How to Train Your Dragon is literally the best movie of all time. There's no question about it. I've seen is so many times that I've got most of the script memorized. I listen to the soundtrack a little too often. I have 4 Toothless plushies and a Toothless onesie. I used to have Tumblr dedicated to making "How to Train Your Dragon" gifs.
When the remake came out last week, loads of my friends messaged me asking if I'd seen it. Unfortunately, I have. I was so excited for the How to Train Your Dragon live-action remake that I pre-booked my tickets for the first showing on release day.
But when I left the movie theater, I was disappointed and (most importantly) sad.
However, not all is lost. The original How to Train Your Dragon is streaming on Prime Video, one of the best streaming services right now. You can even get Prime Video for free right now.
So, if you ask me, the live-action How to Train Your Dragon isn't worth your time, and you should just watch the OG over and over again. Here's why I think the new How to Train Your Dragon is a misfire.
What is 'How to Train Your Dragon' about?
If you don't already know, I'll give you a quick run-down of the beloved kids' movie. So How to Train Your Dragon is set on Berk, an island some unspecified location in Scandanavia, and follows the story of Hiccup, a young Viking. Hiccup's an outsider — he's not strong, bloodthirsty, or violent like the rest of the Vikings.
Berk is tormented by dragon attacks, and the other Vikings are hell-bent on eradicating all dragons. So when Hiccup befriends the most dangerous dragon of all, he starts to realize killing dragons might be is wrong. Check out the live-action trailer above.
The 'How To Train Your Dragon' live-action remake is unbearably bland
Let me explain myself by discussing what made the original "How to Train Your Dragon" so magical.
In the OG, Hiccup's personality is flawed. He's sarcastic, jaded and lonely. At the start of the movie, he's a Boy-Who-Cried-Wolf, desperate to be accepted and will lie to his peers to achieve that. He's an outcast because he's different: he's weak, scrawny and a bit of a wimp. By the end of the movie, he's rounded, tolerant and adored because of this uniqueness.
In the remake, though, he comes off more petulant. His line delivery is different: gone is the tentative, witty jabs of Jay Baruchel's Hiccup, replaced with an unpleasant snark. Sure, this is probably more accurate to real life (you'd definitely hate everyone if they hated you), but it doesn't accurately reflect the character we were introduced to in the original.
Hiccup's not charmingly unique, he's standoffish and whiny.
Hiccup's interaction with the other characters feels flat, too. The barbed jokes that went over the others' heads are few and far between, and when they are there, they're not funny, they're whinge-y.
I'd like to see more intelligence from Hiccup in future remakes (if they make them, of course). Not just cruelty, but wit and charm, because that's the Hiccup we were introduced to in the original movie.
This brings me onto the humor. The OG "How to Train Your Dragon" is stuffed full with jokes, quips, and vibrancy. However, most of this was either cringeworthy or nonexistent in the remake.
In the scene where Astrid finds Toothless and Hiccup says, "I'm through with the lies—I've been making outfits..." (etc etc), there's no life at all. The line delivery is rushed and bland, like the actors just wanted to get the scene finished so they could go home. It's missing energy, and it's not just this scene.
The scenes during dragon training are perhaps the only parts of the movie that I thought improved on the original. But the secondary characters (Fishlegs, Snotlout, Ruffnut, Tuffnut) were just awful. Cringeworthy delivery and mismatched humor resulted in a stilted and awkward watch.
I'm not sure if others will have noticed this issue, but seeing as I've got 90% of the OG script memorized, I sure did.
In the original movie, a lot of dialogue is interrupted. It makes the characters feel real, and the world feel lived in.
For example, in the scene where Hiccup and Toothless are making friends in the cove, Hiccup says: "Toothless. I could've sworn you had—" Toothless cuts him off by snapping his teeth and chomping the fish. Hiccup hurriedly finishes with a perplexed, "Teeth."
But in the live-action, it's like the actor was waiting for the CGI dragon to extend his teeth, and the delivery fell flat. This happened multiple times throughout the movie, and it wasn't just Mason Thames — other actors stumbled with this, too.
This weird delivery makes the world feel like a set, not a truly immersive experience. I felt like I knew the actors were acting, and they knew they were acting, so I felt distant from the characters.
I'm not saying the remake is unwatchable (98% of the Rotten Tomatoes audience disagree with me, clearly) but these are just a few of the reasons why the OG "How to Train Your Dragon" is infinitely better.
