Just what I expected

Best movie ever!

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

Continuing my plan to watch every Arnie movie in order, I come to his cameo in Around The World In 80 Days.Plot In A Paragraph: A bet pits a British inventor (Steve Coogan) a Chinese thief (Jackie Chan), and a French artist (Cecile De France) on a worldwide adventure that they can circle the globe in 80 days.A lot of your enjoyment of this movie will depend on how funny you find Jackie Chan's slapstick routine and Steve Coogan. I love Coogan as Alan Partridge, but most of his other stuff is hit and miss at best. As for Chan, I have not enjoyed anything he has done in a long time.Arnie turns up about 40 mins in, as Prince Hapi, the man with 6 wives and whose favourite thing in the world, is a giant statue of himself. Hamming it up more than he ever has, Arnold is clearly enjoying himself and is a lot of fun. He is the only bright spot in an otherwise dull affair.Around The World In 80 Days is strictly for people who don't go to the cinema, and stay at home watching movies on DVD and TV. Around The World In 80 Days grossed $24 million at the domestic Box Office and ended the year the 97th highest gross in movie of the year.

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.

This film is less a modern interpretation of the Jules Verne classic and more a kid's adventure flick that bears scant regard for realism, historical fact or sense. It's not a very good children's film at that. It's a muddled story, trying too hard to mix in Oriental detail and tribal battles with the standard 'journey' template and any attempts at seriousness go out of the window in the first five minutes with the introduction of bizarre and fanciful machinery that looks like something out of a kid's fantasy novel. Special effects are generally poor and many of the supporting cast members give outlandish, over the top performances that I personally found repulsive. Jim Broadbent is a particular offender in this respect, but Ewen Bremner doesn't come off very well either. The script is below par too.Steve Coogan isn't too bad as the foppish Fogg. He fails to make his character remotely likable, but I did find him believable in the part. Jackie Chan is the same lovable buffoon that we've seen in every Hollywood film in the past decade. Of course, he's the best thing in the film, garnering the few laughs on offer, but I did find the lack of action to be a bit insulting. There are only a couple of the sprawling, choreographed battles we've come to know and expect and the focus is elsewhere, on the nonsensical plot and the need to cram in as many different places as possible.That leaves the cameos. There are many of them, taking place throughout the film at regular intervals, and they do give the movie a certain novelty value that works, for the first viewing at least. It's quite amazing how many different stars were lined up to appear. The best, of course, is Arnold Schwarzenegger, in his last screen appearance before he became a politician; he's genuinely funny, as usual, and they make great use of his larger-than-life persona. Other fun moments include an appearance from Richard Branson as a balloonist; Rob Schneider playing a befuddled tramp; Maggie Q in a one-scene fight; Sammo Hung, playing Wong Fei-Hung; Daniel Wu as a villain and Ken Lo as a henchman; John Cleese in a bit part as a policeman; the Wilson brothers, Luke and Owen, as the Wright brothers (an inspired bit of casting, that); Mark Addy, pretty poor as a steamer captain; finally, Kathy Bates, pretty convincing as Queen Victoria. Take away the cameos and Jackie and you have a bottom of the barrel production in every respect.

In contrast to the '56 version, this is a very cartoonish 90% Jackie Chan vehicle, obviously aimed mainly at children., whereas the '56 version was aimed at all ages, with minimal slapstick, and a majority of faithfulness in portraying the details of the original Jules Verne story. In contrast, this film departs wildly from the book in many details, emphasizing physical confrontations with agents of the introduced female Chinese warlord Fang, who seem to pop up about everywhere they travel, trying to retrieve the small jade Buddha that Chan stole from the Bank of London(why was it kept there?), that has implausibly great value within the context of this yarn. Whereas the actual journeys between landing points constituted a significant fraction of the total '56 film, they are mostly glossed over in this film, as presumably uninteresting details. For example , the animation after the India portion, suggests they somehow went over the Himalayas, to interior China, instead of going to Calcutta, then Singapore and Hong Kong! In fact, Hong Kong, Japan and the journey across the Pacific are totally skipped, as is the journey across the US, save for the bizarre meeting with the Wright brothers incident.Whereas Niven's Fogg was not an especially imaginative inventor of devices, Coogan's Fogg is an eccentric inventor of 'contraptions', whose inventions have thus far not proved practical. Niven's Fogg excelled in thinking of alternative ways of getting along when the expected means of transport available in 1872 failed, and in mapping out a workable schedule of commercial transport. His most imaginative on-the-spot invention was rigging a square of cloth material he spied to a railroad utility car, to achieve sail power in place of the usual hand pumping propulsion. Supposedly, this achievement is far exceeded in the present film by the construction, within a few hours, of a workable airplane, plus very strong catapult, plus long very high ramp, while aboard a ship, using whatever could be found. It was powered by superman Chan, using bicycle petals, chains and gears(found on a small commercial ship?). Although the resulting plane looks nothing remotely like the Wright Brother's later biplane, supposedly it benefited from the drawings the Wrights bizarrely gave to Fogg, as casual acquaintances! Thus, presumably, the present yarn takes place around 1900, rather than the expected 1872!(except for the Edison light bulb scene!). Incidentally, the first human-powered heavier than air aircraft(without passengers) that flew more than half a mile, and with a mean speed of only 7mph, wasn't proved until 1979! This aircraft weighed only 72 lbs. and had a much larger wing surface area than the one shown in this film, impressively enabling it to cross the English channel.In contrast to the '56 version, there is no highly memorable inspirational waltz, as the theme song. On the other hand, the female(Cecile de France, as Monique), picked up in Paris as part of the expedition, is light years more interesting than Shirley McLain's version in the '56 film, who was characterized as an Indian widow, as in the book. Monique also appears much earlier in the film. Also, there is the introduced Chinese woman(Fang) to add further interest, although I didn't find her very interesting. Lord Kelvin((not present in the '56 film) and his agent Mr. Fix are characterized as much more adversarial to Fogg and his valet than their counterparts in the '56 version, Mr. Fix suffering many injuries and other indignities in his role, which ends prematurely when he is battered in India by Fang's warriors, while handcuffed to Chan. Lord Kelvin, of course, was a famous scientist and inventor around this time. Here, he(as well as most of the other members of the Royal Academy of Science)are characterized as a brotherhood of old fuddy duds, who think everything worth discovering or invented as been discovered or invented. Historically, Kelvin did state that he didn't believe a workable heavier-than-air airplane was possible. However, his characterization in this film would have him rolling over in his grave faster than a spun-up neutron star! After all, steam-powered flying machines had proved impractical. The world awaited a power source that was more powerful, yet lighter(Fogg's bunch didn't provide that.) The overall message of the film, much more so that the '56 film, is that old scientists(and by extension, most old people, except Queen Victoria) are set in their prejudices about what is true and what is possible to invent. Thus, they should be kicked out of important positions of authority, replaced by young people, with fresh ideas and experiences, who are not hampered by the currently accepted laws of physics, be they valid or limited in their applicability.Oh, by the way, how did Fogg and friends continue their journey after all his money was stolen in San Francisco?? soon forgotten!