Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Linkshoch Wonderful Movie

Dotsthavesp I wanted to but couldn't!

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

theowinthrop This is the 1989 miniseries with Pierce Brosnan and Eric Idle that retold the story of the 1872 Jules Verne novel that was the subject of the 1956 Mike Todd film that won the Oscar for Best Picture that year. The 1956 film is a little better than this because of Todd's showmanship and the work of Cantaflas and Robert Newton (and David Niven and Shirley Maclaine). But the 1956 film is not as great as it seemed in 1956 - the cameo performances which helped bring many people to see that film now seem a curiosity to modern film audiences who may not know who A.E. Matthews or Col. Tim McCoy were.This version has it's weaknesses too. Although Brosnan and Idle are quite good, the best is Ustinov as a fat-headed Detective Fix (even in his final moments in the film his last revelation of "genius" is like an annoying gift of a migraine headache). But the mini - series tried to up-date (or back-date) the film a little with dollops of reality. So Louis Pasteur, Sarah Bernhardt, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and Jessie and Frank James pop up in the film. Verne would not have liked that - he prided himself on his ability to invent characters (as all novelists do). None of the changes were necessary. Still it has some rewarding aspects. Robert Morley (who was in the 1956 film as an official of the Bank of England, and a member of the Reform Club) reappears here as a more eccentric looking head of the Bank of England (abetted by Roddy MacDowell as his assistant). In the novel's plot, Fogg is suspected of being a man who robbed the Bank of England. In the end Morley and MacDowell meet this gentleman (he does not appear in the 1956 film) and finds he is a very weird thief indeed. Also, there is a choice moment when (while traveling across the U.S. by train) Fogg/Brosnan starts giving his low opinion of America's treatment of it's Native American tribes as organized theft, degradation, and destruction. Unfortunately, in talking about the American Indians, he raises the interest of Princess Aouda, a genuine Indian from India. And she starts bringing up some pointed comments about another Anglo-Saxon country's treatment of Indians. This was not in the novel or in the 1956 film, but it was nice to see that Aouda for a change had a mind of her own - and could be critical and even a little icy toward Phileas (Brosnan's embarrassment and apologizing is priceless).For all it's defects, the television version was well worth watching too.

rinzai While it's not high cinema, it's watchable, and certainly passes the time on a rainy afternoon. It could be said that Phileas' constant do-si-do with the Princess (as Passepartout puts it, "l'affaire du coeur") does drag a bit, but I can't find any reasons to be truly unhappy with it. It's more authentic than the Jackie Chan version (which I don't hate, either).I don't see this portrayal of Fixx as a bumbler, either...efficient Fixx may be, but he was never a Nobel prize nominee, and Ustinov does well enough with what's provided. The Princess may have some anachronistic attitudes, but no historical movie has ever failed to cast the characters in at least a semi-modern mindset--it makes the characters more accessible to modern viewers. Of Eric Idle I'll say no more--I enjoy his work, and I don't care if the accent is ludicrous or not.It's entirely possible that the novel simply can't be filmed. It wouldn't be the first one to have that happen. ("Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" comes to mind, for example.)

ShelbyTMItchell This is a great miniseries for the whole entire family. Pierce Brosnan doing a Bond/Remington Steele as Fogg from a kind of cold-hearted but then caring Englishman making the legendary journey. Rambo and Babylon Five's Julia Nickson beautiful as the princess. The great and late Peter Ustinov in one of his fine performances. But the person to steal the show is Eric Idle of Monty Python as the caring and resourceful as well as comic relief Jean Passepartout. He played Passepartout as a frenchman and also was really the star but gave way to Pierce/Fogg. Idle is the real, real star. And the mini series is like the book. Unlike the Jackie Chan movie and David Niven. More like follows and stick closely to the Jules Verne novel!

Borko Baric I guess this is the ultimate Jules Verne adaptation. This mini-series is in every way far superior to the 1956 movie, and almost certainly will be to the upcoming one. I have to admit I haven't read the book, but somehow I believe the series to be pretty true to the story. Humor and thrills are making the fabric of an exciting adventure story throughout the world. Look for some interesting references to historical figures, like Sarah Bernhardt or Jesse James, and also for some beautiful geographical locations. A brilliant cast, headlined by pre-007 Pierce Brosnan, excellent Eric Idle and a perfect Peter Ustinov makes this one of the most enjoyable TV experiences ever.