User reviews

Gaul is entirely occupied by the Roman . Well not , entirely . One small village of indomitable Gauls holds out against the invaders . Life is not easy for the Roman legionaries who garrison the fortified camp . In the village are our friends, Asterix (Clovis Cornillac replacing Christian Claver) , he's a shrewd and cunning little warrior, his inseparable partner is Obelix (Gerard Depardieu , as always), he's ready to drop everything and go off on a new adventure with Asterix , Panoramix (recently deceased Jean Pierre Cassel) , the venerable village's druid who brews magic potions , his speciality is the potion which gives the drinker superhuman strength , without forgetting the chief Abraracourcix and the singer Bardo Cacofonix . Besides , a young villager enamored a beautiful Greek princess named Irina (Vanessa Hessler). Then our heroes decide participate in the Olympic Games in Olympia . There they must confront the Caesar's (Alain Delon substituting Gottfried John and Alain Chabat) son , named Brutus (Benoit Poelvoorde).

The picture captures outrageous adventures , tongue in cheek , anachronisms , feats and hilarious moments here and there. Packs sympathetic first appearance of Julius Caesar played by Alain Delon doing a self-homage with musical background from the Clan of the Sicilians . It appears several secondaries as Spaniards and French actors , such as Santiago Segura , Monica Cruz and Jean Pierre Castaldi ,Janel Debouzze repeating his role of Numerobix and the wrestling champion Nathan Jones as Humungus . However , this time doesn't appear the likable pirates and their sinking ships , being replaced by known football players in a silly ending with a balloon as plot . The motion picture was regularly directed by Frederic Forrestier , though it contains lively musical score and colorful cinematography by Thierry Argobast . This inferior third entry shot in live acting is preceded by ¨Asterix vs Caesar¨ directed by Claude Zidi and ¨Asterix and Cleopatra¨ by Alain Chabat with Monica Belucci.

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.

Rarely I do feel so outraged, but this piece of mindless images-in-motion is positively a sacrilege. NOTHING remains of the bright and snappy Humor of Gosciny and Uderzo. The ONLY puns worth a half-smile are the meta-movie ones: Alain Delon mentioning guepards, samurais, Rocco's brothers and the Sicilians' clan, or Schumacher running in the race with a Ferrari battle-car - but even these are obsolete, old-fashioned and excessive. Further, the humor is admirable, sublime we can say, but totally amiss. ALL the gags are forced, painfully slow, grotesquely overdone. The script is an absolute mess - no convincing story-line, no dramatic structure, no sense of rhythm (all these being capital errors when doing a comedy; even more so, for such a difficult and ambitious comedy as Astérix: absurd, fantastic, cunningly warping history, childish in an intelligent way). All in all, as other comments rightly stated, this film-lenght is the worst of all three: definitely slow, much too long, outright boring and worse than amateurish - it's DILETTANTE! If you loved Astérix, avoid it - it will incense you. If you don't know the Gaul hero, avoid it harder - it will unfairly compromise him forever in your eyes. The ONLY Astérix remains the one in the toons and comic books.

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.

I was really looking forwards to this: Whereas "Asterix & Cesar" wasn't great, they seemed to have found their stride with "Asterix et Cleopater" only to inexplicably throw it all away with this heap of rubbish. Where shall I start: The cast.

Clovis Cornillac - catastrophic. There isn't a hint of the quick wittedness and light footedness you expect of Asterix. Instead of being the mainstay of the film, he's a sideshow: Unfunny, uncharismatic. Bring back Clavier!

Alain Delon? I nearly wept! He's an all time legend. Cool, hard, dangerous. And here? A creepy buffoon. His worst role. Ever.

That's enough. Now the plot: In Asterix & Cleopatre, the writers (and director) managed to update the Goscinny original comic spirit and clever references very successfully in my opinion. That is, without sacrificing the flow of the narrative, and without over-emphasizing modern references. That is, they didn't get in the way nor did they hobble the Goscinny narrative.

These clowns seem to have completely missed the plot. The unsubtle references stick out like a sore thumb, and the things referred to will all be forgotten in a few years.

But more fatally for the plot: they've glued together episodes from different Asterix books with elaborate pastiches to try and re-establish some sort of story logic.

Then, they have seriously warped the actual olympic games narrative flow. The plot they've come up with leaves you constantly thinking "What? How ... why is this happening now? Where is such-and-such gone?" and most importantly "hmm, was that joke supposed to be ... funny?".

All in all, truly catastrophic. The only saving grace is - I supposed toddlers might find it exciting.

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.

