Another fun fact: when Stoick tries to listen to Hiccups heartbeat to confirm he's still alive, in the music you can hear a drum beat. That is then when Stoick states *"HE'S ALIVE"*
He’s up reading the books, loved them. Saw the movie, first extremely confused by the differences, but ended up loving it too and watching a hundred times more, becoming my favourite movie. I do like the first movie more than the first book, but other than that I don’t like to compare the two series as a whole due to how different they are. The books become so good, and the movies maintain that quality throughout. Both are still my comfort read and comfort watch. Every time I listen or watch them I feel like a kid again, and I can’t say the same for any other piece of media. God what a franchise, not a single bad instalment (except for the sequel series which is non canon to everyone who has a brain). That might change with the live action movie, which so far I’m very conflicted on, but only time will tell.
I noticed how basically every one of the other dragon riders (Astrid, Fishlegs, Snotlout, Ruffnut, Tuffnut) get a significantly more appealing design in the second movie than in the first one.
Universal Pictures & DreamWorks Animation was initially on board with this, but after looking over everything they'd come up with the film makers realize something. This wasn't the 3rd film sequel they had wanted to make. it was too dark, too somber, it was very close and tone to Cressida Cowell Books, but that was the problem. The decision was made to make the film an amusing, heartwarming, light-hearted, action adventure, and epic experience with only a few elements of the incredibly dark territory with the somber and scary atmosphere...just a little bit.
I do love the HTTYD Movie more, but now I wish the live action movie coming out soon tried to be more book accurate instead of what looks like a regash of the original film's story
The director recently stated that it'll not be a shot for shot remake. The teaser just deliberately showed the scenes that closely resembled the original movie. So there's a good chance they might take more inspiration from the book.
@m.g.zilla2022 Maybe, but there's a lot that came out in the trailer and casting list that rules out large sections of the book. -We know that dragons and Vikings start out enemies in this. We also know Hiccup is not Hiccup I if that would have helped (no Wodensfang, e.g Stoick in the casting). This rules out a large portion of the scenes in the book, and also the presence of literally the "How to Train your Dragon" book the series is named after. -We know Astrid and Ruffnut are in it. Presumably the presence of Astrid rules out the presence of Thuggory; and having a girl Hooligans(/Meatheads) ruins the overly-macho environment Hiccup and Fishlegs are meant to contrast against in book 1. -We know Toothless is a riding dragon instead of a hunting dragon; and definitely not a Common-or-Garden lookalike. The whole point of Toothless is he's meant to appear small and unremarkable, and be a metaphor for parenting toddlers. You can't do that with a overpowered adult riding dragon. -Hiccup speaks Norse to Toothless rather than Dragonese (and Toothless's growls do not sound like a language). -It seems they are adapting Toothless's injury at the hands of Hiccup, which will lower the impact of Toothless's wound at the hands of Green Death if they include it. -We know the cast resemble the animation more than the original; and particularly Fishlegs' body type is the complete opposite of his book character, so he no longer contrasts with the prevailing Viking culture. -There is a distinct lack of book-exclusive characters with announced castings, like Old Wrinkly or Mogadon the Meathead. This is only suggestive but it suggests a lot. I'm holding out hope for some aspects being taken from the books, but they've removed/changed so much already.
People are saying that the characters aren’t accurate in the new movie but they literally refuse to read the book. They just say, “it’s different.” It’s laughable and I’m exited for the new movie.
Though the early books are more kid friendly and light hearted the later ones get very dark and Hiccup spends a whole book a slave and has a messed up scary villain with both Alvin and Furious.
Movies for the Slightly Older Audience: The king of Dragons is a lovable derpy fluff-ball of a dragon who's madly in love with the girl dragon he just met. The books for younger crowd: King of dragons is a tortured broken hearted soul who's anger and fear led him to lead an genocidal war against mankind. But y'know Furious along with Wodensfang and Deadly Shadow are just "Silly Talking Dragons" so we'll just make A pre-school show to give book fans "That". Fact: They wanted to Adapt her book back in 2004, but the studio under-went changes in the script cause it was "Too Bright and Whimsical" for the head of DW. Brah, did you read the Green Death's dialogue? He's talking about filleting human beings, and the psiological art of Cannibalism and his own Nihilism! It wasn't too light-hearted. It was too Dark and Visceral! Witch is something they themselves pulled back on in their sequel with the subject of Hiccup's mom being a bad-guy. 7:40 Never actually seen that image. I'm fine with the more Wholesome parts, its just Toothless should've just been named Wind-Walker in the DW film Versions!
