How To Train Your Dragon 2 (2014)

[Sara2009]

Has anyone else seen this yet? I thought it was good especially for a sequel.

[ramble]

My kids & I saw it today. I enjoyed it a lot. Sweet & fun! It wasn't life changing or anything but it was good for what I think it was meant to be: an entertaining sequel. I was entertained. I may be biased because I read the books to my kids when they were younger. And there were dragons! Yea!

[Rick Kitchen]

Excellent animation in this film.  Not only is the texturing, such as in water and clothing, great, but you can see every hair on an arm.  And the way the human characters move is very realistic.  Great job, animators.  The story itself is pretty good, but I would definitely not recommend it for little kids.

 

[Rick Kitchen]

ugh, I mistitled it.  Could an admin please change the title?  Sorry.

[BizBuzz]

ugh, I mistitled it.  Could an admin please change the title?  Sorry.

 

There was actually another thread already started, so I merged them.

[Rick Kitchen]

Thanks, @BizBuzz.  Somehow I couldn't find it.  :/

[BizBuzz]

Quite alright - once things get to the second page, they get harder to find.  ::giggle::

 

We are going to go see this, hopefully this weekend, will report when done.

 

And by the way?  You got the notification procedure down correctly @Rick Kitchen , except there is a bug that doesn't like punctuation right after the name.  Keep that in mind when you want to notify someone that you mentioned them in a post.

[OakGoblinFly]

I saw it and I thought it was lovely (Star War reference and all)  - I really like the fact that the characters aged.

 

The animation was amazing - there were times when the background landscape looked so real I had to remind myself that I was looking at animation and not an actual landscape.

[NoWillToResist]

I knew nothing going into it but I re-watched the first one to remind myself about the characters etc. Still an awesome movie. :)

 

I'll buck the trend here though and say that I want to disavow all knowledge of this sequel. Wait! Let me explain: yes, the animation is gorgeous; yes, the theme of "inspiring loyalty out of friendship/love is better/stronger than inspiring loyalty out of fear/violence" is important; yes, the scenes of Hiccup and Toothless exploring and making maps was a great storyline; and there were lots of very funny dragon moments. BUT...

 

What I cannot get past: 1) they killed his father, and (2) they had TOOTHLESS kill his father. I know it sets Hiccup on the path to being the new chief but I fucking hated that they went that route. I was waiting for a fake-out or last-minute gasping breath, but once they lit the boat on fire, I knew his death was sticking, and I was PISSED.

 

I'm so glad they had Hiccup's mother return just so that they could go ahead and kill his dad, because God fucking forbid a kid in an animated movie gets to have both parents around. Fox giveth...Fox taketh away. And hey, substituting the parent you've known all your life with one you've known for a hot minute is a totally easy transition, right? And how nice of Stoick to not have ANY questions about how/why his wife is alive and chose to not come home to him and their son. Total forgiveness, no questions asked. Really? Don't even get me started on her justification for staying away. Vikings were mean to dragons! They'll never change! Guess I'll leave my baby boy to be raised by these savages rather than stay and try give my son some support for his apparent affinity (from the cradle!!) for dragons. Nope. Let 'em think I'm dead so he'll be raised in a way I find repugnant while I play Jane Goodall with dragons. Blergh.

 

Why did the villain have to be the sole black character? They couldn't have made him a vengeful Viking? And how did he control the alpha?

 

Why did they have the other female Viking girl creep on Jon Snow's Viking? It's one thing to make comments to herself, but when she's all up in his business and putting her hands all over him - attention he clearly doesn't want - that is not ok, IMO. If it were a male doing that to a female, there would be outrage, but since it's a woman doing it to a man, it's funny and ok?

 

Also not impressed that Astrid advertised TO THE DRAGON CAPTOR that they have an entire island of domesticated dragons...like, way to go, kid. Jesus.

[BizBuzz]

^This

You articulated what I couldn't. I saw this Wednesday night and up until the death scene, I was pretty much ready to preorder this movie, I liked it so much.

Like you, I kept waiting for there to be some sort of switch towards the end, and it never came.

My daughter (14) can't stop talking about it, how amazing it was. Ugh.

I am speechless...

[Crs97]

The animation was wonderful; the plot was horrific.

[Sara2009]

I actually liked that Toothless was the one to kill Hiccup's father, but I understand why it was polarizing.

[OakGoblinFly]

I thought the entire film has a very Empire Strikes Back vibe to it - and since there are going to be two more installments to the series, I can see why.