The European sense of humour must be different from the North American one for I thought this movie was genuinely funny. First of all you critics from Europe should always note that a movie is a movie--it stands alone as an object of creativity. It is not a carbon copy of your favorite book or in this case comic book writing. I have not seen the pre-quals to this movie but I think based on this movie I would like them. I like this movie in the tradition of the Carry On films it is campy, slapstick humour and that is all I expect of it. I do not expect Francois Truffaut to crawl out of the grave and direct Alain Delon to a Jules And Jim performance whilst Ingmar Bergman laments in the corner of the screen. I think all of you who lambasted this film should lighten up and judge the film for what it is silly, funny, and at times humorous.

The movie has some very good parts, but unfortunately, it has more boring parts. It's big, and it made me wanna fall asleep a lot of times.. If they had cut all he stupid, with no reason, long parts, this would have been a great movie. I know that ASTERIX had always been a great comic. And it's a good reason to made me wanna see the movie. I expected something better for the movie, and so will you. The actors who play Astérix and Panroamix(druid) are different from the last two Astérix movies, and they are terrible. The don't feel like the original Astérix actors, but more like some random actors they picked up, and dressed in the right clothes. The humor is boring, because it's the same stupid "funny" thing all the time. It was pretty funny when Numérobis acted stupid at "Astérix & Obélix: Mission Cléopâtre", but at this movie it's not.

Many reasons to see this nice comedy. if you has not high expectations from it. because it has two sides. one reasonables, who saves few errors - the great actors in the lead roles - and it is a delight for malicious aspect of us to see the admirable Alain Delon in a hilarious sketch of Julius Cesar - or tolerate a so strange Asterix gived by Clovis Cornillac. the other side is a little bitter . because it is too...American. special effects, few not real inspired jokes and Olimpic Games, too eccentric references to history and an obvious film almost only for adults . but, sure, Depardieu does a good job. and a solide pillare could save a fragile house to fall. with huge dosis of mercy from public.

Comedy. The sequel to the previous successful film "Asterix and Obelix: Mission Cleopatra", based on children's comics by Rene Gosinni and Albert Uderzo. I must say right away that this picture became a kind of completion of the entire series, because after that something went wrong. And I have nostalgic feelings for this picture, because I have watched and reviewed it many times. Nevertheless, today I will be as critical of her as possible, because she deserves it. And here's my brief opinion for you - A cheerful madhouse. There were not only disadvantages in the picture, but also advantages (which are also worth mentioning). And this should end such an important introduction, and move on to the interesting one.

So, the pros: 1. The main story - if you do not go into unnecessary details, and forget about the monstrous disadvantages, then the main story in which our beloved Gauls Asterix and Obelix help Lubovix to win the hand of the beautiful Greek princess Irina by winning the Olympic Games, and this will be prevented by Irina's rejected fiance - Brutus himself, Caesar's adopted son, it turned out pretty good. There are no problems with logic in it, and the central characters are interesting to watch. There is a moral, the emotions of the audience turn on, and the finale pleases.

2. Graphically - each subsequent painting in this series tried to look as beautiful as possible, and this part turned out to be the most colorful and sophisticated. There are a lot of graphs here. It's both out of place and out of place. Apparently, the creators really wanted to show off with special effects, well, I must admit they succeeded. After all, the budget was decent for that time (almost eighty euro lemons).

3. Brutus - yes, the main villain of the picture, in the magnificent performance of the Belgian actor and humorist Benoit Pulvord (who was perfectly dubbed by Vadim Galygin) actually drags the whole picture. Yes, he has more screen time than the rest of the center characters. He's ridiculous, he's funny, he's kind of intimidating, and he's damn endearing.

So, the cons: 1. Asterix - he is no longer played in this picture by Christian Clavier, but by a certain Clovis Cornillac, who does not look at all in this role. In general, it was from this picture that the constant changes of Asterixes began (and in the fifth part they also changed the Obelix), which does not have a very good effect on the series. Clovis is mowing under Clavier here, but he does it much worse than the talented Christian. Clovis's Asterix turned out to be flighty, nervous, very restless.

2. Alain Delon as Caesar - forgive me, dear fans of the great French actor (I saw him only here and also in the film "Tehran 43"), but there is no Caesar here, but there is Alain Delon in a Caesar costume. Delon here brought the features of Napoleon Bonaparte rather, and already the emperor, who had just won the Battle of Austerlitz. Well, at least Alain Delon brightened up this role a little with his presence, because it won't get any better.