The early books, when even when Green Death was filleting human beings, were obviously for a younger audience. They're full of toilet humour. However, the later books clearly have a more mature audience in mind.
While Toothless from the movie is nothing alike to the book however apparently the small green toothless did appear in the film as the Terrible Terror 5:20
I liked this video, and I think you should make more related to similarities betwene the novels and the movies, maybe going over various things the other two movies might have taken from the novels, and also maybe tlak about the differences between the two characters called Alvin the trecherous. I think some paralels could be drawn between the book Alvin and some of the more main villains in the tv version. One thing I would like to point out is what you siad at 7:29. The books get more mature as they go on, and I would say the turning point for when it really gets darker is partway through book 8 and also then book 9. I think Cressida Cowell probably did this because of the audience of the novels growing older. I'd say it definantly gets darker than the second httyd movie.
Nah, I'd say it was way pass the darkness of the 2nd movie. The books are like Watership Down. Just cause it has a 'Children's' label doesn't mean that the story is necessarily for 'Everyone'. Let's say its the difference between an 2010's PG and an 1970's PG!
I suspect the author of this video didn't read that far, hence why they put up a picture of Furious in the place of Purple Death; and ironically put a scene with Wildwalker reminiscent of his iconic "smells like drinking chocolate" scene when talking about how the books aren't too dark.
@@YamiSpyroX yeah your right honestly I just didn't go back to change the comment. I haven't read watership down though. I started to listen to an audiobook of it but then decided to listen to a different one instead.
@@VegandudeGaming I wanted to listen to the story itself, and while I have the books and seen every animated version, the TV series being something I find severely underrated (Campion is pretty much my favorite character cause of it.) I never actually heard the audio books. Is the voice good? The books I found a little dry, and I admit I don't care for Richard Adam's non antrho-animal story's WD is still a classic mile-stone of literature just like Lord of the Rings! Cressida Cowell was influenced by both LOTR especially. I just don't get why nobody ever discusses the book series. They actually get Way Deep!
@@IamGrimalkin Sorta like how allot of fans don't even realize that there's more than one book of HTTYD. If it was just the one book what DreamWorks did would be allot more understandable, but as it stands...it just looks they aren't giving the original author enough credit, and that's putting it lightly. I wouldn't even say there's that much in terms of potty humor in the books. Sure there's toothless dumping in Alvin's helmet (He's making a point of not liking him.) and him doing it on Hiccup's bed, but it felt like Cressida was treating kids like they were grown-ups reading. While her newer books are a little more 'family-friendly' its actually a little shocking how dark the books can get! Aside from how Traumatic Furious's back-story is just in the 3rd book alone we get, trauma of lost loved one, exploitation of wildlife, sadism, death camps, a man eating animals live (Yuck! I hate that Man.) and the saving of said loved one at the last second. I can never forget that image of skin and bones Toothless licking Hiccup's face telling him "You saved me!" breaking past his 'said' dragon-nature loving his master out of sheer gratitude, and personally outside that one moment in HTTYD2 were Hiccup get's Toothless's mind back from his brain-washing, I never really felt that level of emotion from Dream Works. Maybe its cause if we adapted the actual version we'd get something like 'The Plague Dogs' but it still feels like such an shame. The books were like both for kids and adults like with allot of Anime. It feels like the animated versions are mostly for kids, regardless of the attempts of aging it up, for romance sake. It annoys me, cause I never tried getting an girl-friend while I was growing up. Maybe I'm weird but I lost personal connection with DW's Hiccup. I don't like that he just gives up in that last movie, for something that barely would've fazed the book version of Hiccup. He's just not very heroic in that version if you ask me. He has his moments, but still...
For me, the biggest change was in the fact that movie portrays dragons as more misunderstood than the books and the movie has this whole big message against prejudice and for peace, which is not present as much in the books.
