How to Train Your Dragon: The Hidden World (HTTYD3)

That's what it seemed like to me as well, I also didn't like how they made Toothless dumber and more animalistic.

I think the real reason they went this route is because that's how it ends in the book (I think), and I completely agree with the fact that it doesn't work in this context because of what we've seen in 2 movies and the television shows.

It made sense in the books, because the Dragons were self-organized and had sufficient force to wipe (pre-industrial) Humanity off the face of the planet. The only reason they had not done so in the past was that Humanity had an ace up its collective sleeve, and cool heads prevailed on both sides centuries before the books, averting species wide Mutual Kill. The film/TV continuity differs so much it is practically In Name Only by the end of the second season, to say nothing of what follows.

Edited by ViperMagnum357 on May 4th 2019 at 5:09:01 AM

Weren't the dragons outright sapient in the books?

How to Train Your Dragon Homecoming:

• Is a TV special that comes to NBC on December 3, 2019, and two days later on Hulu.
• Written by Jonathan Groff (black•ish) and Jon Pollack (Modern Family) and directed by Tim Johnson (Home).
• Premise:

But... how will we see Toothless sharing his part of the story if he can't talk?

We'll see how.

Just putting my thoughts on the film, which I've compiled from my previous posts regarding the movie on other threads.

They should've honestly just brought back Drago several years down the line as the main antagonist and have Hiccup as a grizzled and experienced chieftain.

Part of HTTYD 2's widespread appeal (which also pushed it above the first movie's level for me) was that Hiccup had to deal with solving the past mistakes of his parents and evolving his own approach with their advice to get the best results, as a leader should.

Getting rid of Drago completely and still keeping Hiccup relatively inexperienced was the sign that the franchise was stuck in a "It's For Kids" ghetto (which I blame Jeffrey Katzenberg for — the fool just doesn't understand that good stories ultimately make better movies in the long run, not money-grubbing executive decisions).

As a Kung Fu Panda fanboy, however, on the plus side, the deterioration of the HTTYD franchise will inevitably make people reconsider which of Dreamworks' animated film franchises deserve the pedestal of Best Franchise.

Tai Lung and Shen (the latter especially) are examples of how great villains provide great contrasts with the heroes and drive the protagonists to be better people.

Drago could've been that for the Haddock family, but then the HTTYD franchise dropped him entirely.

The second movie had the characters at their most likable. The majority of them weren't assholes to Hiccup as they were in the first movie, and they weren't infuriatingly incompetent as they were in the third.

Fans may complain that the second movie put the other riders Out of Focus, but objectively speaking, they're generally bland, forgettable and annoying characters from a writing standpoint. The early seasons of the show had trouble giving them Character Development, with their maturation only happening at the tail-end of the show's run.

The third film just wasted precious screentime trying to overcompensate for their perceived lack of screentime in the second movie (which I actually view as the peak of the trilogy).

I found the characters much more enjoyable in 3. At least they were being used, as oposed to just standing around in 2. I loved the ending of the franchise and I'm looking forward to the special. Gimme Haddock family scenes, Dreamworks!

Even though Ruffnut practically f**ked everything up and led Grimmel to the others by being a braindead idiot?

(Lamest plot device EVER.)

Edited by BrightLight on Oct 15th 2019 at 4:31:43 AM

Yes.

All of her dialog and attitude is a riot and a thousand miles more interesting than the entirety of her role in HTTYD2.

The character interaction in 3 is top notch.

Edited by MrSeyker on Oct 14th 2019 at 8:43:44 AM

Too bad the story provides a deeply bitter aftertaste to what was otherwise a wholly enjoyable franchise.

I don't mind a bittersweet ending. I found it a perfect send off to the franchise.

I think I would have liked the ending of this movie better had it not felt completely disconnected from all previous installments of the series. I just can't buy that humans and dragons cannot co-exist when Berk has been living proof that they can (have been doing so) for at least a decade in-universe. They've been through the fire and flames (sometimes literally) together and there were hardly any hints that the dragons and humans living together was detrimental to either side. Why do the actions of one guy who is barely different from Drago or any of the other baddies Berk has faced and Toothless wanting to be with the Light Fury more than Hiccup mean that the humans and dragons living together in harmony is no longer possible? If it had just been Toothless leaving so he could be with the Light Fury and Hiccup accepting this (which was honestly what I had been expecting to happen), I think that would have been just fine, but the way they ultimately went about the conclusion just left me very confused.

I thought the movie was alright overall, but it really felt like the writers were throwing continuity and established characterizations out the window just so they could justify how this one ended.

Edited by kablammin45 on Oct 15th 2019 at 2:59:29 PM

It’s a thing stories do sometimes where they try to make the ending more meaningful by putting the distinguishing plot elements away in the toy chest at the end

Which has a VERY mixed record as a trope

Not to mention that they couldn't even stick to their guns on the Bittersweet Ending.

Dragons and Humans have to keep apart?