3. Logic - no, I understand perfectly well that the whole series has never been a bastion of logic, but here it is already beyond the beaver and the donkey. I do not even know where to start, maybe from the initial scene, where in the Gallic forest, where our village is located nearby (as all three Roman camps are aware of, that they are watching it), a Roman athlete is calmly running, and is very surprised by Asterix and Obelix, who easily overtook him using a magic drink. Or the numerous attempts of Brutus to kill Caesar. They all look very ridiculous and even very stupid. Etc. If I list them all, then the review will take a long time. Just know that there is not just a lot of this, but a huge amount.

3. Humor is not all of it, of course, but most of the jokes and funny situations are just not funny. And after all, there is no childish humor here (which was not observed before), but there is a lot of stupid and even stupid. Here, the jokes are already entirely designed for an adult audience.

The third part of the series did not feel so good at the box office (in fact, it failed), and deservedly so, because repeats of the original moments from the first and second pictures, new actors in old images (which also do not look like them in any way) did not have the best effect. Even Brutus and Alain Delon didn't save the day. It was a failure.

But, the organizers of the real Olympic Games perceived this comedy not as a comedy, but as a guide to action, otherwise how can we explain the obvious disregard of Russian athletes and even their ban on participating in the Rio 2016 Games? And now the situation with doping, explicit contractual competitions has not improved. Damn people! It was a comedy, not a call to action!

But this did not stop the greedy producers, and in 2012 the world saw the fourth part of the series, called "Asterix and Obelix in Britain", but we will talk about it another time.

My score is 6 out of 10. As for the recommendation, see for yourself!

The first live action Astérix film was terrible, an atrocity of mammoth proportions. The second one was a marked improvement with Jamel Debbouze's comic timing and the exotic locale. It still paled in comparison to Albert Goscinny & René Uderzo's classic comic books, but an improvement nonetheless. Hopefully the upward trend would have carried on, right? No, it doesn't because Astérix at the Oympic games which the third in the series doesn't even measure up to the crappy standards of the first one.

The new Astérix actor is hopelessly out of touch with the comic book Astérix. Gérard Depardieu is on the button as usual, but it takes two hands to clap. The celebrity cameos are worthless and only make the whole thing more tedious. The humor is very childish and in-your-face rather than subtle. Even with the huge budget, the special effects don't live up to the hype. I just hope they stop making these substandard live-action films and stop ruining the legacy of Astérix.

I used to read the adventures of Asterix when I was younger, and I was always delighted. But, watching this movie made me think differently: has the little 'Gaullois' village given up? the movie seems only made to guarantee commercial success: many famous people (many of whom are known only in France, plus some guest stars), special effects, big marketing, etc... But, in the end, the jokes are not very good, the special effects are sometime ridiculous, the plot is far fetched and the frequent appearance of guest stars doesn't manage to fill this rather empty movie (in fact, it ended getting on my nerves).

I don't know if children will find this movie funny, but it's really difficult for anybody without 'laughing potion' to take real pleasure here. Too bad for Benoit Poolevoerde, who has done his best to save the Titanicus!

After great example of "Asterix and Obelix Mission Kleopatra" I was hoping that the next Asterix movie will be as good if not better. When I saw the trailer the visuals and special effects for this one look amazing and I was happy to see it base on one of the best Asterix books...

Sadly all the hope gone very quickly, as while looking pretty this movie field when it came down to the script.

The story barley fallows the book. It use few ideas and thats it. All cleverness and satire is throw away in place of a Cliché love story I've seen million times before. What worst for a title character Asterix dose little in the movie (and I don't care much for the new actor who is playing him) Instead movie focus on the new characters either the lovers who aren't that interesting or the main villain Brutus who's simply annoying and gets way too much screen time.

Jokes are either gags that will entertain the youngest of children or simply forced jokes like the Star Wars reference that barley made any sense. The only thing I like about it is the actor who played Cesar but pare-up with the annoying Brutus he don't get to much chance to shine.

Over all worst of all Asterix movies and a big wast of time and money.

No pun intended - I loved the Asterix (and Obelix) comics when I was a kid. So I guess there is some baggage - and I guess that most watching this have some previous knowledge of the characters. Some more and some maybe less. I can only highly recommend to anyone to read at least some of the comics - they are good.

That said, the movies seem to hit the spot too. Of course comedy is in the eye of the beholder. So you have to really suspend your disbelief - and you have to indulge the silly humor this is serving. This also includes a character that is super beautiful (actually if you are into men, I reckon there are two that you could call pretty) .. and she is just breathtaking - I think I remember that being similar in the comics too.

I might have to do some re-reading myself I reckon ... this is as close to the comics or at least feels like it is, as it can get ...