[NoWillToResist]

 

I actually liked that Toothless was the one to kill Hiccup's father, but I understand why it was polarizing.

 

I was really bothered by the fact that Toothless WOULD HAVE ACTUALLY KILLED HICCUP, if not for Stoick jumping in front of his son. So Toothless's ability to break the mind control the next time he was tested - TEN FUCKING MINUTES TOO LATE, IMO - left me utterly unmoved.

 

I just can't stand that I now feel that the beautiful bond between Toothless and Hiccup has been tainted by Stoick's murder. Yeah, it wasn't Toothless' fault, but what real purpose did it serve to have Toothless deal the fatal blow? Why couldn't the asshole dragon slaver guy have killed Stoick and mind-whammied Toothless away from Hiccup? Would that have really changed anything? Why did they have to make it so fucking traumatic?? It wasn't enough to kill the kid's dad...you had to have his best friend do it? Really? That's just...cold.

[Sara2009]

I just appeciated the gutsiness of it( IMO of course.) I never would've expected it. It left a real impact on me, but as I said, I understand why others might hate it.

Edited July 1, 2014 by Sara2009

[NoWillToResist]

In another movie, I might applaud the bold choice, but yeah...not this one. The first movie was so full of humour and fun and love and good feelings that this movie's dark choices were a fucking kick in the face midway through, IMO.

 

It's as if an adorable puppy suddenly went all Cujo on me. :)

 

Once again, expectations colour my movie-going experience. I went in expecting more of the some awesomeness, not trauma/anguish, thus my inner rage-monster was awakened.

Edited July 3, 2014 by NoWillToResist

[Jediknight]

How to Train Your Dragon 2, or, as I like to call it: How to Completely and Irrevocably Kill The Happy Vibe of Your Entire Franchise, You Dumb, Sadistic, Fucking Assholes.

 

Anyone who has seen the movie knows exactly which scene I am referring to...

How to Train Your Dragon 2: When We Said It Was Going to be Our Empire Strikes Back, We Weren't Screwing Around

 

I love that movie, may have even liked it more than the 1st.

[NoWillToResist]

 

How to Train Your Dragon 2: When We Said It Was Going to be Our Empire Strikes Back, We Weren't Screwing Around

 

I would understand this reference if

a brainwashed Han Solo or Leia killed Obi Wan (Luke's father figure)

. But since that didn't happen, I don't get the reference...were they just meaning that the sequel wasn't going to the be the same kind of happy, feel-good romp as the first one? If so, fuck,I wish I'd read that before watching the second movie. Might have helped me prepare (or better yet, skip it altogether)...

[frenchtoast]

I think it was referring more to the mood of Empire--they didn't win at the end, they barely escaped. It was actually gloomy and somewhat depressing. Also, there's the idea of finding out about a parent and Luke's not so successful journey into being a Jedi could also describe Hiccup not doing such a great job at it either. It's tenuous, but I can sort of see it. If I squint my eye and tilt my head. Honestly, I was pretty impressed that they were brave enough to do something like that for something that was ostensibly happy go lucky. With that being said, my kids (8 and 11 at the time) were totally cool with it, which surprised me.

But I can definitely see how that would turn people off from the movie because it was quite a sharp turn and completely changed the movie and franchise.

[Sara2009]

I sort of loved the big twist, but I understood why it was so polarizing. I had to applaud the gutsiness of it, though.

[NoWillToResist]

 

Honestly, I was pretty impressed that they were brave enough to do something like that for something that was ostensibly happy go lucky.

 

I would like TPTB to explain why they chose that particular execution (no pun intended) of a serious theme. The first movie had some serious themes but there was humour and there was a positive spin on it (guy doesn't fit in...works to his advantage; guy lost his foot...doesn't hold him back etc.) If TPTB wanted to introduce the concept of loss, I get it, I do. I just don't understand why they chose to do it the way they did. The contrivance of the AWOL parent arriving just in the nick of time to, essentially, replace the other one doesn't sit well with me. Nor does it sit well with me that the kid's best friend is the reason he's down one parent. Sure, brainwashing, but it doesn't change the end result. I honestly don't see how Hiccup and Toothless could go back to their super tight bond with that between them.

 

The joyful bond between Hiccup and Toothless MADE the franchise for me, and, IMO, TPTB just totally smashed it to bits with the sequel.

[Spartan Girl]

Saw it yesterday.  While I did like it for the most part,

brainwashed Toothless killing Stoick was horrific. It seems even more cruel when Stoick had just been reunited with Valka.

 

But I did love Gerard Butler and Cate Blanchett's little duet.

