The faults with the film result primarily because of the time period in which it was made. The Indian princess is played by Shirley MacLaine, who is definitely not Indian, and this obviously white actress made her portrayal seem campy at times and offensive at others. She doesn't even look remotely ethnic, and there didn't seem to be much of an attempt to change that. Another fault was the clear master-servant relationship between Fogg and Passpartout. While yes, Fogg is kind to Passpartout and even cares about his loyal servant, Passpartout is treated with disrespect by other characters and becomes a caricature at points, emphasizing how not British he is.
Despite these faults, the film overall is enjoyable. In many cases, it appears that the film was shot on location (one exception being San Francisco where it's a poorly constructed sound stage), so the cinematography takes you along their journey. This does result in some longer shots to showcase the setting which add to the already long film (175 minutes), but considering how much money and time was spent to set up on these locations, I can't say that I blame the filmmakers all that much. The story itself is interesting; I found myself wondering why it mattered so much to Fogg to prove to these stuffy old men that he could in fact circle the globe in 80 days. But it set up this clear contrast between the old and new way, and since Verne set the story in 1872, a time when the old ways of life were giving way to the new, it makes sense to have a story that showcases how technology is rapidly changing the world. For modern audiences, of course, it does require us to forget about just how quickly one person today could circle the globe and how easy all our technology would make this trip.
