Following an outrageous bet, Fogg and his valet, Passepartout, take on the legendary journey of circumnavigating the globe in just 80 days, swiftly joined by aspiring journalist Abigail Fix, who seizes the chance to report on this extraordinary story.
I honestly fail to understand some of the comments about this, and other shows i've liked.
I often wonder, who ARE these people, to have such divergent views?
many of the UK press panned it & in particular Tennant's Fog. But like you I liked the show, in particular the characterisation of Fogg as some one frightened of life opening up to the world, unlike the David Niven version in typical British uppercrust do and dare. So a worthwhile addition to the versions
by jimslim posted 2 years ago
Wifey enjoyed it immensely. I enjoyed it also.
I honestly fail to understand some of the comments about this, and other shows i've liked.
I often wonder, who ARE these people, to have such divergent views?
by merc posted 2 years ago
The only reservation in writing in eps 8 and the train station dont read the spoiler until you have seen the epsEstelle his lost love are they are they not reunited? seems rather clumsy handling
by Wizard posted 2 years ago
IIRC, there were three channels (different countries) showing it on slightly different schedules. It's was all a bit confusing.
by santah posted 2 years ago
drmonbowen said:
We really liked the first two episodes, but the Next Episode calendar entries for S01E03, 4, and 5 are incorrect.
These episodes are airing on Jan 2 (3 and 4) and Jan 9 (episode 5).
Is there any better way to report this error?
Any chance that's because the show airs originally on another channel (country) ?
by merc posted 2 years ago
well I have seen all 8 eps and enjoyed it very much. Tennant did a fine job.I dont care if it departed from the canon one bit otherwise it just becomes another performance of what eg Shakespeare becomes - nothing new
I liked how his character was some one who was afraid of life, hiding in his club and goes on the trip finally due to a postcard posted by some one with the word coward on it - I wont say any more about that.......
by TheFizza posted 2 years ago
g371 said:
Watched half of the first ep, have read a book, have seen older movie versions - but this one is just sad, dropped. It's supposed to be fun and adventurous, they made some gloomy depressing trash.
Wizard said:
Agree, half the episode was filler - I don't remember from any of the previous outings about a plot to kill the french president. It was a completely unnecessary storyline.
merc said:
The show has got mixed reviews in the UK press. Some reproted it as the worst thing to watch for Christmas others that it is a good show. Many comments do not like Tennant who they say gave the show a kiss of death as he does with everything
Ed_C_NC said:
This story has been made several times before, and this time it only barely follows the classic; in characters, motivation, details, and even broad strokes. It really isn't the same story. And as a stand-alone tale, it's not really worth watching.
This is yet another show that really should be labeled (at best), "Inspired by" rather than claiming to be another version of a famous story. Why do the networks keep paying never-heard-of-them writers to take the title, and often not much more, and write their own story. The original story was probably a best seller and famous.
As someone who has read the Jules Vern novel and had watched at least three adaptation I was excited to check out this version but as noted above it is diverges from the source material vastly however I have long asserted that when a story is translated into a different medium it should be altered as this other medium has different requirements to be successful. That being as it is, the alterations here don't seem to add to the story... indeed it feels more as though much of thee additions are simply filler.
The strange thing is there are plenty of text and subtext from the original novel as well as accounts which followed the Around the World journey in real life (because people did take this book as a challenge and many even chronicled their exploits) that could have been used to expand this mini-series in an interesting and believable way.
The side mission in Paris to delve into Passepartout's past moreover the trauma Phileas Fogg is continuingly undone by are not only monotonous but misguided, despite the attempt to rationalize the character for audiences having been an understandable path... unfortunately the path explored had the opposite effect than intended, I fear.
The only adjustment I was interested in was the NEW role of Abigail Fix Fortescue, the journalist, and I must admit it was the nerd in me who was excited for this as I had read Around the World in 72 Days by Jason Marks about how in 1889 two journalist, Nellie Bly & Elizabeth Bisland, actually attempted the very adventure Phileas & Passepartout supposedly carry out. One of the ladies make it in 72 and the other in 76 (I believe?).