When I saw the first film i said to myself "Why should they mix elements from different stories to make a movie...? It's bloody Asterix, any comic-book could be a full 90 min. movie easily!". When i saw the second movie, I said to myself "Well Alain Chabat has a similar humor to Goscinny (OK OK + Uderzo..) and i laughed my a** off! The movie was solid, without blanks and even the new elements Chabat added were in the spirit of the comic". And now i see that... The total offense to Asterix's spirit, humor and script!! They messed up everything on that movie! I think there wasn't at all any editing or montage! I thought i was watching the raw mix!!! All the scenes were copy+pasted?? WTF?? WTF?? Why did they make that movie? No scenario, no humor (in only 2-3 scenes i smiled!) not even acting!!! NOT A MOVIE!!! Thnx for reading... sorry if you liked the movie! P.S.: I'm big fan of Asterix, have all books, read them many many times, so i thought i should post a comment on that non funny - offensive movie.

I never liked any of the 'Asterix'-Movies very much, I found them mostly boring. The newest addition to the line is no exception to the rule: a lot of crappy humour and bad timing. One good thing this movie has is the presence of Alain Delon. He was and still is an actor with an unbelievable on-screen-presence and charisma. My impression was, that this dull movie came alive when he had screen time. His role was silly, he wasn't. He brought in nearly fifty years of experience and it worked even in this silly role and silly movie. I was really impressed with his performance and just realized once again, what a fine actor Delon is. It is sad that he retired from acting and that this s***** movie brought him back, but well, that's his decision. If you have a childish sense of humour or small kids, this is your movie for a bad-weather-day. Everyone else: leave it.

I have been laughing all along! Delon's self parody is so well fitting, Depardieu's jab at Cyrano, etc... Actually there are so many references to other movies that the actors made, I am pretty sure I did not catch half of them. There are a lot of good jokes as well as greasy ones. But if you do not expect Goncourt's phrases, that perfect! Schumacher's appearance is excellent, but you need to like F1 to appreciate the jabs. The others athletes are also well presented, but this can be understood as low self-gratification or as a great self-parody depending on the point of view. I personally saw great humor.

As for the story, it is quite light but well brought. The visuals are good and made to make laugh.

And I personally think that departure of C Clavier is not a lost. Still, you have to know the figures in this movie to enjoy it, knowing they are French/European only.

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 ! :)

After seeing 4 times the previous "Asterix: mission Cléopâtre" in theaters, how can I tell my deception? For months, I waited for this one, and all I was rewarded, was finally a pointless story, made of gags without connection between them. Besides, famous actors do all they can. Great names, as many guest stars, each one dedicated to one specific kind of gag, as if the movie makers tried to achieve the ultimate commercial movie, at once for all audiences: kids, old movies fans, sport lovers, and so on. All we think they could do with such a cast, remains in our imagination: the reality is just a boring succession of bad jokes, like a sketch movie. Teletubbies fans will love. With constantly increasing ticket prices, I hope you'll a way to spend a better time.

This is unquestionably the worst comedy I have ever seen in my life. May be it is slightly better for those who understand French but the jokes were so bad, didn't make any sense with the subtitles. The music and special effects were OK but the plot is just nonsense. I gave a 2 just for the time they spent on this. They had some good ideas close to the end but no one can survive up to that point without loosing his sanity. With the money they spent on this, if they had a good story, it could have been better. At least, it wouldn't fail as much. Don't waste your money and time. It is even not worth for renting. Painfully bad, not funny even for a moment.

What a crap!!!... I'm so disappointed.. OK,the first film was not very good, everybody agrees, but in some way it had some a sort of dreamy ambiance, that could kept someone a bit connected to the ambient on the books, and, of course, Christian Clavier as Astérix.. I absolutely LOVED the 2nd one.. Now that's comedy, that transported you back to the subtle humour on the books, those were great actors, etc etc... This one was TERRIBLE! Has anyone seen Astérix?? Who was that guy?? How on earth did anyone ever thought he could play astérix!? And did the director's even read the original book? This was a really bad movie... By the time an hour had passed I couldn't listen to Benoît Poelvoorde (Brutus) anymore.. Even though I think he pulled out a decent performance on this, please, shut him up! My head was banging with all that shouting and crappy dialogues... Not funny whatsoever.. And I guess that crappy Astérix talked 3 or 4 times during the whole movie... Maybe I shouldn't complain, because every time he appeared on screen I thought "what tha hell.. a blue eyed astérix with the appearance of teenager badly dressed to carnival??!"

Please... You ruined it all

:(