'How to Train Your Dragon' casting Gerard Butler was a major shot in the foot
Gerard Butler played Stoic, Hiccup's chief dad, in the original "How to Train Your Dragon". And he also played Stoic, Hiccup's chief dad, in the live-action "How to Train Your Dragon" remake. I think that was a major shot in the foot.
Because Butler absolutely bodied his role as Stoic, it showed up every other actor. I couldn't help but compare Butler to everyone else in the scene. Unsurprisingly, Butler always came out on top.
Gerard Butler was one of the only 100% positive parts of the How to Train Your Dragon remake. Everything about him was perfect: his delivery, his wit, his costume, his vibe. As a result, that made the lack of perfection in the rest of the movie all the more obvious. Maybe if they'd cast a different actor as Stoic, the stark difference wouldn't have been so bad. (But, then again, Butler wouldn't have owned his role even more.)
Because Gerard Butler absolutely slayed his role — pun kind of intended — it just showed up everyone else. Particularly Nick Frost as Gobber. Now, I love Nick Frost. I think he'll do an amazing job as Hagrid in the new HBO Potter. I love Hot Fuzz, and Shaun of the Dead. But I can't lie — I think he was horrendously miscast in this movie.
Most of his line delivery was flat, like the actor himself was bored during production. I'm not sure if this was due to direction, perhaps if DeBlois wanted to show Gobber in a different light. But in my opinion, it simply didn't work. Craig Ferguson as Gobber in the OG is tenacious, snarky, and kind of brutal, and that's why you should just watch the OG "How to Train Your Dragon" on Prime Video.
What's the point of the live-action 'How to Train Your Dragon' when the deuteragonist is a CGI dragon anyway?
Now, this last point is kind of an occupational hazard. There was no way around this. DreamWorks and Universal set up "HTTYD" to fail.
Toothless, the deuteragonist (secondary character to the protagonist, aka Hiccup), is literally a dragon. Dragons, if you haven't noticed, don't exist. So Toothless would have to be brought to life by CGI, regardless of the movie being live-action or animated.
The whole time when I was watching the "HTTYD" remake, I couldn't help but think: Who asked for this? Because it wasn't me, "HTTD"'s number one fan. I wanted to love it. I wanted to love it so bad.
I would have loved it if the new "HTTYD" had managed to capture the magic of the original. But it just... didn't.
I'm not sure if it's miscasting secondary characters, the screenplay, or the direction. As the "HTTYD" remake has the same director and writer as the original, I doubt it's the latter.
Even so, I think Mason Thames (live-action Hiccup) did a wonderful job of embodying the character he was given. These issues aren't acting — my best guess is direction. I think most of the problems lie in a combination of script, direction and a two-dimensional supporting world.
But it's not all bad... there were some improvements
I'll be the first person to admit that the OG How to Train Your Dragon isn't perfect. Rewatching as an adult makes me realize that Astrid's character was mishandled. However, the live-action completely rectified that.
Astrid is more kick-ass than ever
The only part of the remake that outshone the OG is Astrid. Now, I don't have anything against America Ferrerra, who voiced Astrid in the original — she did an amazing job with the script she was given. This is completely a writing issue.
In the OG, Astrid is kick-ass, sure. But she doesn't have agency. She doesn't have personal motivations — she's there to be Hiccup's antagonist, and then his love interest.
However, in the remake, Astrid has a purpose. She's dead-set on being the best — she wants to be the village chief one day — and she has to work hard because she doesn't come from money.
Hiccup cruises along, the son of the chief, never having to worry about money. But Astrid is from a less privileged background, so she has to work harder to get to the same place.
It's kind of ironic that Astrid's actress Nico Parker is a nepo baby, but I digress. Parker did a fantastic job bringing the new-and-improved Astrid to life. While, yes, she's a nepo baby, she's a nepo baby who definitely shone in her first major movie.
I'll fight anyone in the comments who disagrees with me — go on, I dare you. Me and my Toothless plushies are ready.
More from Tom's Guide
- When is 'How to Train Your Dragon' coming to streaming? Here's our best guess
- LEGO Toothless from ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ is finally here — I’ve never pre-ordered something so fast
- This new How to Train Your Dragon toy made me feel like a Night Fury — and it's here right in time for the live action movie release
You must confirm your public display name before commenting
Please logout and then login again, you will then be prompted to enter your display name.
