Back when Jules Verne wrote his adventuresome "travelogue," "Around the World in 80 Days," the only way to circle the globe was by boat and/or a combination of that, rail, horseback and or foot. Needless to say, the nearly three-month period given to complete the quest seemed generous at best. That, and the fact that few people of the time had actually traveled to foreign countries or sailed the seven seas made the literary work quite popular.
When it was made into an Oscar-winning movie in 1956, travel options had increased to include planes and automobiles, but the allure of such exotic and adventurous travel was still present. Today, there are faster ways to circumnavigate the world (the space shuttle in orbit probably being the quickest), but some people like Virgin head honcho Richard Branson try the older and slower way, such as in hot air balloons.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Branson gets a brief balloon-related cameo in the 2004 adaptation of Verne's venerable work. Unfortunately, that brief moment is about the only highlight of this otherwise lame, slow-moving and "re-imagined" update. Beyond the allure of the subject matter pretty much having evaporated in the nearly half century since the David Niven version, the filmmakers have taken some -- okay, a lot of -- artistic license and liberties with the work.
The most notable is the casting of Asian martial arts star Jackie Chan in the role of Passepartout, the valet to inventor/traveler Phileas Fogg. That obviously necessitates some back story (to explain the change in ethnicity) and a new plot thread, but also introduces plenty of martial arts action. Now, it's been a long time since I read the original novel, but I don't seem to recall such material.
Of course, director Frank Coraci ("The Waterboy," "The Wedding Singer") -- who works from an adaptation by writers David Titcher ("Morgan Stewart's Coming Home") and David Benullo & David Goldstein (making their feature film debut) -- is free to make whatever sort of film he wants.
Yet, why not just make an "original" picture rather than bastardize the source material and essentially only use the title for name recognition (although many of today's kids probably won't know about it)? In essence, all they've done is turn Verne's tale into yet another period Jackie Chan film.
That said, the fight-filled action scenes are okay, but Chan's middle-aged status has obviously slowed him down a bit and reduced the incredible stunts he was once able to perform. In addition, he's done just about every stunt and used every object imaginable to fight the bad guys over the years, leaving said material in this film feeling like reheated leftovers.
In one scene, however, the effects of such acrobatic and prop-filled fighting leads to the creation of a famous painting. While somewhat cute in concept, the moment never goes much beyond that, although it's certainly not bereft of similar company.
Yes, it's just one example of the comedic re-imagining of history that's on display here. After moving the plot's temporal setting forward several decades, the filmmakers have allowed the characters played by Chan, Steve Coogan and Cecile de France to meet and interact with various real life historical figures.
Some may find that amusing, but considering that Chan already experienced that not once but twice in the "Shanghai Noon/Knights" films makes it feel both redundant and old hat here. That pretty much sums up the film as well. While younger kids might be entranced or at least entertained by the adventure and comedic shenanigans, this will be a long (2 hour plus) sit for everyone else.
The one thing the film copies from its predecessor is in filling the ranks with a multitude of cameos of those playing such historical figures and others. Although some will find such material more annoying and/or distracting than funny, at least the "I wonder who will be next" questions break up the monotony of the rest of the offering. The likes of Owen and Luke Wilson, Kathy Bates, John Cleese, Macy Gray, Rob Schneider and even the "Governator" himself, Arnold Schwarzenegger (in a creepy and lecherous part), interact with the main characters.
Speaking of which, Chan ("The Tuxedo," the "Rush Hour" films) pretty much plays the same sort of character he always does, while Coogan ("Coffee and Cigarettes," "24 Hour Party People") comes off like a weak Monty Python character.
Cecile de France ("L'Auberge Espagnole," "A+ Pollux") is okay but unremarkable playing an impressionistic painter who tags along for the worldly trip, while Jim Broadbent ("Iris," "Moulin Rouge!") is wasted as the purposefully one-dimensional, blowhard villain. At least he fares a bit better than Karen Joy Morris ("Shaolin Soccer," "Fallen Angels") who's a barely explained or defined Asian villainess.
While some parents may appreciate the mostly innocuous film (notwithstanding the fight-filled action and other, more subtle material), the film is a boring mess from an artistic standpoint. Although the original picture hasn't withstood the tests of time that well, at least it's more faithful to the source material and far more entertaining. "Around the World in 80 Days" feels much longer than its titular time period and rates as only a 3 out of 10.
![[Logo]](/images/screenit_logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