Toothless was originally considered to be a Common or Garden Dragon, it wasn't until the 11th book where he was believed to be a Seadragonus Giganticus Maximus
@@LoweQualityTom This is the first time it's spelled out, but there are hints from book 1. Fishlegs' "Toothless Daydream" lie felt a bit too on-the-nose with the themes of the book, it felt like it was setting up some ironic twist later on. Hiccup psychically found out where Toothless was in the dark when they first met, and the only other dragon with psychic powers is Green Death. Toothless remained a toddler throughout all the books (with only one tooth ever), despite several years passing. And Old Wrinkly thought Toothless might be something special; and was actually successful in his other prophecies.
Just a tid bid, its found out in the book series that toothless actually isnt a common type of dragon and actually is a "sea dragon" the same type as the green death, just he is much younger and in an earlier stage in life,
I read five of the books, and I can say that Snotlout in the movies is ten times less annoying than he was in the books. At least he's not a bully in the movies, but every time he spoke in the books I almost imagined myself yelling at him to shut it. So yeah, there are some times when the movie is actually better than the book. Even though a lot of times the book is always better than some movie adaptations.
You said the books were targeted at a younger audience than the movies but that is VERY wrong, or at least past book 8, though from 4 onwards they start getting slightly darker but the last 4 books are INSANELY dark, to the point where everyone gets enslaved by Alvin (book exclusive bad guy first appearing in book 2), and half the people die including Snotlout!
The Romans are barely relevant in the books. The appear in book 3 but that's basically it. The Wanderers are more relevant than the Romans, if you're talking about non-Vikings.
@IamGrimalkin I like the romans in the books, even if they aren't so relevant to the plot, because they are culturally different from the vikings. They could be a true menace for Hiccup too, because we aren't talking about tribes, but an empire that dominated most of Europe and North Africa for centuries
@@Bolo_di_Murango But in the books the Romans are only a threat because of Alvin. It's also worth mentioning that neither the Romans nor the Vikings in the books are the same as their real-world counterparts. As the book says "Any relationship to any historical fact whatsoever is entirely coincidental." The Vikings in the books are able to cleave an adult dragon in two with a thrown axe. They are clearly superhumans by our world's standards. We know the books are set in or after the 9th century because of Yobbish's library book, which is after the fall of Rome; and we also know that Hiccup I was around 1000+ years previously, which was well before the Viking age. And pictures of the Barbaric Archipelago next to America seem to imply it kind-of replaces Europe. None of it is historically-founded.
@@IamGrimalkin Yeah, the books aren't historically accurate. I remember that exists an character named Camicazi and this name is from japanese culture 😐
@@Bolo_di_Murango Kamikaze isn't Japanese culture as such. They were Japanese suicide bomber piolets from WWII. I think a good interpretation of the name is it's a translation of a similar concept in Old Norse, much like we would assume for names like "Hiccup" or "Dogsbreath". These kind of nicknames *are* actually historically inspired, Vikings were called things like "Ragnar HairyBreeches"
What’s your favourite How to Train Your Dragon movie or book?
👋 hi
How To Twist a Dragon’s Tale
I never read the books but the best movie is HTTYD 1.
@@AGuyWhoDoesStuff548 i agree
Books they have a better plot
Another fun fact: when Stoick tries to listen to Hiccups heartbeat to confirm he's still alive, in the music you can hear a drum beat. That is then when Stoick states *"HE'S ALIVE"*
He’s up reading the books, loved them. Saw the movie, first extremely confused by the differences, but ended up loving it too and watching a hundred times more, becoming my favourite movie. I do like the first movie more than the first book, but other than that I don’t like to compare the two series as a whole due to how different they are. The books become so good, and the movies maintain that quality throughout.
Both are still my comfort read and comfort watch. Every time I listen or watch them I feel like a kid again, and I can’t say the same for any other piece of media. God what a franchise, not a single bad instalment (except for the sequel series which is non canon to everyone who has a brain). That might change with the live action movie, which so far I’m very conflicted on, but only time will tell.
I like movie version more than Book. Didn't you notice they changed Astrid face completely in second and third movie
You are aware they all changed mostly due to it taking place several years after the first film as they are adults.
