How To Train Your Dragon Review: Unnecessary But Not Bad

In the last decade, Walt Disney Studios has taken a lot of flack to return to the well and Re-orientation or re-imagining over a dozen of their classic animated films in live action (or photorealistic computers “Lion King”) – and there is a good reason for it. With the exception of “Cinderella”, “Little Mermaid” and “Cruella”, most Disney’s renewal has not come close to their predecessors as the live-action element takes up a large part of the personality and imagination of these loved animated stories. Re -versions are often too close to the original without much innovation or improved and updated elements that often contain new original songs, do not add much to the pre -magic.

Therefore many (including you really) have been a live-action-eminence of DreamWorks animation “How to train your dragon” (despite its robust ticket results)allegedly their most beloved Franchise “Shrek” (although “htyd” is much better and has overwhelming sequels). Although marketing materials are packed in puncture, thanks to the return of the composer John Powell, the score of victory, it has not seemed much of the film that nothing but a shot with little or no signs of the original significant changes or improvements. It is admitted that there is not much improvement because the original film is still a wonderful animated adventure.

That’s why I’m happy to notify you “How to train your dragon” remake is not worse as an original movie. At the same time, however, I am also sad to say that the reforming of director Dean Deblois’s own animated film live action (for the first time such a scenario was born) remains so faithful to the original that there are few redeeming features that make this movie necessary when the original is still so magnificent.

If you have seen the original “how to train your dragon,” you already know the story. If not, a movie that has been written by Dean Deblois again (this time without an animated film writer William Davies, even though its almost identical script is basically a writer again) follows a teenage boy named Viking Boy (Mason Thames of Black Phone “). Although all his colleagues are tough warriors who are ready to fight with the dragons, who often plagued them, stealing their cattle and burning their homes, Hiccup is difficult, charming and more susceptible to use their inventiveness in front of the danger. It does not fit well with the village manager, Stoick the Last (Gerard Butler, who raises his earlier sound role in live), who also happens to be Hiccup’s father.

But Hiccup’s life is changing in a big way, when the mechanical weapon he came up with is finally captured by the rage of the night, one of the most difficult and miserable dragons of Viking. However, no one believes in his success, and when Hiccup realizes that he cannot take himself to kill the black fireplace in the field, he begins to understand the true nature of the dragons. They are not nasty creatures that mercilessly attack according to the choice, and the Viking people are completely misunderstood.

Unfortunately, Hiccup cannot let anyone know about his secret new dragon piece, so he learns to drive and fly a dragon he will play toothless (because he originally appeared without retractable teeth), not to mention peaceful and difficult ways to subjugate the dragon from the cold.

His village crushing and second trainee Astrid (Nico Parker “The Last of Us”) are not so pleased with the success because he hopes to be a new chief one day and does not understand how he is so good in Dragon training, but their age snotlout (Gabriel Howell), Fishlegs (Julian Dennison) and Sisters Tuffut and Ruffutn Correspondingly, Bronwy and Ruffy and Ruffnut (Harry Trevad) and Sisbrons Tumbing) are eager to find their skills. Things become more complex as Astrid learns the secret of Hiccup, and they find that there is an even more terrible threat in the dragon’s nest that Stoick swears to destroy his home permanently.

Guess what? That’s how it plays in the reproduction. Sure, it is to be expected when you tell the same story, but the script raises every memorable moment and every fun line to the exact wording and sometimes even the same pedal speed as Jay Baruchel’s lovely Misfit Hiccup from the original animated movie. Unfortunately, there will be another problem.

Mason Thames is an indisputably charming and strange sweat, but he also charges the renewed presentation a positive and negative: Tom Holland as Peter Parker/Spider-Man’s Marvel Cinematic Universe. Don’t understand me, Holland gives an excellent presentation at Spidey McU, but he is almost too handsome and charismatic to be as nerd and awkward as Peter Parker should be. Thames has the same thing, almost as if the Peter Parker of the Netherlands was given the same haircut as Jim Halpert in the “office”. Although he has a lot of charm and will certainly give a commendable performance, he has something that naturally does not feel sweaty.

Secondly, Gerard Butler shines in his renewed role as Stoick (something we knew from the beginning). Butler plays a bigger and stronger role, but not quite as exaggerated in the comedy. In fact, if there is one thing that the “how to train your dragon” version succeeds in the same proportion, it increases a more raw feeling to the procedure. While animation has the ability to pull your heart and play with the audience’s feelings, there is something about live activity that still hits a little harder, even in the fantasy model. Seeing a person’s face shows fear, anger, sadness, or any feeling often associate at a deeper level because we feel it more as a second real life. Seeing pain and disappointment that fills the eyes of both Thames and Butler, when their story is shown, exceeds the original feeling.

Their emotional strength is Nico Parker Astrid. He has courage and conviction in his presentation, and you can often just see it in her big, obvious eyes. But those eyes also have a softness behind them, and when his guard finally has to embrace Hiccup, you see that he has a gentle side to compensate for his rage.

It also helps the fact that composer John Powell has returned to provide a score from the replay. Yes, the familiar theme of the original is back, but the score feels much bigger and bigger, perhaps to match the movie scale, another area where Dean Deblois has improved the original “how to train your dragon” a little. Because we are dealing with human figures, the adventure has to feel greater than life, so there are moments that seem much more grounded, more enthusiastic and terrifying in live activities. Especially as the dragons attack the Vikings as they strive in the middle of their nest in the middle of a movie, the period of action shows us what happens to the warriors instead of leaving it in our imagination. It is taken to a whole new level in the film’s finals, where a monster-like, Kaiju-sized dragon feels much more scary and massive than his animated colleague.

Together with the “How to Dragon” version of flying sequences rises both literally and patterned (That’s why they won some people in a trailer). Too often, such scenes may seem fake, but the visual effects of the film bring flying on the back of the dragons with the same excitement and magic as Harry Potter rode behind Buckbeak “Azkaban’s prisoner”. But there is one element of “how to train your dragon” that visual effects cannot quite win.

Although the toothless character is still undeniably wonderful, the photorealist version of him still borrows too much of his animated response. It is a kind of double -edged sword and maybe an impossible job to pull out. If you make him look more realistic, his expression and behavior may seem strange, Similar to the “Lion King” versions. But if you stay closer to the original animation character design, it does not seem to be harmoniously in the world of real life. Although the texture of the toothless’ and his various animal characteristics is brought to life with proper details, animated characters still look strange in live activities, especially since the rest of the dragons are set to look much less cartoonish appearance. It is perhaps the biggest obstacle that a movie can never win. It and the constant abuse of live action, which has no vibrant colors that made it so visually pleasing to the predecessor.

By default, the “How to train your dragon” version is simply because it tells almost exactly the same story that turned out to be successful in 2010. Unfortunately, with the exception of a few style changes and emotional human element, it does not feel that it is enough to justify the story that feels almost like the original coal. It does not bring the original movie to the heights, but rather adjusts the effectiveness of certain elements, which is even a breakage, but eventually falls back because it is an area too familiar.

Of course, maybe those who avoid animated movies may be more inclined to check this, or children who have not yet experienced an animation version may be seen for the first time, but the animated film was more than good enough and did not need to be renewed what is essentially an expensive photo filter.

Admittedly, “how to train the dragon” is not terrible, like some of Disney’s there, and it is better than almost everything, but it is not significant enough to ensure its existence. We have “how to train your dragon” at home. It is the corresponding turning of the film into nachos, and while Nachos can be delicious, they are not so good reheated.

/Movie rating: 6/10

“How to train the dragon” will be opened in theaters on June 13, 2025.