Another traditional European feature - about time, too! I saw it last night and thought it worked rather well considering the comic book it's based on doesn't lend itself to feature animation at first sight.
I heard Astérix has never been too popular in the United States (with the exception of Canada) and that it's been accused of French chauvinism on more than one occasion. As a European, I cannot tell how the Astérix books' humour is generally perceived in the US, of course, but the series' former writer René Goscinny was one of Europe's foremost humorists who played brilliantly with national bigotry and stereotypes, including those of his fellow countrymen.
Nonetheless, go see Astérix and the Vikings if you get the chance and maybe pick up the comic book it's based on, too. (Astérix and the Normans.) The animation is well above average, it's a nice break from those hip 3D features and comparing comic book and film makes for a nice exercise in animation script writing.
Astérix and the Vikings
By Jabberwocky | Monday, May 15, 2006 at 12:35am
#1
Astérix and the Vikings
Well, I am one Canuck who LOVES the Asterix series. I might have read them all actually. Or at least as many as I can. I will definitely see this movie the first chance I get. :cool:
Order my book Jesus Needs Help on Amazon or download on Kindle.
You can also read the first 18 pages of my next book for free at this link: The Hap Hap Happy Happenstance of Fanny Punongtiti
This isn't the same Asterix movie with Gerard Depardu (sp?) is it? I know he was in a live action version of the moive, but I wasn't sure if it was all live action or part animated or what. Either way, I've love to see them. I hope they are released here in the US. I never really got into Asterix, but hey, if the Canuks like him, thats good enough for me! :D
Aloha,
the Ape
...we must all face a choice, between what is right... and what is easy."
Nah, not the live-action movie. I thought that one rather stunk. Stuffing real actors into cartoon characters' clothes almost never works in my opinion.
The illustration in most of those books is terrific - and better than what I've seen from the movie stills - but Asterix doesn't have the type of characters that usually appeal to American kids.
I'm not aware of any plans to bring the Asterix movie to American theaters, but I'll check it out once it's on DVD.
Variety review
Enjoyably peppy if not particularly memorable, animated feature "Asterix and the Vikings" is a good-natured adventure comedy suitable for tots on up.
...
Family-friendly ode to self-reliance and bad puns should fare nicely in France and self-selecting territories beyond.
Europeanfilms.net review
Though anachronisms have always been a source of humour in the universe of Astérix, the ostentatious inclusion of disco music and gadgetry such as SMS messaging (through a bird no less) and a racing car does not sit well with the series’ general old-fashioned tone. These additions do not so much update the setting as they seem to try – rather badly – to hide its true nature, much like a transvestite who wears the latest dress but forgets to shave. The animation quality varies but is generally well done; some sequences at sea look a bit too amateurish, while the use of light, reflections and shadows adds a nice touch of naturalism.
Uderzo (artist) and Goscinny (writer) was a match made in heaven. When Goscinny died, Albert Uderzo took over writing and many fans say the series has been going downhill ever since. Truth be told, I'm not a huge fan of the Astérix books published after Astérix in Belgium myself. Astérix and the Normans was still written by Goscinny, though!
When he was still alive, Goscinny wrote an original script for one Astérix feature. (There's a total of eight now.) It's Astérix Conquers Rome and my favourite not in terms of animation, but certainly in terms of plot. I always thought Astérix works best when he's travelling the world, like he does in the majority of books written by Goscinny, and Astérix Conquers Rome features plenty of that.
Naturally the comic books' separate panels look "better" than the animation stills but animation is about motion, not static detail. Uderzo's style heavily influenced European comic book artists. In the movie, they even paid hommage to the style in which the Astérix comics are inked by varying the outline thickness. Sort of what they did in Disney's Aladdin but it works for Astérix as well.
I'd very much appreciate it if some of that European flavour appealed to American viewers. We in Ye Olden Country have been influenced by American entertainment for much longer than I can think back and it'd be nice to give something back that isn't just a knock-off of that Hollywood formula.
The film was done by a Danish company and I know a few of the animators. It looks REALLY good and I wish them all the success. Go guys go. :)
Well, good animated movies can be about static detail.
The main reason I enjoy Miyazaki's, Chomet's, and Otomo's movies is for the detail of the backgrounds and character designs, which are generally the same quality as their static or comic book counterparts. Then there are 3D movies which tend to rely heavily on "static detail."
If you look at the Asterix movie's backgrounds, you can clearly see that they're victims of a limited budget, not of a physical law which forbids detail.
I don't mind that if it fits . As artists we get all excited by great drawings like Chomets but it really doesn't mean that much if you can't get the audience to relate to the characters. Ok, I was not in love with Hoodwinked (sorry guys though I am happy for your financial success ) . To me the characters were too detailed yet too inflexible (this is totally the rigging ) to deliver expressions but lots of people liked it for the writing. It's the fully 3D South Park in a way. I think Asterix fits the look of the books and the day I stop watching is the day it goes 3D. But thats me because I read them growing up , new viewers might love it. Film is really driven by character so whatever works I guess.
I didn't mean to imply that high detail is always done well or is always appropriate.
Interesting characters can help, but there is no absolute formula for creating a good movie. Out of all the elements - story, characters, screenplay, voice actors, design, character animation, backgrounds, FX animation - only a few of them need to excel.
It's true that Myazaki movies are pretty much unrivalled when it comes to layout. In terms of animation, however, they're not up there with Disney productions. So much meticulous detail gets into the characters' designs that it hampers fluidity. The characters as such are a treat to look at even in stills but there's rarely lip synch in Myazaki's movies, what you get are those anime-type face holes that just open and close. I also find that they don't always work correctly with weight in motion, but that's just my perception.
As for 3D animation, I've never liked how they tend to make characters jerk from pose to pose as is often seen in Ice Age and Madagascar. They're running that Madagascar Penguins short on display PCs in the shop where I currently work, without sound, and seeing it that way every day it strikes me again and again that the animation is so hasty and jerky it really lacks pantomimic expression.
You're right about there being no absolute formula for a good movie - but that doesn't stop them from trying. Ever since Toy Story they've been churning out 3D buddy sitcom after 3D buddy sitcom. Again, this is me, but it's starting to suck more than mushy, song-filled fairy tale adaptations.