Around the World in 80 Days

The problem of this film does not lie in the fact that it contains a lot of invention and that it’s trying hard to be different from the original, which many people know by heart from their childhood. I personally thought that Steve Coogan portrayed Phileas Fogg as a half-wit and I couldn’t really get over that. Fogg has always been an intelligent gentleman and all of a sudden he’s this boob who has shit in his head rather than genius. Nevertheless, scenes involving Arnold Schwarzenegger are great and the series of scenes in China was pretty awesome too. Jackie Chan definitely put in quite a performance. Actually, the entire movie is quite nice, but doesn’t deserve more than the decent three stars. (02/14/2017)

Jackie Chan will produce a new version of Jules Verne's classic book and also play one of the main roles. Quite a crazy sentence. You probably wouldn't know what to think about someone who told you something like this a few years ago. However, it really happened. Jackie Chan has decided to co-produce a film based on the book "Around the World in Eighty Days". "Around the World in Eighty Days" was a beautiful book that was able to present the world to young and old readers in a few dozen pages. At a time when people didn't know the Earth as we know it, it was literally like a dream. Even today, the book is interesting to read because it is simply well written. Jules Verne was a master of adventure literature and science fiction. When we look at the film "Around the World in Eighty Days", we have to accept that it lacks any exoticism. Yes, even though it takes place in the previous century and features a Hong Kong actor and a French beauty. It is just an empty adaptation that has gotten rid of the original story and left only the classic plot where Phileas Fogg bets that he can travel around the world in 80 days. Everything else is something completely different. The screenwriters came up with their own story that probably suited their needs better, they inserted Jackie Chan's masterful stunts and even Arnold Schwarzenegger, who probably spent a long time in the tanning bed. His role is absolutely terrible. I didn't like the main protagonist Fogg because I certainly didn't imagine him as a grumpy moronic fool who has more luck than sense. Of course, he also has his weird inventions. "Around the World in Eighty Days" has become a costume comedy, which is a shame. If you want to see this classic in a film adaptation, I recommend trying the Spanish-Japanese animated series "Willy Fog Around the World". That is a children's classic and it is much better and more entertaining. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/12/wtc-yes-man-mary-max-zambezia-cerna.html (03/02/2013)

Very sympathetic adrenaline ride, in which it is impossible not to hold the main trio's thumbs. A lot of the cameo roles will be enjoyable (most likely Owen Wilson+Luke Wilson as Orville Wright+Wilbur Wright). It's just a shame that the ending is too childish and doesn't fit the action-adventure comedy at all. (08/15/2006)

I can get over this degradation of my favorite book; apart from the title and a couple of names, nothing remains of the novel or the journey, but if I ignore that, then this is... In fact it’s quite a pleasant and relaxing movie to watch. Nothing more, nothing less. The opening fifteen minutes needlessly damages the movie; after than it is a good joy ride that thankfully doesn’t pretend to be anything more. Apart from a couple of embarrassing escapades reminiscent of The Pink Panther, it contains some really good scenes, nicely choreographed fight scenes (considering this is an adventure movie) and a couple of really great lines (We’ll burn birds!). A crying shame that there wasn’t a clash of titans Arnold vs. Chan in the pool scene. OST score: 4/5 (05/13/2022)

The 80-day trip around the world is a wonderful start, promising truly dazzling epic action, diluted with intelligent conversational humor (which really doesn't wear stars and stripes on its shorts), but ultimately unnecessarily slipping into shallowness and it breaks what adorns it in the beginning – integrity and style. I'm sorry, but it's Jackie Chan's fault, who, though he plays his part decently, brings something foreign and incompatible to the picturesque world of inventor Phileas Fogg. He smuggled the weird style of Asian action film into the world of dry English humor, and Frank Coraci couldn't combine them into a coherent whole. An English gentleman and a levitating Asian don’t work together. Therefore, all the potential gradually disappears, and at the end there remains only a fairly satisfying feeling of a craftsmanship of a decently executed action comedy, which needed much more than satisfying craft to achieve true brilliance. It needed a really great storyteller to handle the story. Coraci remains halfway there. It needed a great screenwriter to avoid schoolboy lapses and disproportions in the construction of the plot. Unfortunately, it's stuck halfway there, too. No, it's not a flop. It's a fun and enjoyable movie. Halfway to a really great movie. And that's what I'm most sorry about. At least I like Steve Coogan's excellent bore in the title role of Mr. Fogg. (01/27/2005)