Around the World in 80 Days

The new version is far less about spectacle [than the 1956 film], though it is quite beautiful in the way it captures the physical world, from post-Commune Paris to the Yemeni desert to Raj-era India to, eventually, the U.S., where a meeting with the legendary lawman Bass Reeves (Gary Beadle) leads to a gun-slinging romp through Reconstruction Era America that borders on the preposterous but is highly exciting.

Around the World in 80 Days isn’t an earth-shattering Jules Verne adaptation, but it is a lovely one. Thanks mostly to the way it understands how to harness David Tennant’s magnificence on screen.

By journey's end – which is satisfying even if viewers believe they know what to expect – our affection for the trio has grown. It's no wonder that the studios have already wagered on a second round of more Verne-inspired adventures.

Tennant promised a “romp” from this updated version of Jules Verne’s novel, and it certainly is lively. This is big television in the vein of His Dark Materials. ... Clearly, there is great confidence in it. It is justified, largely.

This Around the World frolic might just be the ticket for those whose wanderlust was curtailed in recent years. Buckle up. [3 - 16 Jan 2022, p.9]

What seems like a not-necessary idea actually turns into a pretty good one with "Around the World in Eighty Days," adapting Jules Verne's novel into an eight-episode Masterpiece series, one already renewed for another voyage. David Tennant plays the unlikely adventurer Phileas Fogg, in a slick retelling that significantly updates and expands the story.

It’s certainly not short of activity and yet, it all feels a little flat. The cast do their best with the material they’ve been dealt – Tennant, Benesch and Koma are convincing in their roles – but after watching the first three episodes made available to critics, we were quite happy to leave it there.

The pace was glacially slow.

Look, it’s reasonably good fun. But – and I hate to say this – if Netflix and Amazon had made it, and thrown a shedload of money at it, they’d probably have done a better job. It’s a story that would benefit from a more lavish treatment.

Masterpiece’s adaptation of the Verne classic adds almost nothing significant to the story of Phileas Fogg and his companions. It remains firmly within the limits set by the novel in 1872, turning a journey around the world from an adventure into unknown lands to a stroll along a well-trodden footpath. It is an expansion that does not exceed the constraints of the original tale and perhaps even flounders under the weight of attempting to tell every aspect of Verne’s story and then some.

It’s ultimately a middling, entirely unnecessary new take on Verne’s classic adventure novel, and its main cast seems aware they’re starring in what amounts to an afterschool special.

It’s a story with a ticking clock literally in the title and yet this adaptation is largely devoid of adventure or fun and doesn’t work nearly well enough as serious drama to compensate. ... What kept me going primarily was Tennant’s interpretation of Fogg as a mournful man characterized by his abiding sadness.

Once the adventure got going, it just wasn’t quite as fun as it ought to be. ... For what should be a rollicking good time, this trip felt much longer than 80 days long.

London and Paris look nearly identical here, perhaps both shot on the same block in Romania. In every frame, you can sense corners being cut. ... TV is finally in a position to faithfully remake Around the World in 80 Days, so why not give it the treatment it deserves?