Yeah because there is a 5 year gap and so they went from 15 to 20
I noticed how basically every one of the other dragon riders (Astrid, Fishlegs, Snotlout, Ruffnut, Tuffnut) get a significantly more appealing design in the second movie than in the first one.
Universal Pictures & DreamWorks Animation was initially on board with this, but after looking over everything they'd come up with the film makers realize something. This wasn't the 3rd film sequel they had wanted to make. it was too dark, too somber, it was very close and tone to Cressida Cowell Books, but that was the problem. The decision was made to make the film an amusing, heartwarming, light-hearted, action adventure, and epic experience with only a few elements of the incredibly dark territory with the somber and scary atmosphere...just a little bit.
I do love the HTTYD Movie more, but now I wish the live action movie coming out soon tried to be more book accurate instead of what looks like a regash of the original film's story
The director recently stated that it'll not be a shot for shot remake. The teaser just deliberately showed the scenes that closely resembled the original movie. So there's a good chance they might take more inspiration from the book.
@m.g.zilla2022
Maybe, but there's a lot that came out in the trailer and casting list that rules out large sections of the book.
-We know that dragons and Vikings start out enemies in this. We also know Hiccup is not Hiccup I if that would have helped (no Wodensfang, e.g Stoick in the casting). This rules out a large portion of the scenes in the book, and also the presence of literally the "How to Train your Dragon" book the series is named after.
-We know Astrid and Ruffnut are in it. Presumably the presence of Astrid rules out the presence of Thuggory; and having a girl Hooligans(/Meatheads) ruins the overly-macho environment Hiccup and Fishlegs are meant to contrast against in book 1.
-We know Toothless is a riding dragon instead of a hunting dragon; and definitely not a Common-or-Garden lookalike. The whole point of Toothless is he's meant to appear small and unremarkable, and be a metaphor for parenting toddlers. You can't do that with a overpowered adult riding dragon.
-Hiccup speaks Norse to Toothless rather than Dragonese (and Toothless's growls do not sound like a language).
-It seems they are adapting Toothless's injury at the hands of Hiccup, which will lower the impact of Toothless's wound at the hands of Green Death if they include it.
-We know the cast resemble the animation more than the original; and particularly Fishlegs' body type is the complete opposite of his book character, so he no longer contrasts with the prevailing Viking culture.
-There is a distinct lack of book-exclusive characters with announced castings, like Old Wrinkly or Mogadon the Meathead. This is only suggestive but it suggests a lot.
I'm holding out hope for some aspects being taken from the books, but they've removed/changed so much already.
Great vid again, make more of these comparisons!!
Thanks! Will do 😊
You forgot to mention hiccups narration in the final scene from the 3rd movie is ripped straight from the first page of the first book
People are saying that the characters aren’t accurate in the new movie but they literally refuse to read the book. They just say, “it’s different.” It’s laughable and I’m exited for the new movie.
The book series actually dark af
Audience when the animation look far different than the novel: 😀
Audience when the lifeaction look slightly different than the animation: 😡
Though the early books are more kid friendly and light hearted the later ones get very dark and Hiccup spends a whole book a slave and has a messed up scary villain with both Alvin and Furious.
Movies for the Slightly Older Audience: The king of Dragons is a lovable derpy fluff-ball of a dragon who's madly in love with the girl dragon he just met.
The books for younger crowd: King of dragons is a tortured broken hearted soul who's anger and fear led him to lead an genocidal war against mankind.
But y'know Furious along with Wodensfang and Deadly Shadow are just "Silly Talking Dragons" so we'll just make A pre-school show to give book fans "That".
Fact: They wanted to Adapt her book back in 2004, but the studio under-went changes in the script cause it was "Too Bright and Whimsical" for the head of DW.
Brah, did you read the Green Death's dialogue? He's talking about filleting human beings, and the psiological art of Cannibalism and his own Nihilism! It wasn't too
light-hearted. It was too Dark and Visceral! Witch is something they themselves pulled back on in their sequel with the subject of Hiccup's mom being a bad-guy.
7:40 Never actually seen that image. I'm fine with the more Wholesome parts, its just Toothless should've just been named Wind-Walker in the DW film Versions!
