DVDizzy Forum

Right. It's ok to decide whether or not you want to see a film based on the previews, because you can't see everything, and have to have something to go by. It's not ok, though, to say a film is terrible based on the preview.

-Aaron

I didn't get to see it, but love the story and original. I will def pick this one up on DVD!! One of the major retailers should have it for $15.99 or so, week of release.

Okay, fine, you're all right, I shouldn't judge it. I stand correctly.

The trailer is a piece of trash and it's clear that the filmmakers have no respect whatsoever for the novel, so the movie is -most likely- trash too. Admittedly I've only read a kiddie adapted version of the book so far but...eh. So the film looks terrible.

Jake Lipson wrote:Okay, fine, you're all right, I shouldn't judge it. I stand correctly.

The trailer is a piece of trash and it's clear that the filmmakers have no respect whatsoever for the novel, so the movie is -most likely- trash too. Admittedly I've only read a kiddie adapted version of the book so far but...eh. So the film looks terrible.

Well, I'm not sure that's a reason to say it will be trash. Disney (or as it is increasingly looking, Walden Media alone) set out to make a slapstick comedy based on the novel (but not too closely I would expect). While the original novel wasn't a farce or slapstick, it was a comedy. I would probably call it an adventure comedy.

It all depends on what you want and what you expect from the film. As for respect for the novel, how much respect do you think the animated Three Musketeers will have to the original? How much respect did Walt show for The Jungle Book? ("Don't worry about following the story, just have fun with the characters" to paraphrase).

Of course no one minds about that, as those are animated. But really, the fact that ATWI80D is live action shouldn't make people mind that much either. They never set out to follow the book (or the Academy Award winning film, which I may add deviates from the text substantially too). They just set out to make a fun movie.

Of course, in retrospect it was bound to fail. Victorian set films have all failed recently. From 'From Hell', 'The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen' to even adaptations of classics (I understand 'Nicholas Nickleby' didn't meet the filmmakersexpectations - and they weren't expecting much and had a fairly well known cast. It cost $10m and made $1.3m in the US).

Satoshi Wrote

MMP, I think it's completely unfair to judge a movie solely on previews. When I first saw a preview for Pirates of the Caribbean I thought it looked terrible, but when my brother went to see it I tagged along, and ended up loving it.

I said I was going to rent it first before I consider to buy Around the World in 80 days the only reason why I like it a little was because of Jackie Chan so I'll just rent it.

I get it for free because steve Coogan is my cousin.

I was unable to see this movie in theaters but really wanted to only becasue Jackie Chan seems like a decent realse. Now that I work at blockbuster I will defintley pick it up on its first day of realse and if I enjoy it I can buy it.

From Hell flopped? That's a shame, it's a great movie. It got fantastic DVD treatment, so that's a surprise to me.

-Aaron

I hadn't paid attention to it, but Jackie Chan looks so old on that cover, hehe! How old is the guy?

*Didn't read other posts cause I'm lazy*

Anyway, I think sometimes if a movie JUST came to theatres and like 1-2 months later it goes to DVD and VHS, it must have been bad. Like with The Cat in the Hat. It didn't last long, musta been bad (never saw it). Usually movies that did well in theatres (like Lord of the Rings), the ppl make you wait a long time (usually 3-6 months).

Since this is coing November 2 and it was released in theatres.....what? May? June? July? I guess it'll be worth seeing. My friend saw it and said it was good. I'll have to rent it first.

Joe Carioca wrote:I hadn't paid attention to it, but Jackie Chan looks so old on that cover, hehe! How old is the guy?

50!

Considering some of the garbage Disney's released in the past couple of years (Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen, Country Bears), this is very good. Let's hope they make up the budget in DVD sales

Secret Disney Man wrote:Considering some of the garbage Disney's released in the past couple of years (Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen, Country Bears), this is very good. Let's hope they make up the budget in DVD sales

Personally after seeing the charst for a few of the relases and how well they have done in the past after being relased on DVD. I think this one is going to be a shocker and sell well maybe not #1 but it will be up there.Now working with the Blockbuster industry I can cant count how many times for so many movies I hear costumers say they just dontnhave the kind of time to go to the movies like they want. Normally they come back happy from the movie they have rented and are ready to purchases it. Also with the holidays coming up I think Around the World in 80 days is going to do just fine.

There are two things I want to know before I rent or buy this movie:

1. Does Jackie Chan do any stunts/fight scenes that are not computer-assisted?

2. Is there some good British humor (or humour, as those across the pond spell it)?

1. Jackie ALWAYS does his own stunts. That's like his calling card.

2. I'm not entirely sure what British humour is...

Jackie USED to do all of his own stunts. However, some movies like The Tuxedo and The Medallion have used CGI to do some stunts. That is the reason behind the question.

Well, he does all his own stunts in THIS movie.

umbreongirl wrote: Anyway, I think sometimes if a movie JUST came to theatres and like 1-2 months later it goes to DVD and VHS, it must have been bad.

I think you'll find that a lot of movies will be put out on DVD in November and early December in order to cash in on the holiday shopping frenzy. So, IMO it's less to do with how good or bad the film is and more to do with when it'll make the most money.

Frankly, I enjoyed this movie. It's not groundbreaking and it had its flaws but it was a fun family movie.

MickeyMousePal Wrote

I said I was going to rent it first before I consider to buy Around the World in 80 days the only reason why I like it a little was because of Jackie Chan so I'll just rent it.

Did you ever get a chance to see it? Just curious if your opinion of this changed after seeing the movie the way your opinion of <i>Teacher's Pet</i> did?