Master and Commander (2003)

From what I remember, I thought it was alright.

IMO? I don't think it was worth all that Oscar hubbub.

Accolades​

Main article: List of accolades received by Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World

At the 76th Academy Awards in 2004, Master and Commander received ten nominations: Best Cinematography, Best Sound Editing, Best Picture, Best Director, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing, Best Makeup, Best Sound Mixing and Best Visual Effects. It won the awards for Best Cinematography and Best Sound Editing but lost the rest to The Return of the King.[36][37] The film also garnered Weir the BAFTA Award for Best Direction.
[38]
Updated: April 18, 2023 3:53 pm EST
 
I go by what I find entertaining & I thought it was it excellent.

I just started with the first novel.

IDK jacksh!+ about all the nautical terms but it's been a great read so far
 
I re-watched 'The Bounty' the other night, which has a similar look and feel. So many great actors in that, along with all the topless native girls. ;)

Anthony Hopkins
Lawrence Olivier
Mel Gibson
Liam Neeson
Daniel Day Lewis

The last two before they were stars.
 
We watched this one tonight.
It's good, well done. Over 2 hours but doesn't feel like it.
Not the best of Crowe, but solid.

Good Movie
Good movie. I am surprised that they didnt make more of them. There are plenty of books.
Did they show the Hornblower series in the US ? They were even better in my opinion.
 
Good movie. I am surprised that they didnt make more of them. There are plenty of books.
Did they show the Hornblower series in the US ? They were even better in my opinion.
While there was plenty of material for a franchise, over 20 volumes a 230 million box office against 150 million budget for this film does not create the interest needed for a franchise Also the year it came out audiences were turning to superhero films.
 
Last edited:
While there was plenty of material for a franchise, over 20 volumes a 230 million box office against 150 million budget for this film does not create the interest needed for a franchise Also the year it came out audiences were turning to superhero films.
You would think that a sequel would be cheaper. They already have the ship.
 
You would think that a sequel would be cheaper. They already have the ship.
Not really. The ship probably cost about a million or so but the budget for the film was 150 million. Sequels usually don't do as well as the original and investors typically only get moderate returns on their investment so they are looking for a huge box in the original film, which didn't happen.

Franchises are where the big bucks are. The 2003 Pirates of the Caribbean had a budget of about 200 million. The box office was 670 million. Obviously there was no problem getting investors for a franchise. The 5 films that made up the franchise had a box office 4.6 billion. Like just about everything else cost per item is reduce by making more of them a same time. Multi-year contracts can reduce personal costs, cost of sets, costumes, and equipment. Also, filming all scenes that use the same location or sets at the same time can result in big cost reductions if the scripts are completed.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top