I had high hopes that Ms. Fix would be a fictional mash-up of those very accomplished and trailblazing women, however she hasn't been much of an improvement from the Princess Aouda or Monique Laroche... the previous female companions to Phileas & Passepartout in past screen incarnations.
by Ed_C_NC posted 2 years ago
This story has been made several times before, and this time it only barely follows the classic; in characters, motivation, details, and even broad strokes. It really isn't the same story. And as a stand-alone tale, it's not really worth watching.
This is yet another show that really should be labeled (at best), "Inspired by" rather than claiming to be another version of a famous story. Why do the networks keep paying never-heard-of-them writers to take the title, and often not much more, and write their own story. The original story was probably a best seller and famous.
by merc posted 2 years ago
The show has got mixed reviews in the UK press. Some reproted it as the worst thing to watch for Christmas others that it is a good show. Many comments do not like Tennant who they say gave the show a kiss of death as he does with everything
by Wizard posted 2 years ago
g371 said:
Watched half of the first ep, have read a book, have seen older movie versions - but this one is just sad, dropped. It's supposed to be fun and adventurous, they made some gloomy depressing trash.
Agree, half the episode was filler - I don't remember from any of the previous outings about a plot to kill the french president. It was a completely unnecessary storyline.
Follow
I honestly fail to understand some of the comments about this, and other shows i've liked.
I often wonder, who ARE these people, to have such divergent views?
many of the UK press panned it & in particular Tennant's Fog. But like you I liked the show, in particular the characterisation of Fogg as some one frightened of life opening up to the world, unlike the David Niven version in typical British uppercrust do and dare. So a worthwhile addition to the versions
I honestly fail to understand some of the comments about this, and other shows i've liked.
I often wonder, who ARE these people, to have such divergent views?
These episodes are airing on Jan 2 (3 and 4) and Jan 9 (episode 5).
Is there any better way to report this error?
Any chance that's because the show airs originally on another channel (country) ?
I liked how his character was some one who was afraid of life, hiding in his club and goes on the trip finally due to a postcard posted by some one with the word coward on it - I wont say any more about that.......
This is yet another show that really should be labeled (at best), "Inspired by" rather than claiming to be another version of a famous story. Why do the networks keep paying never-heard-of-them writers to take the title, and often not much more, and write their own story. The original story was probably a best seller and famous.
As someone who has read the Jules Vern novel and had watched at least three adaptation I was excited to check out this version but as noted above it is diverges from the source material vastly however I have long asserted that when a story is translated into a different medium it should be altered as this other medium has different requirements to be successful. That being as it is, the alterations here don't seem to add to the story... indeed it feels more as though much of thee additions are simply filler.
The strange thing is there are plenty of text and subtext from the original novel as well as accounts which followed the Around the World journey in real life (because people did take this book as a challenge and many even chronicled their exploits) that could have been used to expand this mini-series in an interesting and believable way.
The side mission in Paris to delve into Passepartout's past moreover the trauma Phileas Fogg is continuingly undone by are not only monotonous but misguided, despite the attempt to rationalize the character for audiences having been an understandable path... unfortunately the path explored had the opposite effect than intended, I fear.
The only adjustment I was interested in was the NEW role of Abigail Fix Fortescue, the journalist, and I must admit it was the nerd in me who was excited for this as I had read Around the World in 72 Days by Jason Marks about how in 1889 two journalist, Nellie Bly & Elizabeth Bisland, actually attempted the very adventure Phileas & Passepartout supposedly carry out. One of the ladies make it in 72 and the other in 76 (I believe?).
I had high hopes that Ms. Fix would be a fictional mash-up of those very accomplished and trailblazing women, however she hasn't been much of an improvement from the Princess Aouda or Monique Laroche... the previous female companions to Phileas & Passepartout in past screen incarnations.
This is yet another show that really should be labeled (at best), "Inspired by" rather than claiming to be another version of a famous story. Why do the networks keep paying never-heard-of-them writers to take the title, and often not much more, and write their own story. The original story was probably a best seller and famous.
Agree, half the episode was filler - I don't remember from any of the previous outings about a plot to kill the french president. It was a completely unnecessary storyline.