Remove ads

How To Train Your Dragon (3): The Hidden World

Reader mode
mr_stibbons said:
Well, now that this is finally out in NA

I didn't really feel it? I think the lack of personality or presence from the villains really undercut the plot. When the plot is largely about running from a threat, it doesn't work when the bulk of said threat is mostly played as a joke. Gimmel is the sole competent individual on the side of the trappers. The fact that a large portion of the human cast are comic relief is also a bit grating, and further undercuts the tension. The sections with Toothless, the light fury, and hiccup are well done, but I don't feel like it holds up the rest of the movie.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Grimmel didnt have to be a Big Baddy Villian in order to demonstrate what he represented. He represented all future threats to Toothless and the other dragons. Hiccup had to make a decision that would best protect the Dragons and The Berkians. His sacrifice was based on love.
 
Last edited:
brittany21 said:
Grimmel didnt have to be a Big Baddy Villian in order to demonstrate what he represented. He represented all future threats to Toothless and the other dragons. Hiccup had to make a decision that would best protect the Dragons and The Berkians. His sacrifice was based on love.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Grimmel does a terrible job of representing all future threats, because so much of the narrative paints him as a singularly dangerous figure. He is a legendary dragon hunter pulled out of retirement who works alone and doesn't share his toys. Rather than being the latest in an endless line of threats, he's an irreplaceable relic, the last gasp of the old order. Which would maybe be excusable if the rest of the trappers weren't clowns played for comedy in every scene they're in.

Thus, I have a hard time seeing the sacrifice of all the dragons as justified. Toothless leaving alone felt natural,
 
yea it really seems that Drago would have been a much more appropriate finale villain (or he could have been worked into that role)

in an alternate universe, Drago came in the 2nd movie and pulled off the first half of his shtick in HTTYD2

Toothless flees into an alternate universe, receives training from a certain someone and powers up

boom we get HTTYD3, Drago's being evil and Drago and "rah rah we gotta kill/enslave dragons LOOK AT MY ALPHA"

and courtesy of Drbuffalo, we get this, BEST CROSSOVER

 
Drago wasn't even meant to be the villain in 2.
Valka was.
but when it was shown, some people went all "You can't show that a parent can be wrong, his mother should be a good guy" and they changed it.
 
Krazyfan1 said:
Drago wasn't even meant to be the villain in 2.
Valka was.
but when it was shown, some people went all "You can't show that a parent can be wrong, his mother should be a good guy" and they changed it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
She was? That explains so much about its structural issues. Valka is a dragon tamer with a bewilderbeast (the central plot device of the movie), who is somewhat unsympathetic and easily forgiven for her actions that basically made the conflicts of the first movie as severe as they were. She then exits stage left so that another dragon tamer with another bewilderbeast, this one with little to no background development, can take over as the villain of the piece.
 
Last edited:
firefossil said:
She was? That explains so much about its structural issues. Valka is a dragon tamer with a bewilderbeast (the central plot device of the movie), who is somewhat unsympathetic and easily forgiven for her actions that basically made the conflicts of the first movie as severe as they were. She then exits stage left so that another dragon tamer with another bewilderbeast, this one with little to no background development, can take over as the villain of the piece.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yup!
heres some more info
Original 'How to Train Your Dragon 2' Storyboards Showcase a Villainous Valka | Rotoscopers

 
Last edited:
mr_stibbons said:
Grimmel does a terrible job of representing all future threats, because so much of the narrative paints him as a singularly dangerous figure. He is a legendary dragon hunter pulled out of retirement who works alone and doesn't share his toys. Rather than being the latest in an endless line of threats, he's an irreplaceable relic, the last gasp of the old order. Which would maybe be excusable if the rest of the trappers weren't clowns played for comedy in every scene they're in.

Thus, I have a hard time seeing the sacrifice of all the dragons as justified. Toothless leaving alone felt natural,
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yet, Grimmel was still a threat. The threats were not going to stop coming. The Dragons leaving were the only way to protect them. Like Gobber said to Hiccup, "One day you are going to pick a fight that you cannot win." Hiccup made the responsible decision to let the dragons go, in order to keep them safe.
 
brittany21 said:
Yet, Grimmel was still a threat. The threats were not going to stop coming. The Dragons leaving were the only way to protect them. Like Gobber said to Hiccup, "One day you are going to pick a fight that you cannot win." Hiccup made the responsible decision to let the dragons go, in order to keep them safe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
It would have been nice to see those threats coming then...
The series would have benefitted from either A) someone dying to show how serious the threat was or B) more decompression to do the same and show that Toothless has responsibilities in the Hidden World now. Because a fleet that nine people and some dragons could deal with without casualties did not feel like an unwinnable threat.
We should not have to dig down into the implications of the worldbuilding to realize the scope of the threat. It should be made explicit in the material. Have someone say, "That's the fifth fleet we've destroyed so far. Where are they coming from? Will they ever stop?" Have there be a funeral, or the returning dragon-rescuers having to chase off poachers as soon as they come back in the opening scene. Etc. Show us the threat...

and the main reasons humans and dragons don't get along is firstly because of the raids, and secondly because of the value of dragons alive or dead.
The sensible plan would be to wait until people have more or less forgotten about them - it might take a generation, but that's what it would take. Keep the dragons human-friendly in the meantime, then gently re-introduce them to the world. There are a few ways this could have been done.
 
Last edited:
Krazyfan1 said:
and the main reasons humans and dragons don't get along is firstly because of the raids, and secondly because of the value of dragons alive or dead.
The sensible plan would be to wait until people have more or less forgotten about them - it might take a generation, but that's what it would take. Keep the dragons human-friendly in the meantime, then gently re-introduce them to the world. There are a few ways this could have been done.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That seems to be his plan, going by the last scene where him and Astrid took their kids to meet Toothless and his kids.
 
my complaints.
sending the Berkian dragons away is presented as solving the world's problems with dragons. Completely ignoring that the Berkian's ability to prevent further dragon trapping hinged on having dragons. Their are dragons across the world Berk is incapable of helping. Just because you sent "your" dragons to the magic underground kingdom, doesn't mean all dragons are now forever in it. Toothless becomes the Hidden World alpha....somehow? for no reason?
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top