[Jediknight]

I sort of loved the big twist, but I understood why it was so polarizing. I had to applaud the gutsiness of it, though.

Oh absolutely.

 

The marketing could have done a much better job of letting people know it would darker.  The makers of the movie said in interviews it was going to be darker, and it would be their Empire Strikes Back, but the marketing ignored that.  The trailers, and commercials made you think it would be the exact tone of the first one, just with a human main villain.

 

I loved the movie, maybe even more than the first.  Also I've just got to say that the animation was perfect, I'd say it was better than even Pixar's best.  The only thing in the same league is Wall-E and Eve's dance, but that falls to this.

Edited November 13, 2014 by Jediknight

[BizBuzz]

Been around a long time, and I have taken it as inevitable that most animated movies have to have a death.  Normally, that death always happens at the beginning of the film, so that you are aware of the angst that causes the story line.

 

Granted, this movie was part 2, however, this death happened in the middle of the movie. 

 

I have heard a lot of online and offline people say that most kids were ok with it.  I even said it, it did not affect my daughter the way it did me. 

 

However, I got to thinking, what is that saying about kids today, that death is something that is inevitable?  That death happens and move on?  And what does it say that kids are ok with the best friend causing the blow.  That was something that was totally different about this death.  I think that was made it even more difficult to watch and accept.

 

I don't know, it's been months, and I am still feeling it.  It just wasn't right.  I get it, but it just wasn't right.  The delivery is all wrong.  For an animated flick.

 

Anyway ... just random thoughts.

[Rick Kitchen]

I actually dislike the mother more than the death of the father.  She abandoned her child and husband and let them think she had died, and never made any effort to contact them.

[NoWillToResist]

 

I actually dislike the mother more than the death of the father.  She abandoned her child and husband and let them think she had died, and never made any effort to contact them.

 

Oh but see, it's totally ok because she liked dragons more than her family! And now with the pesky dad out of the way, Hiccup and his mother can bond like crazy over their mutual love of dragons! /bitter sarcasm

 

Still not over it either, BizBuzz

 

 

And what does it say that kids are ok with the best friend causing the blow.

 

Right? When I watched it, I was all "OH MY GOD, THIS WILL TRAUMATIZE KIDS!!!!" Aaaand yet apparently it only traumatized me (and BizBuzz)  ;).

 

Seriously, am I supposed to believe that in the next movie(s), Hiccup is going to be able to be all happy-go-lucky with his bestest Night Fury and NOT see the thing that FUCKING KILLED HIS DAD instead???? What in the holy hell? Even though it's not Toothless' fault, how do you get over something like that? Ugh....

[Readalot]

PTO sponsored after school fundraiser. Fail. I was there to chaperone. Not my kind of movie. I was hoping to like it but I didn't get it at all. Half the kids were restless almost immediately. Boo

[paramitch]

I actually really loved it, and was impressed with some of the risks they took, not least the one you mention, No Will To Resist. (If it helps, I was upset too. Although I liked it storywise -- more on that below.). Also, FWIW, I didn't think Drago was a person of color, I just thought he had distinctive black hair (I had no idea it was Djimon Honsou's voice until the end credits). I did find him the least interesting character in the film, but he definitely epitomized the point of view that even animals as wondrous as dragons simply exist to be dominated and used, and to a chilling degree.

 

(NOTE: I don't know what to do here about spoilers because I really want to address other posts on what happened in the film without constantly spoiler-tagging everything, although I'll try to catch the most egregious stuff. But you have been warned: HERE THERE BE SPOILERS!)

 

I was upset by what happened too, but what I really liked about How to Train Your Dragon, and what continued to impress me here, was that they are consistently not afraid for events to have permanent consequences.

 

To this day, one of the most stunning moments of any film to me is the moment near the end of the first film where Hiccup wakes up and realizes he's

lost his leg

. And he just kind of sighs. And then Toothless comes over and helps him up, and as the two go out the front door, they are supporting each other, these two damaged creatures who actually and literally complete each other.

 

So what happened here for me in the second film was also powerful, even if absolutely devastating (and yeah, like many I was really upset by it). But I thought there was actually a lot of subtlety in the film's exploration of parents, children, responsibility, and power, and I thought it was a brave choice storywise, even braver than the events of film one. I hated that Toothless was basically forced into this evil act, but he was after all completely blameless (and we do see him struggling to see through the fog the first time he is 'possessed'), and I bought that he needed actual contact to break free the second time -- contact that directly and poignantly illustrated Hiccup's forgiveness while also hearkening directly back to the first film and the first moment of connection between Hiccup and Toothless.