The early books, when even when Green Death was filleting human beings, were obviously for a younger audience. They're full of toilet humour. However, the later books clearly have a more mature audience in mind.
I didn't know it was base of a book
every dreamworks film is based on books
@@greek9089That’s not actually the case. Chicken Run isn’t
@@greek9089 really 🤯
YOU DIDNT????
@Spyalwayswins YES I DIDN'T
I was surprised about how different the books are to the book.
And I have completely read the first 8 books.
While Toothless from the movie is nothing alike to the book however apparently the small green toothless did appear in the film as the Terrible Terror 5:20
I liked this video, and I think you should make more related to similarities betwene the novels and the movies, maybe going over various things the other two movies might have taken from the novels, and also maybe tlak about the differences between the two characters called Alvin the trecherous. I think some paralels could be drawn between the book Alvin and some of the more main villains in the tv version.
One thing I would like to point out is what you siad at 7:29. The books get more mature as they go on, and I would say the turning point for when it really gets darker is partway through book 8 and also then book 9. I think Cressida Cowell probably did this because of the audience of the novels growing older. I'd say it definantly gets darker than the second httyd movie.
Nah, I'd say it was way pass the darkness of the 2nd movie. The books are like Watership Down. Just cause it has a 'Children's' label doesn't mean
that the story is necessarily for 'Everyone'. Let's say its the difference between an 2010's PG and an 1970's PG!
I suspect the author of this video didn't read that far, hence why they put up a picture of Furious in the place of Purple Death; and ironically put a scene with Wildwalker reminiscent of his iconic "smells like drinking chocolate" scene when talking about how the books aren't too dark.
@@YamiSpyroX yeah your right honestly I just didn't go back to change the comment. I haven't read watership down though. I started to listen to an audiobook of it but then decided to listen to a different one instead.
@@VegandudeGaming I wanted to listen
to the story itself, and while I have the
books and seen every animated version, the TV series being something I find
severely underrated (Campion is pretty
much my favorite character cause of it.) I
never actually heard the audio books. Is the voice good? The books I found a little
dry, and I admit I don't care for Richard
Adam's non antrho-animal story's WD is
still a classic mile-stone of literature just
like Lord of the Rings! Cressida Cowell was
influenced by both LOTR especially. I just
don't get why nobody ever discusses the
book series. They actually get Way Deep!
@@IamGrimalkin Sorta like how allot of
fans don't even realize that there's more
than one book of HTTYD. If it was just
the one book what DreamWorks did
would be allot more understandable, but
as it stands...it just looks they aren't
giving the original author enough credit,
and that's putting it lightly. I wouldn't
even say there's that much in terms of
potty humor in the books. Sure there's
toothless dumping in Alvin's helmet (He's
making a point of not liking him.) and him
doing it on Hiccup's bed, but it felt like
Cressida was treating kids like they were
grown-ups reading. While her newer books
are a little more 'family-friendly' its actually
a little shocking how dark the books can
get! Aside from how Traumatic Furious's
back-story is just in the 3rd book alone we
get, trauma of lost loved one, exploitation of wildlife, sadism, death camps, a man
eating animals live (Yuck! I hate that Man.)
and the saving of said loved one at the
last second. I can never forget that image
of skin and bones Toothless licking Hiccup's face telling him "You saved me!"
breaking past his 'said' dragon-nature
loving his master out of sheer gratitude,
and personally outside that one moment
in HTTYD2 were Hiccup get's Toothless's
mind back from his brain-washing, I never
really felt that level of emotion from Dream
Works. Maybe its cause if we adapted the
actual version we'd get something like 'The
Plague Dogs' but it still feels like such an
shame. The books were like both for kids and adults like with allot of Anime. It feels
like the animated versions are mostly for kids, regardless of the attempts of aging it
up, for romance sake. It annoys me, cause
I never tried getting an girl-friend while I
was growing up. Maybe I'm weird but I lost
personal connection with DW's Hiccup. I
don't like that he just gives up in that last
movie, for something that barely would've
fazed the book version of Hiccup. He's just
not very heroic in that version if you ask me. He has his moments, but still...
For me, the biggest change was in the fact that movie portrays dragons as more misunderstood than the books and the movie has this whole big message against prejudice and for peace, which is not present as much in the books.
