August
Tuesday 18 September 2018 photo 3/6
|
Around The World In 80 Days Sub Download
-----------------------------------------
DOWNLOAD: http://urllio.com/qz64k
-----------------------------------------
Set in 1890, the story focuses on Passepartout, a Chinese thief who steals a valuable jade Buddha and then seeks refuge in the traveling companionship of an eccentric London inventor and adventurer, Phileas Fogg, who has taken on a bet with members of his gentlemen's club that he can make it around the world in a mere 80 days, using a variety of means of transportation, like boats, trains, balloons, elephants, etc. Along the way, Passepartout uses his amazing martial arts abilities to defend Fogg from the many dangers they face.. One major threat to their adventure is a detective that's following them. Why? Just as Fogg and Passeportout left London, a major bank was robbed, with Fogg suspected of using the "around the world" trip as an excuse to escape.. Their path from London and back includes stops in Paris, Turkey, India, China and USA.
To win a bet, an eccentric British inventor beside his Chinese valet and an aspiring French artist, embarks on a trip full of adventures and dangers around the world in exactly 80 days.
Around the World in Eighty Days is an appealingly naive movie. Rather than focus on the sex, violence and Matrix-cloning of every other blockbuster around today, it's a pure comedy adventure with old fashioned ethics of genuine heroism and friendship. To give you an idea, it's like Raiders of the Lost Ark meets Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, with the odd Shaw Brothers kung fu movie every so often.
Frank Coraci's direction is appealing. He keeps up the pace, makes sure there's always somethig happening and creates a genuine atmosphere of 19th century adventure. His slapstick sequences are weak, but his action scenes are surprisingly exciting, mainly because he lets a shot last longer than two seconds.
The combination of Jackie Chan and Steve Coogan is completely unexpected. But it works because they're so different. Chan plays the emotional, physical clown who has no idea what's happening, while Coogan is the inteligent sophisticate who is emotionally restrained and a lesser physical specimen.
Coogan is not played to his greatest strengths. He smiles too much and laughs when he's funniest when trying to retain his dignity. His lines are not sharp enough and his delivery is too broad. Both stars are given too much slapstick, mainly falling over. Nevertheless, they are always appealing if not always laugh out loud funny.
The surprise package is Cecile De France as the romantic intrest, Monique. Incredibly cute and charming, she has a naturalism in her performance (and a smile) that lights up the screen. She's quite a find, and hopefully will appear in more international films.
Even though Coogan really plays the main hero and Chan his Kato-like sidekick, this is seen as a Chan movie in some quarters, and so there are a number of fight scenes. Chan seems to be going through the numbers here, and the combination of age and Hollywood safety restrictions stop him doing anything too outrageous. Still, these scenes are fun to watch, and you even get two X-Men movies rolled into one when Chan fights a nineteenth century Lady Deathstrike in the Statue of Liberty.
My favourite thing about the movie is it's morality. In most movies today, the definition of a hero is someone who kills someone else for revenge. The definition of romance is two young people sexually attracted to each other. Around the World in Eighty Days has heroes who help people because it's right to do so, risk their lives to help strangers, bare absolutely no grudges and don't kill anybody. There is virtually no sexual emphasis, apart from Coogan seeing Monique's stockings, which is quite innocent and leads up to one of the funnier slapstick uphevals.
To sum up, not a great film by any means, but a good one. Fun and energetic, never less than entertaining, with three great leads and a wonderful find in Cecile De France.
I think where people have problems is children's movies. Critics bash children's movies all the time, which is rather upsetting to me. Just because the adult didn't enjoy the movie and thought it was lame, doesn't mean the child though the same thing. I'm 18 and I understand where children's movies are coming from. I enjoy a lot of them because I have an opened mind about them.
This movie in particular, was very good. I watched it with my dad, and he even liked it. Yes it seemed fast paced and sometimes lame or way to juvenille, but i's a Disney movie, and Disney likes to make movies appealing to children for the most part. I've never seen the original, but in this movie I can understand where the director was coming from. So who cares if they added karate, and who cares if some of the jokes are lame and not funny to adults. Your not the target audience. Yes it was made to entertain all ages, but think of the children before you go bashing something like this, because it is an enjoyable movie and very funny, if you open your mind to it!
As the tourist on a time budget, the usually brilliant Coogan merely mugs and flails (we can only imagine what Johnny Depp would have done with Fogg), while he and able straight man Chan enjoy scant opportunity to develop any comic rapport.
No. For the most part this is a film that draws loose inspiration from the Verne novel. A more faithful adaptation was made in 1956.
To name a few specific and obvious changes from the novel:
-In the film, Phileas Fog is an eccentric inventer who takes a bet for a position of auhority. In the book he was a recluse who spent most of his time playing cards and the bet was simply a sum of money.
-Passpartout in the book was much more open with Fog. He was being honest when he said he was French, and there was no sub-plot about him taking advantage of Fog to achieve a hidden agenda. Also in the film he is responsible for the bank robbery, despite having nothing to do with it in the book.
-While the bank robbery did happen in the book, it is given a larger role and serves as motivation for the characters. Lord Kelvin also pins it on Fog as an excuse to keep him from winning the bet. In the book, the robbery happened of-screen and had nothing to do the main characters. Inspector Fix only mistook Fog for the robber because his appearance matched the description he had been given of the actual criminal.
-In the film, Inspector Fix is depicted as a dim-witted officer who is manipulated by Kelvin. In the book, he was much more reasonable, having mistaken Fog for the robber based on his appearance matching the description. He also eventually helps Fog and releases him when he realizes his mistake.
-The love interest in the book was an Indian princess, not a French artist. a5c7b9f00b
http://www.mazeikiugyvunai.lt/en/news/view/id/259647 http://gescoohoujuspoi.simplesite.com/433969998/6623437/posting/download-the-el-rostro-de-la-venganza-full-movie-tamil-dubbed-in-torrent https://disqus.com/home/discussion/channel-warsmulvisiti/hunt_for_hiroshi_full_movie_in_hindi_free_download/ http://www.naminukai.org/en/news/view/id/259677 http://diazlatetpoli.wap-ka.com/forum2_theme_112975309.xhtml?tema=153 http://ntuppuncdustaffpart.wapka.me/forum2_theme_112974624.xhtml?tema=164 https://disqus.com/home/discussion/channel-scenenriatesib/deep_pan_fury_full_movie_in_hindi_720p/ http://mjsunifc.com/main/m/feedback/view/All-5-It-Hd-Mp4-Download https://triginitineldeprai.wixsite.com/tiostonsolsi/blog/download-hindi-movie-episode-3-15 https://www.causes.com/posts/4924184
Annons
Visa toppen
Show footer