Never mind! The Berkians and the Dragons can still visit each other "in secret" — even though that risks the secrecy of the Hidden World and the safety of the dragons.

There are multiple layers to what I dislike about this movie, and I have trouble separating them in a coherent way

It just hits me the wrong way when you have two movies built on mutual trust, mutual support, how multiple parties working together are stronger than by themselves. You have Hiccup and Toothless with their shared injuries as a physical representation if these ideas. Then Hiccup offhandedly waves that away so they can say goodbye forever. .

Theres a point in the film where Hiccup is told he needs to learn to stop relying on Toothless so much. Not long after, he's told he needs to start relying on Astrid more. That hit me all kinds of wrong.

That Toothless apparently just wasnt going to come back felt wrong to me, but I could accept it. That Hiccup was portrayed as in the wrong for being worried and looking for him bothers me more.

And then you have the villains ultimately winning in the end. Not literally. They all lost their respective dragon fights. Idealistaclly, less so. The consistent assertion from the antagonists has been that humans and dragons can not coexist in peace. In the end, Hiccup comes to the same conclusion. It's the most peaceful version of that conclusion, but it boils down to the same thing.

EDIT: I get what they were going for. I do. I should have left the theater with a sweet sense of melancholy. Instead, I just left angry.

Edited by Zeromaeus on Oct 16th 2019 at 4:27:56 AM

I was in a similar boat when I watched this movie. I felt like dragons going back to their secret world would of made more sense if the movie showed humans developing more anti-dragon technology and weaponry on a bigger scale then just with the main villain.

I also felt like the movie really wasted a good opportunity with the Warlords from other cultures. They were barely side villians despite their interesting designs and potential. We could of had a large scale aerial dragon rider vs. dragon rider fight or dark mirrors to the main cast. Or have the Warlords show that they found ways to hunt dragons more efficiently.

We could of had something with those guys but sadly they were not used at all and were just defeated like common mooks.

Edited by Wispy on Oct 17th 2019 at 1:45:35 AM

Heck, with the armada that Grimmel had, I was disappointed that there wasn't even a large-scale Viking vs Viking fight.

Edited by BrightLight on Oct 17th 2019 at 10:36:17 PM

Yeah, that bothered me too.

• HTTYD: "Dragons and vikings can coexist in harmony!"
• HTTYD2: "No, but seriously, dragons and vikings can eke out a mutual coexistence founded on mutual respect."
• HTTYD3: "Dragons and vikings cannot coexist and must remain segregated for their own good."

It renders the entire mission around which Hiccup centered his life, and the morals and messages he has exposited throughout that time, a failure.

Turns out beings from very different worlds can’t coexist after all. Oops.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Oct 17th 2019 at 8:48:52 AM

It also kinda renders the plot of the movie irrelevant because they moved to a new island so they could keep their dragons and hide from people who would take them

But then they let their dragons go and keep living in the new place because whatever

To me, HTTYD 3 kinda feels like Ralph Breaks The Internet in that it feels like it was written by people who either didn't watch the previous film(s) or only fleetingly referenced it when making the sequel and simply tried to make their own movie featuring those characters, resulting in a movie that feels completely disconnected from its predecessor(s) in one or more ways even if it's not necessarily a bad movie.

Though if I'm informed correctly, this movie was written by the usual HTTYD crew whereas I know Ralph had a mostly different crew working on it.

Will Davies, Dean DeBlois and Chris Sanders were credited for the screenplay of the first film; Dean DeBlois solely wrote and directed the second and third films.

For Wreck It Ralph, Phil Johnston and Jennifer Lee were credited for the screenplay, and for the story, Phil Johnston, Rich Moore and Jim Reardon. Rich Moore was the sole director. For Ralph Breaks The Internet, Pamela Ribbon did the screenplay with Phil Johnston instead of Jennifer Lee, and for the story, Johnston, Moore and Reardon returned while Ribbon and Josie Trinidad also contributed. Oh, and Phil Johnston made his directorial debut here, joining Rich Moore in the director's chair.

So, yup, you're kinda right (but you're not at the Ralph part. RBTI was done by the same team as its predecessor, the only difference being new crew members).

Edited by Andrei_Bondoc on Oct 17th 2019 at 7:29:03 PM

Also, Ralph Breaks the Internet was fine.

"Oh no, Vanellope went Turbo!"

Yeah, so what? Ralph went Turbo in the first movie and that worked out pretty great for him. He got a new best friend and the love and acceptance of his peers, something that never would have happened if he'd just stayed in his game, did his miserable 9-5, and never made waves.

People just hate on Vanellope for it because she made Ralph sad. The fandom response to that film is ironically a perfect echo of the exact attitude that made Ralph the antagonist in the film itself: "Vanellope just needs to go home with Ralph and be miserable forever!" The difference is that Ralph gets over himself, while the fandom never did.

Edited by TobiasDrake on Oct 17th 2019 at 12:42:35 PM