Around the World in 80 Days (2004)

IMDb rating is currently 5.8/10. Movie was nominated only for Razzie and Stinker Awards, and financially it's one of the biggest fiascos in history. Of the invested over 100 million, it pulled out about 20%. I'm asking myself who's crazy here...I think that the main problem is that most of the people view this film as either the adaptation of Verne's novel or as a remake of the 1956 film of the same name. In both cases movie would be a failure, but this is neither remake nor adaptation of the novel, so the bad reputation is caused by prejudice rather than the real quality of the film. Script is based on Verne's novel, but but this adventure comedy is a homage to Vern, not an adaptation. Story is modernized, enriched with new adventures and references to many personalities and events, and combines genres with taste and measure in a comedy that keeps the attention and smile on the face from the beginning till the end. When criticizing this film, we must not lose sight of the fact that it is Disney and that accordingly it must be children-friendly.Apart from Schwarzenegger, from whom we don't expect much anyway, the acting is very good. In addition to Jackie Chan and Steve Coogan, who are the bearers of this film, in other roles appear many famous faces, among which are Cécile de France, Jim Broadbent, Ian McNeice, Ewen Bremner, Macy Gray, Rob Schneider, Luke and Owen Wilson, John Cleese and excellent Kathy Bates as the Queen.In my opinion, only those who do not like comedy and adventure as a genre could be dissatisfied with this film,but such people are not competent to judge it and it certainly is not fair that they influence its ratings.8/10

The sole reason for me watching this movie was, without any secret, because of Jackie Chan. And as a big fan of his, then I tend to watch just about anything of his that I come across. However, true to most Western productions that he stars in, then the movie hardly reaches up to the knees of the Asian productions that he has been in. That being said, don't get me wrong. I am not saying that "Around the World in 80 Days" is a bad movie, far from it. It is an enjoyable adventure for sure, it is just suffering from being a forced Western production.The story in "Around the World in 80 Days" is about Phileas Fogg (played by Steve Coogan) who undertakes a wager to travel around the entire world in 80 days with the help of Passepartout / Lau Xing (played by Jackie Chan) a hired help that literally falls into the lap of Mr. Fogg. And the trek around the globe is full of adventure, excitement but also with danger.As with most Jackie Chan movies, then there is a good amount of action and comedy in "Around the World in 80 Days", complete with the trademark style of slapstick action comedy that Jackie Chan is known and loved for.But it is also visually a good movie, very pleasing to the eyes.However, the thorn in my side, is that this is a Western production, and Jackie Chan does seem somewhat like a fish out of water in such movies. But still, it is a fun movie to watch and a fair enough addition to the collection if you are a fan of Jackie Chan.It was a nice treat to have Karen Mok show up in this movie, with her usual charms, spot on performance and on-screen charisma."Around the World in 80 Days" is a movie that is worthwhile sitting down to watch as a family or if you are a big fan of Jackie Chan.I am rating it a sound six out of ten stars.

I've seen the reviews for this movie both here and in Rotten Tomatoes and people basically hated it a lot. Well it might not be the best Jackie Chan film ever made but that doesn't make it the worst film of all time. I liked the characters and the story and where it went sure they changed a lot of things from the original story and the animated movies but still a great take for a new generation and it had a lot of great cameos but my favorite was Arnold Schwarzenegger as Prince Hapi of Turkey. If you can accept a new take on the story that stays a little bit away from the book then you'll be fine if not then you should definitely skip it.

Bottom Line:Was the Movie worth watching? - KindaWould I watch it again within a month? - Definitely NotWould I watch it again within a year? - NOWould I watch it again within 3 years? - NOHow family friendly was it on a scale of 1-10? - *9*I can't say that much for this movie. Once you've seen the 1956 version, the 2004 remake seems unworthy of the Title. I won't say that I didn't enjoy the movie because that wouldn't be true. I just think that it was a very poor remake.The '56 version followed the book closer, which is important to me. Also, the comedy in the original version was funny, compared to the comedy in the remake which was silly.Overall I will most likely never watch this movie again. If I want to watch Around the World in Eighty Days, I will definitely watch the 1956 version.