Around the World in 80 Days (2004)

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Awesome movie. I don't know why this movie under 6. It must be 7- 8.

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.

Around the World in 80 Days (2004): Dir: Frank Coraci / Cast: Steve Coogan, Jackie Chan, Celile De France, Jim Broadbent, Arnold Schwarzenegger: Useless remake about challenge that stretches to about 80 hours. It stars Steve Coogan as an inventor in the early century who undertakes a challenge to venture the world in 80 days. He is joined by Jackie Chan who is wanted for the theft of a sacred object that was stolen from his village. He joins Coogan out of coincidence in order to lay low from the law. They are joined by an artist, played by Celile De France who wishes to get away. Totally lame from beginning to end made up completely of subplots. Director Frank Coraci allows everything to unravel. He previously directed films featuring Adam Sandler but here he is taking a major step back. Coogan is standard issue hero who goes from encounter to encounter without care. Chan is basically there to fight, which he does in nearly every scene he is in. De France as the artist is basically a potential romantic interest and generates little care. Jim Broadbent overacts as a ruthless governor in another standard role. Arnold Schwarzenegger makes an embarrassing cameo as Prince Habi just before his real life role as Governor of California. The production is massive but the screenplay is thin at best. They should have traveled the world to find a hole big enough to bury this crap in. Score: 2 / 10

I just saw this film for the first time on television and thought it was brilliant. What absolutely shocked me was to see the number of reviewers giving it very low ratings, not because they don't think Steve Coogan is funny (perhaps they aren't familiar with Alan Partridge like most UK respondents), or because they don't like to see Jackie Chan's fights (in which case why did they go and see a Jackie Chan movie) but because... the film wasn't true to the Novel?! Can't they lighten up?You won't find anyone who objects more than me to distortion of stories out of all recognition, making up false history, or even breaking the laws of nature ...but in a serious reasonably believable film, not in pure fantasy comedy.