Toothless is not a common type of dragon. He's a young seadragonus giganticus maximus!
Toothless was originally considered to be a Common or Garden Dragon, it wasn't until the 11th book where he was believed to be a Seadragonus Giganticus Maximus
@@LoweQualityTom This is the first time it's spelled out, but there are hints from book 1.
Fishlegs' "Toothless Daydream" lie felt a bit too on-the-nose with the themes of the book, it felt like it was setting up some ironic twist later on.
Hiccup psychically found out where Toothless was in the dark when they first met, and the only other dragon with psychic powers is Green Death.
Toothless remained a toddler throughout all the books (with only one tooth ever), despite several years passing.
And Old Wrinkly thought Toothless might be something special; and was actually successful in his other prophecies.
Just a tid bid, its found out in the book series that toothless actually isnt a common type of dragon and actually is a "sea dragon" the same type as the green death, just he is much younger and in an earlier stage in life,
Correct, but it was only revealed in the 11th book
@@LoweQualityTom still makes it true, in the nicest way possible just fact check more to provide more accurate information
you forgot that the twins were elders of the tribe and there was a tuffnut jr
I read five of the books, and I can say that Snotlout in the movies is ten times less annoying than he was in the books. At least he's not a bully in the movies, but every time he spoke in the books I almost imagined myself yelling at him to shut it. So yeah, there are some times when the movie is actually better than the book. Even though a lot of times the book is always better than some movie adaptations.
That's the point, he's not meant to be likable. That makes his whole story arc a lot more satisfying.
You said the books were targeted at a younger audience than the movies but that is VERY wrong, or at least past book 8, though from 4 onwards they start getting slightly darker but the last 4 books are INSANELY dark, to the point where everyone gets enslaved by Alvin (book exclusive bad guy first appearing in book 2), and half the people die including Snotlout!
I only know how to train your dragon because of the movie lmao
Will the live-action reboot/remake be any different or similar?
it looks like it's gonna be very similar to the animated movie
Now don’t get me wrong, the book was okay. I didn’t like it however. Honestly the movie I think was way better.
The book is better because they don't attack the dragons they are taming them and the books have a better plot
Is Dagur in the books?
unfortunately he is not, but the berserker tribe is and I believe that his personality is inspired from the way berserkers acted in the books!
I didn’t this movie is based on book
It is. It’s quite a good book
It is a good book but its literally completely different to the original minus the names and some designs
@@matityaloran9157it's an ok book, it's meant for very young children so it's kinda basic at times
@@The_MEMEphis I mean...so is the movie?
And the romans don't exist in the movies
The Romans are barely relevant in the books. The appear in book 3 but that's basically it.
The Wanderers are more relevant than the Romans, if you're talking about non-Vikings.
@IamGrimalkin I like the romans in the books, even if they aren't so relevant to the plot, because they are culturally different from the vikings. They could be a true menace for Hiccup too, because we aren't talking about tribes, but an empire that dominated most of Europe and North Africa for centuries
@@Bolo_di_Murango But in the books the Romans are only a threat because of Alvin.
It's also worth mentioning that neither the Romans nor the Vikings in the books are the same as their real-world counterparts. As the book says "Any relationship to any historical fact whatsoever is entirely coincidental."
The Vikings in the books are able to cleave an adult dragon in two with a thrown axe. They are clearly superhumans by our world's standards.
We know the books are set in or after the 9th century because of Yobbish's library book, which is after the fall of Rome; and we also know that Hiccup I was around 1000+ years previously, which was well before the Viking age.
And pictures of the Barbaric Archipelago next to America seem to imply it kind-of replaces Europe.
None of it is historically-founded.
@@IamGrimalkin Yeah, the books aren't historically accurate. I remember that exists an character named Camicazi and this name is from japanese culture 😐
@@Bolo_di_Murango Kamikaze isn't Japanese culture as such. They were Japanese suicide bomber piolets from WWII.
I think a good interpretation of the name is it's a translation of a similar concept in Old Norse, much like we would assume for names like "Hiccup" or "Dogsbreath".
These kind of nicknames *are* actually historically inspired, Vikings were called things like "Ragnar HairyBreeches"
Hi
Hello there 👋
Books
Movie is just better.