SummaryA Victorian Englishman bets that with the new steamships and railways he can circumnavigate the globe in eighty days.
Directed By:Michael Anderson, John Farrow
Written By:James Poe, John Farrow, S.J. Perelman, Jules Verne
Around the World in 80 Days
Metascore
Generally Favorable
69
User score
Generally Favorable
6.3
My Score
Drag or tap to give a rating
Hover and click to give a rating
Not available in your country?
ExpressVPN
Get 3 Extra months free
$6.67/mth
Top Cast
Metascore
Generally Favorable
70% Positive
7 Reviews
7 Reviews
30% Mixed
3 Reviews
3 Reviews
0% Negative
0 Reviews
0 Reviews
100
Everything about this big, beautiful movie smacks of authenticity, excitement, and massive showmanship.
90
Around the World In 80 Days, is a smasheroo from start to finish.
User score
Generally Favorable
58% Positive
7 Ratings
7 Ratings
33% Mixed
4 Ratings
4 Ratings
8% Negative
1 Rating
1 Rating
Jul 24, 2023
7
Movie is way too long,, But stunning widescreen location cinematography, and likable characters make it worthwhile, Major standout in the star studded cast is the charming, Shirley MacLaine
Oct 3, 2024
6
This leisurely adaptation of one of Jules Verne’s most extraordinary voyages sends us on a breakneck race to circumnavigate the globe in a then-unthinkable two and a half months. As more than eight decades had already passed since the book’s publication, the filmed version takes some liberties with the source material, but most deviations are for the better. The famous flight in a hot air balloon, for example, was culled from a different Verne novel and has since become one of the tale’s most enduring images. The protagonist’s French butler has seen his ethnicity swapped to suit the Latin star Cantinflas, a popular foreign comedian whose unique brand of energetic charisma breathes life into a number of floundering scenes. As travel and society are essential themes, we’re treated to a great number of panoramic vistas and unique set designs. The route doesn’t make a lot of sense, given the urgency of the trip, but I’m willing to forgive that in the name of a little extra international flavor. Each destination gets its chance to shine, with a heavy emphasis placed on costume and set design, and the constant cultural crash courses feel earnest and celebratory despite a bit of common western bias. Worst of those offenses: casting lily-white Shirley MacLaine as an Indian princess (she studied for a semester in London, we’re told). But that kind of thing is to be expected of 1950s Hollywood. Verne novels aren’t really regarded for their depth, and in that respect the film is completely loyal. This is just a flowery concept that’s thumped and beaten for every ounce of superficial value, offering no more insight or meaning than a travel agency brochure. It’s a voyage, after all, not a character piece, and despite a literal cast of thousands, loaded with cameos, the finished product can’t quite support its own weight. Without the top-notch production design, it would’ve been a total bore.
70
Todd and Anderson's Around the World in 80 Days is an overstuffed, star-crammed affair, but it's also a sly charmer. [11 Jun 1992, p.14]
67
Broadway showman Mike Todd created this extravaganza, which launched the venerable movie tradition of the celebrity cameo. The color holds up well, although the leisurely pace may be an adjustment in today's world of fast-paced editing. [14 May 2004, p.14]
63
Although Around the World in 80 Days offers gorgeous visuals, that’s not sufficient justification for watching a film – any film – for three hours.
50
Mike Todd's inflation of Jules Verne, with Niven as Phileas Fogg and the Mexican comedian Cantinflas as Passepartout, becomes an interminable travelogue interspersed with sketches in which star-spotting affords some relief (there are cameos from hordes of luminaries ranging from Dietrich and Beatrice Lillie to Keaton and Sinatra).
50
Proof that you can buy an Academy Award, with David Niven, Cantinflas, and 44 stars in cameo roles spending a lot of Michael Todd’s money as they tour the world in Jules Verne’s balloon.
Dec 26, 2022
6
I applaud this movie for its decadence and epic scope. There are many epic scenarios, including bullfights in Spain, Hindu religious ceremonies in India, and a pursuit by Native Americans in the United States. Watching them all is a lot of fun, and the cinematography is excellent as well. The grandiose size of this film is somewhat indicative of the 1950s, which is why I believe it hasn't held up well over time. It is devoid of any supporting material. The characters are all uninteresting. For a three hour adventure film, the plot is quite simple. Of course, the humorous elements have aged as well. This film would likely benefit from being at least a half-hour shorter than it currently is. Note: with entr'acte and exit music [3HR 3MIN]
Jan 21, 2026
4
The stagnant machinery of a bloated travelogue: A 2.0-star "pathetic" drift through colonial postcards.2011 (2.0)I watched "Around the World in 80 Days" (1956) in 2011, and it remains a "pathetic" 2.0-star record in my archive—a film that failed to provide a visceral "revelation" despite its "vivid" technicolor scale and rhythmic parade of celebrity cameos. While the production attempted a "sensational" global adventure with high-tension logistics, the narrative rhythm felt incredibly "stagnant" and mechanical, following a 100% superficial trajectory that lacked the "chewy" intellectual depth of my 5.0-star pillars. Seeing the "vivid" but ultimately hollow spectacle of hot air balloons and "pathetic" cultural stereotypes **** the fourth wall of my immersion; it felt like a "stagnant" tourism advertisement rather than a "raw" cinematic experience. Although the film boasted a rhythmic variety of locations, the emotional payoff felt "pathetic" and unearned, leaving me in a state of "silent frustration" at its bloated runtime rather than "hororong." The 95% preservation of my memory is centered on the "stagnant" pacing of the journey and the "vivid" but empty glamour of the production, creating a theatrical encounter that provided no permanent, "sensational" scar on my soul. Unlike the high-tension precision of "The Machinist" or the "raw" soul of "My Fair Lady," this experience was a "vivid" exercise in excess—a 2.0-star artifact of "stagnant" storytelling that felt as "pathetic" as a 1.0-star trauma in its inability to engage my "human distrust" or provide any "raw" rebellious energy.
Jan 13, 2026
4
There's a charming story somewhere in here and the narrative and performances are silly to match (compliment). But the runtime is loaded with filler scenes as they travel from country to country. Like extended Spanish dance and bullfighting scenes, Indian burial sequence, Geisha performance, and maybe hundreds of scenery, boat, and train shots. All the portrayals of regions and people are basically caricatures.
Production Company:
- Michael Todd Company
Release Date:Oct 17, 1956
Duration:2 h 47 m
Rating:G
Tagline:See everything in the World worth seeing! Do everything in the World worth doing!
Awards
Academy Awards, USA
• 5 Wins & 8 Nominations
Golden Globes, USA
• 2 Wins & 3 Nominations
New York Film Critics Circle Awards
• 2 Wins & 2 Nominations
