Around the World in 80 Days

source: Around the World in 80 Days

Spoilers herein. They took an absolutely ordinary film - even dreary in places - and wrapped it in two things that are lovely. The first is a lovely production design. Pastel watercolors that are evocative of Verne's abstract nature. I have no idea who to credit for this, but the mundane story provides interstices of grace in the spaces usually occupied by filler. The other joy in this is the girl. Usually the girl in these things is a pretty screamer. What we have here is altogether novel in the nature of the girl. This one has a voice and tone that is ironically cartoonish. She's the female equivalent of Owen Wilson, but with pluck. A Julia Roberts smile specifically antiJulia. Only the Disney lab could scope out such a thing. Oh, and Jackie does his 'fight with ordinary objects' thing. Here, it is a stool, but the moves are the same we've seen a dozen times. Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

This movie is not good. The original plot of circumnavigating the world in 80 days is great but they had to water it down with pointless plot points. The entire Jade Buddha plot was so pointless and it was very annoying. This whole movie is so 2-dimensional; nothing of significance ever happens. Even Jackie Chan's fight sequences seemed worse. They seemed like they had a quarter of the available time to choreograph the fights compared to other Jackie Chan movies. Besides those points, the red head repeatedly getting beat up while trying to stop Phileas and Passpartout was pretty funny. Jackie Chan and Steve Coogan also had some arguably funny moments. Overall, there are better mindless movies to watch with kids, not to mention yourself.

A very pleasant blend of adventure, comedy and action. Great movie to watch with family. Sometimes when they do a remake of an older movie or frim a book that has already been written, sometimes it turns out well sometimes it doesn't, but in this case it turned out to be a lot of fun. Good acting scenery and a good selection of actors. I recommend!

i almost walked out after a half hour but decided to punish myself and struggled to stay in my seat the rest of the way. pure and simple, rent the original, forget this turkey. for jackie chan fans, 'tuxedo' was better. even frank sinatra's 10-second appearance in the original was better than any - quote 'cameo' in this thing. this was a comic book movie and my apologies to jules verne. he has to someday be spinning in his grave-if he gets cable or dish or has a strong antenna. a good thing 'ah-nold' already won the california election because if this came out beforehand, he would have been judged to dumb to go to sacramento. to shirley maclaine - don't go. you will run screaming from the theater in tears in memory of a job well done in '56. folks, no need to read any of the long reviews on 'a-t-w-i-e-d' (the remake) here at IMDb pointing out the many flaws. this review (or warning) is all you will need.

Wonderful! We just saw the film today and I laughed out loud! Not only did the seven year old laugh, but the fourteen year old laughed too! My husband and I laughed as well. Chan was very funny, so was Coogan. There were also a host of cameos to keep you laughing. Where on EARTH did Schwarzenegger find that wig! The fighting scenes were very good. Chan, as usual, delivers his usual cavalcade of exciting martial arts. All in all, a movie that will keep you entertained AND you can take the kids to see! A miracle in 2004! Well worth the price of a ticket!

This big, new version of "Around the World in 80 Days" is just the kind of movie that enthralled me as a kid--adventure, action, exotic locales, slapstick laughs, and a simple story with likable characters. Now, 40 or so years ago, this would have been in the company of many similar films, such as "Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines" and "The Great Race," but these days this kind of big family adventure has been relegated to the digital cartoon arena. And I happen to think that Jackie Chan's rebirth in American films as a successor to the great physical comedians of the silent era is a good thing. His action routines are getting more and more elaborate with each Hollywood flick he does (though there are still none as elaborate as his old Hong Kong action flicks). It's a crying shame that this film didn't do the kind of box office business it should have.

I have watched the original version of this film a few months back and think that was way better then this one. I thought some of the jokes were pretty lame and unoriginal. Steve Coogan particularly doesn't seem to fit in a comedic role. The cameo roles were ok but nothing amazing. I found Arnold's cameo as a Turkish Monarch rather drab and I thought they should have done some more. Jackie Chan as usual out did himself with some of his stunts. Making some ordinary items into weapons are just great. SOme of the effects were OK especially the shots showing the different cities they went to. A little to much "computery" but none the less good enough. The ending I thought was a serious disappointment. Instead of ending on a high it went down with a big THUD!

Around the World is remade once more with more of a comedy take than before. Jackie Chan is more the focus as the valet. A man from China trying to return a stolen Buddha. Steve Coogan is a wacky inventor and would be adventurer, Phileas Fogg, who takes up a challenge to voyage around the world from Jim Broadbent. Chan is chased by both police and Chinese assassins and uses Fogg to get back to China. This allows Chan to use his slapstick acrobatics and comedy kung fu. Coogan is the more erudite one, intelligent almost an Henry Higgins type. Emotionally repressed as we see when a young French painter (Monique) joins them and be the eventual romantic interest for Coogan. The film has a host of star cameo appearances such as John Cleese, Richard Branson, The Wilson brothers and Arnie the Governator. The film has broad laughs and slapstick. It's disposable fun but also easily forgettable.

It is a sad commentary on our lives when true classics of fiction can be made into commercial garbage like this. Action movies might be popular, but they certainly are not quality motion pictures, and this is an insult to a very fine author! I thought this was a joke, but saw later it was not. I am not amused. The 1956 version is gorgeous, and full of fun cameos. The 198-something mini series is loaded with stars, and has the added value of a FRENCH (at least the character is) Parspatou. I am not even going to acknowledge the nationality of the one in this movie! Sorry, as a Humanities Major, I just cannot understand what is happening to the quality of movies these days. Anything for a buck, it seems. When it starts to take over really fine literature, I just have to complain.