 

Seriously, am I supposed to believe that in the next movie(s), Hiccup is going to be able to be all happy-go-lucky with his bestest Night Fury and NOT see the thing that FUCKING KILLED HIS DAD instead???? What in the holy hell? Even though it's not Toothless' fault, how do you get over something like that? Ugh....

 

 

But doesn't it say something about Hiccup that he IS able to get over it? That he sees and understands that Toothless was used ruthlessly by an outside force, and was completely blameless for the event? I was glad that Hiccup showed initial rage and grief, but I was also very relieved that the blaming of Toothless was relatively short-lived by Hiccup and the others.

 

I loved Valka as a kind of Dian Fossey of the dragons, and was fascinated by the continued expansion on the idea that the dragons are biologically hive creatures. I thought it was especially poignant that Toothless is forced to commit this awful act but nobody is more horrified by what happens than Toothless himself (which broke my heart). Yet he does redeem himself and not only regains his power, he ends as

King of the Dragons

even while pointedly renouncing the power the other dragon delighted in holding over his subjects. Meanwhile, Hiccup himself has a similar fate -- and in a very Shakespearean way it's like both Hiccup and Toothless have come of age by the end of the film. And both unwillingly. They didn't want to be grownups. But now they have to be.

 

For me, these movies have always had a willingness to explore the darkness in our own hearts. The moment in the first film where Hiccup raises the knife to kill Toothless, who just looks at him exhaustedly, waiting for the blow to fall -- that's dark. Or the fact that Hiccup irrevocably damages Toothless and is then irrevocably scarred himself (the only time in any animated film that I have ever seen a hero permanently injured by an onscreen battle). And even in the second film here, we have Gobber, who is cheerfully pro-dragon despite the fact that dragons, like, ate his arm and leg in the not-so-distant past ("I could see it in his eyes! I was delicious!"). Even Valka despite her warmth and wonderfulness is pretty selfish and childish -- so single-minded that she abandons her husband and son to go live among the dragons (and never looks back despite the fact that she was certainly able to travel back anytime she might have wanted to).

 

Ultimately, I like that there are real consequences in this universe and that the second film continued that theme. And even the death worked for me storywise because it is something that irrevocably changes everything and that cannot be undone. In the end, Toothless is redeemed, as is Hiccup. And while Hiccup might like nothing more than to run off like Valka and play with the dragons, the fact that he stays to do the responsible thing says volumes to me.

Edited November 20, 2014 by paramitch

[Athena]

(NOTE: I don't know what to do here about spoilers because I really want to address other posts on what happened in the film without constantly spoiler-tagging everything, although I'll try to catch the most egregious stuff. But you have been warned: HERE THERE BE SPOILERS!)

 

Once a movie has been widely released in US cinemas, spoiler tags are not necessary in the thread. In multiple works (Best of lists, etc.), tags are encouraged for a-bomb spoilers unless the topic allows for spoilers. So feel free to remove the spoiler tags and spoil away. Thanks.

[NoWillToResist]

 

Ultimately, I like that there are real consequences in this universe and that the second film continued that theme

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that kids' movies shouldn't address heavy shit because kids these days are experiencing a lot of heavy shit. :)  Hell, I friggin' LOVED that they had Hiccup lose his leg without it slowing down his adventuresome spirit. I honestly couldn't think of another animated film with a handicapped protagonist.

 

But I feel that Valka got a total pass and it pissed me off. She literally abandoned her baby and husband. Had Hiccup not tripped over her, he would never have known that she was even alive. Yet both he and his father are so happy to see her that all is forgiven.

 

Forgiveness is great and there's that whole 'turn the other cheek' thing but, honestly, there are some things that I can't believe are accepted without a major blow out.

 

And it is to Hiccup's credit that he is fine with Toothless; I'm not saying that he SHOULD blame the dragon. I'm just saying that I find it hard to believe that he will be able to totally disassociate themselves from the fact that his father is dead because of his best friend. Their relationship has now been marred for me. *I* can't look at that duo the same way again and with the same affection as before; there's too much anger and sadness there.

 

So, in conclusion I'm apparently just petty. :D

Edited November 20, 2014 by NoWillToResist

[KatWay]

I get it. It also bugged me that Toothless killed Stoick and to me there was no major fallout from that one. People mourned for a second, Hiccup rejected Toothless for a second, five minutes later they were quipping and smart-assing and Hiccup was all "my BFF is in danger". To me the fact that Toothless, albeit unintentionally, killed Stoick is a huge thing and they totally glossed over that. And yes, it also bugged me that stupid Valka, who abandoned her husband and kid and only got introduced in this movie, was there to swoop in when Stoick, a character I liked much more, died. And that nobody gave her shit for her selfish decisions.

