Retro C
The first animated film based on René Goscinny and Albert Uderzo's iconic French comic-books, Asterix The Gaul was made in 1967 and was based on the first of the books. Roger Carel voiced Asterix while Jacques Morel voiced Obelix.
Set in an alternative version of history in which Julius Caesar managed to conquer all of France save for one small village where the Gauls have stayed safe thanks to a magic potion, the comics follow Asterix and Obelix, with their dog Dogmatix, on their adventures. This first film sees nearby Roman camp send one of their most dim-witted soldiers disguised as a Gaul to Asterix's village in order to find out the source of their power.
Caligula Minus, the spy in question, finds out the Gauls' secret and shows off the power of the magic potion to his superior Caius Bonus' camp. This prompts the Romans to kidnap the druid Getafix, who makes the potion, and it's then up to Asterix to find him and bring him back. This being the first story, it's mostly a showcase of how clever and fearless Asterix himself is as he single-handedly outsmarts the Romans using only his wits. Obelix isn't really a big part of this particular story but he pops up again along with the rest of the village near the very end.
The creators of Asterix were not satisfied with this movie, especially since they only found out about it once it was being screened for them. After this, they decided to be significantly involved in the making of any further projects. Their disappointment was understandable as the film is infinitely more slight than the book and it only captures some of what makes these comics so lovable. The animation throughout is patchy and the voice acting is occasionally a bit off but, on the plus side, the film does have a lot of charm.
The characters are instantly likable, we're introduced to the most classic of Asterix music themes, there are quite a few funny, memorable moments and you definitely recognize key aspects from the book. You do get the feeling, however, that the making of the film was perhaps a bit rushed and, had a lot more work and supervision gone into the project, it could have been a lot better. It doesn't make the best use of all the characters and, watching it now, it does feel quite dated.
This first Asterix movie may be a bit of a mixed bag but it's still an enjoyable little film and a decent enough place to start if you're not too familiar with the comics or the characters. This is a fun, if slightly clunky, animated film with enough good humor and charm to make it worth it.
Enjoyable.
Rated 3.5/5 Stars •
Rated 3.5 out of 5 stars
10/12/23
Full Review
Audience Member
'Asterix the Gaul' is an adaptation of the first book in Goscinny and Uderzo's iconic comic series. Released in Britain before the official English translation was published, this is a faithful but crude adaptation, changing the names of various secondary characters.
This adaptation was produced without permission from Goscinny and Uderzo, but it follows the story of 'Asterix the Gaul', as Asterix and the village druid have to outwit a scheming Roman general. This fidelity is not necessarily a good thing. Like most comic series, Asterix got off to a slow start, so 'Asterix the Gaul' is a silly affair with little of the satirical bite and creativity of later Asterix tales. The backgrounds are big and well painted, but the animation on the characters is crude and low-quality. The voice acting is anonymous (the end credits on Netflix list several distinguished British actors, but they appeared in later animated movies...) and the score is annoying, with several unnecessary musical scenes padding out the story and disrupting the comic momentum.
This film is for hardcore Asterix fans only - anyone else would be better off reading the comic...
Rated 2/5 Stars •
Rated 2 out of 5 stars
02/22/23
Full Review
Audience Member
I think Goscinny and Uderzo had good reason to dislike this movie. The "movie" was originally going to be televised but instead got a theatrical release. It's painfully obvious too thanks to its repetitive music, crappy Hanna-Barbera-style animation - I can only tolerate those walk cycles and repitition of frames for so long - and constant fades to black. My God, do those voices not fit the characters. I know things were different in the 60s but those American accents don't sit well with me. It's faithful to its source material and there are few funny moments but the movie's a bit too faithful, almost as if the writers are afraid that if they truly differentiate from the comic, the fans will crucify them, when some changes should be made because it's a movie, first and foremost. Asterix the Gaul is not terrible but it's still bad and I'm glad later movies had considerably more effort put into them (at least the animated ones), even if some of them seemed to have a worse reception.
Rated 2/5 Stars •
Rated 2 out of 5 stars
01/23/23
Full Review
Audience Member
I prefer the 1960's animation to the recent Mansions of the Gods computer stuff. Otherwise, it really hasn't stood the test of time. It's clunky and often painfully unfunny, and has a score that grates on your nerves. It demonstrates that the Asterisk stories are definitely due a reboot, but not by the same people who did Mansions.
Rated 1.5/5 Stars •
Rated 1.5 out of 5 stars
02/23/23
Full Review
s r
Slow and quirky, but it has an unusual appeal.
Rated 2.5/5 Stars •
Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
duncan p
A rather cheesy introduction to the series in general, it unfortunately is, in its English dub, showing its age, especially since it was made and translated a whole 2 years prior to the official English translations of the comics started nailing down details (names especially) that are now quite different after said translation effort. It must be said that "Asterix the Gaul" was not exactly the best volume of the book series, being the first, but they somehow managed to cheese up that introduction to the mythos even more, largely, I think, due to the fact that Goscinny and Uderzo had no say in the film (and were known to be dissatisfied with this film). Ultimately, you're better off getting an introduction to the characters with the books or a later film, though the books are better.
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
Read all reviews
Post a rating
>
