Asterix the Gaul

There’s no biggest fan of Asterix than me, I grew up with the comics and I know most of the stories by heart. That's why I can't accept its animated form, which is a mere pastiche compared to the books. What happened to Goscinny's clever humour? Where is Uderzo's artistic brilliance? Both of Asterix's "spiritual fathers" have nothing to do with the animated films and the result shows it. Asterix is for me an intelligent kind of humour, like Cimrman here for example, but the animated versions are not like that and they are quite different from the printed ones, they lack the ambiguous humour. You'd better read Asterix. (05/08/2003)

The first Asterix movie doesn't reach the quality of its legendary successors, but it's still a force to be reckoned with. It is, after all, a stepping stone to the piles of battered Romans and the imaginative humour that entertained children and adults then, and continues to do so today. There are already some nice dialogues and motifs that show the genius and timelessness of Goscinnny's humour. (03/12/2012)

I mostly give 60% of this film out of nostalgia, which is still quite good in terms of animation, but the story is so simple and silly that one wonders how it even made it into a one-hour movie. It is an introduction to the characters in the film, at least the animated part, and it is not much to go by otherwise. The good movies are yet to come. (04/05/2016)