 

To me it felt totally different than the first movie with Hiccup's leg - that was unexpected for me, and gutsy. Stoick's death just felt like any other Disney parent death ("Mufaaaasaaaa" - Lion King did it first and better) and pissed me off because of the awful way they did it. And there were literally no consequences, except for Hiccup becoming chief, which, duh, like he ever wasn't going to.

[BizBuzz]

Although I am still pissed at the story, your viewpoint was well stated paramitch and I appreciate it much.  I am just not there yet.

[ribboninthesky1]

Way late to the party, but I was surprised at how my perceptions differed on this.  For example, I liked Hiccup in the first film.  He thoroughly annoyed me with his "I'm a peacemaker, I'll talk Drago down" schtick in this one.  It was just incredibly dumb and irresponsible to me, and ultimately his obstinacy set the events in motion that would eventually end in the death of his father. Yet, he kept being reaffirmed by the women in his life.  Ugh.

I don't think Drago was black, but he had an...ethnic look to him.  That Hounsou was the voice actor definitely prompted the side-eye.  It's set in Scotland, so I'm fine with not seeing non-whites, but the villain was an obvious, "WTF were they thinking?" fail.   

I had no problems with the mother, but I can acknowledge the double standard that if it was the father who had been taken away and made no effort to return, it wouldn't have been so easily forgiven.  Still, it was probably the most interesting aspect of the film for me - a woman prefers to stay away from her husband and child, having her own adventure vs being a mom, and she's not demonized for it. I think she thought they were better off without her. I could kind of sympathize with her weariness of the father's (and the village's) violent tendencies. 

Toothless was adorable...until he wasn't. Also rolled my eyes at him becoming the alpha, but whatever. 

Ultimately, the animation made the film.  Like others have said, there were times I forgot it wasn't real.       

Edited August 16, 2016 by ribboninthesky1

[BetterButter]

[IWantCandy71]

I took my nephew today to the sequel/part 3, and we left early. Granted, we left early because he wouldn't sit still and I wasn't going to tell him to get up off the floor for the remainder of the movie. We made it about halfway through but I don't feel like I missed anything.I was so underwhelmed by what I did get to see. It was so low energy and pointless. Just proof positive that a lot of money at the box office don't mean jack diddly squat about quality. Of course, the horrible, trite, Marvel and DC movies are proof lots of money at the Box office doesn't mean quality movies but I try to be optimistic that not all cash grab movies are going to be awful. And some aren't. Plus, maybe it did get better after we left ? But a movie tailored towards kids-even older kids-should have genuine laughs and be FUN. From what I saw of it, this movie wasn't. I laughed at one moment and another adult did at some other point. The kids were dead silent. Not a good sign.

Edited February 25, 2019 by IWantCandy71

[Sara2009]

On 2/24/2019 at 9:52 PM, IWantCandy71 said:

I took my nephew today to the sequel/part 3, and we left early. Granted, we left early because he wouldn't sit still and I wasn't going to tell him to get up off the floor for the remainder of the movie. We made it about halfway through but I don't feel like I missed anything.I was so underwhelmed by what I did get to see. It was so low energy and pointless. Just proof positive that a lot of money at the box office don't mean jack diddly squat about quality. Of course, the horrible, trite, Marvel and DC movies are proof lots of money at the Box office doesn't mean quality movies but I try to be optimistic that not all cash grab movies are going to be awful. And some aren't. Plus, maybe it did get better after we left ? But a movie tailored towards kids-even older kids-should have genuine laughs and be FUN. From what I saw of it, this movie wasn't. I laughed at one moment and another adult did at some other point. The kids were dead silent. Not a good sign.

I thought that as a film in general , it really picked up about halfway through, but I’m not sure how much kids would enjoy it over all. With that being said, I found it to be a mostly satisfying conclusion albeit imperfect.

[IWantCandy71]

1 hour ago, Sara2009 said:

I thought that as a film in general , it really picked up about halfway through, but I’m not sure how much kids would enjoy it over all. With that being said, I found it to be a mostly satisfying conclusion albeit imperfect.

I had a feeling maybe that would be the case, and I'll probably rent it at Redbox and watch it to see if I enjoy the rest of it.  Thank you !