Asterix alle Olimpiadi

No, it's not *good*, I won't go that far. When you think of what it *could* have been, you feel cheated. The remarks listed in reviews stand: the focus isn't always there, the supposedly main character was relegated to being mere support, the pacing is often off - for example, the chariot race manages to look way less exciting than it should be, so one can speculate where the fault lies - the camera-work, the editing... I think it's the direction. The director(s) and the producer(s) went to create a film for about a bazillion types of audiences (and I don't blame them, when there are 70+ million Euros to justify and return) but that's a pretty tough goal. It worked for the original comic where the kids get the gags and the subtle education, and the adults get the clever wordplay and densely packed historical, literary, and other references, but this doesn't mean it will necessarily work in another medium. So there are too many plots (patched together from several Astérix books - this was the demise of the first film too, so future takers, learn!), too many people to satisfy, and too many actors and celebrities. To hold all those egos in check one needs a stronger director or team than the newbies (sorry, but it's true) this film had. I have the impression that they went with the idea that if they throw enough money and enough famous names into the cauldron the film will make itself, but, eh, no. This film desperately needed somebody who could shape it better because it's obvious where things were cut (some scenes make no sense) and they should have used the *titular character* a lot more. It must be said however that for an amusing night's out it's a perfectly fine piece of entertainment. We laughed quite a lot. Depardieu and Delon deliver, Poelvoorde is a comedian I'd not heard of before but now I'm interested in his other work, and as for the new Astérix - Clovis Cornillac - well, he got the character down to a T: he's too tall and a little too fit, sure, but he looks pretty darn much like the guy in the comic book and he moves and talks just like him. I'd never seen a fictional character recreated with such essential accuracy and since this must be even more difficult when the source material is based on grotesque and exaggeration, this is quite an achievement. Hopefully, Mr Cornillac will have (and accept) another chance to play in an Astérix film, this time with a bigger role.

Of course I was expecting celebrity cameos, but I hopped the movie won't stand only on this. Unfortunately it does it.

At each minute a celebrity face arrives, (french and European celebrities of course) makes a reference and gets out. What about ASTERIX himself ? Well, he's also making a "cameo" since he is not the main character of this movie. And the worst stands at the end of the movie (when the story is finished) when a bunch of sport's stars arrived to show themselves without having nothing to do in the spot line. Sort of "we didn't have time to put you in the story, but you will appear at the end, to increase our credits"...

The good points : The special effects and the set decoration are really great. We understand this picture costs the price of a "STARWARS". Too bad to have spent so much for a tiny joke...

"THE MOST EXPENSIVE FRENCH MOVIE OF ALL TIME !".

What a pride ! :)

This is my first encounter with M. Depardieu as Obelix. I wasn't expecting much: French cinema has a habit on making poor nepotistic films on a regular basis (i.e. members of the typical film family keep scratching each other's back in circles...)

Asterix is both a French institution that has always been written to be understood at several levels by different age groups. The film is good in the sense that it doesn't try to replicate the book, it expands on it but still tries to capture this multi=layered humour. It's not always subtle but it works. A few examples:

• Alain Delon makes an impressive comeback while sending himself up and referencing the films that made his past glory

• Depardieu re-enacts scenes from his marvellous Cyrano, using virtually the same shots and lighting almost 20 years on

• The modernised Ben Hur chariot race is absolutely right for today's audience and manages to capture the spirit of the book while being much more sophisticated.

• The multiple cameos are very funny, especially if you can pick up some of the French dialogues. Others will simply be impressed by who appears on screen...

I also found that the special effects were used to carry humour and a cartoon-like spirit as opposed to being grandiose.

In summary 'The Third Man it ain't, but as thoroughly entertaining family film for all ages, it just works.

The first one looked good but just could not get the humor right. The second one was quite good; close to the sense of humor of Gosciny (and Uderzo as well). So I was hoping for something good. Now the third one is kind of terrible. The visuals are okay (yes you see the CGI but it's not a problem in a funny movie based on comics) but almost everything else... The humor is worse than in the first one, the movie is just too long, the cameo-filled last ten minutes seem to be shot only for the end credits (they just don't make sense in the movie) but somebody must have thought they are funny enough for the movie - they are not. There are strange parts meant to be funny (e.g. the laser sword you could see in the advertisements - if they had to include a star wars joke again then why not make it at least a bit funny?), even the time between intended (forced and overplayed) gags is too long. Alain Delon is moderately funny as Caesar but his part is also overplayed, overly long. The new actor playing Asterix is a, as high as Obelix... b, never as funny/witty-looking as Christian Clavier. So what could go wrong did go wrong with this movie; maybe children will enjoy it but probably it will be too long for them as well.

I just watched the English translation of this movie, and I don't think it was as bad as people made it out to be.

Of the three live-action Asterix movies, none has really come close to capturing the charm of the comics (or even the animated features). "Mission Cleopatra" came closest, I think. The first movie was just miserable.

"Asterix at the Olympic Games" was a fun, if not perfect, attempt at capturing the magic of the books. My biggest complaint was that although its an Asterix and Obelix movie, it doesn't really seem to be about them. They don't even make an appearance until about 15 minutes in. It lends a certain degree of ridiculousness (and not in an amusing way) to the movie to have this enormous title screen that says "Astérix Aux Jeux Olympiques," and then have the entire opening act of the movie be about someone other than Asterix.

The CGI in the movie was also off-putting. Its used to make many of the more cartoony effects of the film, which is good, but it was really over-used in many scenes that didn't require them. Also, it wasn't really good CGI either.

The plot was nothing special, but it was amusing. It had some good jokes, and the characters were pretty fun. It was nothing like the comic ("Asterix at the Olympic Games") which it was based on, but I didn't expect it to be.

There were, apparently, tons of guest appearances by European (I think) athletes, none of whom I recognize -- being wholly ignorant on the topic of sports in this country or any other. I think these probably stuck in the throat of many people, who might have known who they were.

Anyway, I think they are starting to get the hang of how to make live-action Asterix movies, but I really do wish that the story had been more involved with Asterix, himself.