She also apparently lost a lot of weight considering that in the first movie Stoic gives Hiccup a helmet made out of "half of his moms breastplate" that was bigger than his head.
@@cthonisprincess4011 Yes, but Stoic specifically says his helmet and the one he gave Hiccup was a "matching set", which was meant to imply that it was basically her bra lol.
My issue with the movie: *trailers* Literally every HTTYD movie RUINS any and all twists in their trailers. Rewatch the 2nd movies trailer and it tells you everything that happens. The mother reveal loses so much weight by telling us about it in the trailers
I agree that should've been kept strictly as movie revelation. Walking into the movie knowing that was coming took away some of its dramatic weight. I also agree with how the the underlining comedic elements of Stoick giving Hiccup a memento of his mother in the first film was also problematic because each time I watched that scene, I found it more funny than heartfelt.
Hiccup got his attention, he was infatuated by him and that was his deathly flaw. He found someone that not only was his opposite, but a real enemy that even though was kinda naive and hasn't much resources was a real treat to him. It's now a character writing flaw, it was his flaw that lead to his death.
I agree... 😄😄 It is a bit of a mistake, tho, that he "blames Toothless for what happened" ( 12:00 ) Not being the peacemaker he thot he was? okay, but in the 1st two movies he never saw himself as responsible 4 anything that goes wrong until part 3. He never blames himself for losing Tooth to Drago & never admits he had the wrong approach, he & the movie itself is like "Drago bad. Dragons good. Hiccup right.", & I like Hic & all but... he doesn't regret. That is 1 thing I will giv Brave is that it's not just the 'hero' learning a new truth, they confess to their flaws. Hic says "they made you do it" instead of "I let them take you". And it's gr8 that he embraces his responsibilities by the end of the movie sense he's trying to avoid/prevent/outrun them at the start, but he doesn't blame himself for Tooth makes me notice even mor that he tends to want to take no responsibilities he thinks aren't "his thing", or not admit his approach could be flawed. (Not wrong but flawed). It's kinda why I enjoyed the end of Hidden World b'coz he has to get over his ego & feelings to do what is best for both humans & dragons. He needed to compromise. He could provide dragons w/ their unique needs & let his story "change the world 4ever" instead of asserting a positive change. In my opinion, dragons & humans fighting is an endless cycle b'coz both are going to be fighting to survive & fear each other. Hic learns dragons aren't pets/domesticated, but wild creatures w/ wild animal needs, & not all ppl/cultures want to be shoehorned into *his idea* of a peaceful life, so it was a win win: Dragons could be safe, ppl couldn't/wouldn't hurt them, & ppl wouldn't hav to be hurt by them.
I think httyd2 has more of an impact if you've watched the Netflix show as well because you see more development of the side characters in it and you also see more development between stoick and hiccup making his death even more sad
@@spartanking1405 I watched it on a whim because it was on Nerflix and HOLY SHot, best decision ever because the HTTYD series, to the book, shows, movies, and comics are my special interest now.
“That was belonging to a person of the male gender’s previously mentioned action that is misguided” ok that was the best version of that running joke ever
it's because walt disney himself was an orphan, it was justified in the first movies, but they do it in 70 percent of all of their movies, locking away creativity for new storylines or characters, why can't we have for once two parents alive disney, it's so boring and lame and it stopped being sad a long time ago
@santiago carrer is it still done that often, tho? There's a fair amount of main characters with both parents (Zootopia, Moana, Tangled, Finding Dory, Inside Out) Sometimes there's only one parent, but actual orphans seem pretty rare now.
@@echomoon4693 The use of repeated phrases in the first movie was such a simple trick, but it made it a movie with huge writing complexities. Paying attention to the intentional words someone said would say made the scenes connect without any visual cues at all.
Also it wouldn’t have taken much because hiccup said that in the first movie I think when either when he found toothless or realised that he was the reason he couldn’t fly
Honestly if Hiccup had said aloud "I did this" after Stoic died, that would've satisfied the need for his self-regret AND called back to the first film really well
Gobber: “When you are faced with the option of choosing a sword or a shield, take the shield.” *Father sacrifices himself because Hiccup was defenseless* Hiccup: “oops. Maybe big fire sword was not best idea for a pacifist... (But it does make me look cool.)
personally one thing i would've liked to see in this movie was a bonding scene between stoick and toothless. the two never really interact at any point after stoick changes his view on dragons, and in the second film all we really get is them being in the same room without directly acknowledging each other. having a scene where the two directly interact before toothless kills stoick would've not only added another level of emotion to the scene, but it also would make toothless feel more like a character outside of his relationship to hiccup imo
@@annivilen but a film must be able to stand on its own feet. It`s like saying you gotta watch clone wars to understand revenge of the sith. You dont have to, but it is fun and knowledgeable. however, the impact that revenge of the sith presents is great on its own, and even better with clone wars.
Valka’s purpose in the movie is how she represents half of Hiccup. In the second movie, Hiccup’s parents represent the two halves of Hiccup: the chief and the dragon rider. At the beginning of the movie, Hiccup is being pulled in two different directions. His dad wants him to be the chief, but he wants to explore and map out the world. Hiccup, at the beginning of the movie, doesn’t know who he is, he thinks that he can’t be the chief. When he meets his mom, he he meets the half of himself that he thinks is his whole: the Dragon tamer side, Valka even tells him “this is who you are, who we are.” Then, when Hiccup’s parents reunite, it represents how Hiccup’s two halves have come together. Valka reinforces this at Stoick’s funeral when she says that Hiccup has “the heart of a chief and the soul of a dragon”. Hiccup is both of his parents, he is a chief and a dragon tamer, and this is what the movie is about, Hiccup learning who he is, and him and Toothless becoming leaders of their respective races.
So far I've only gotten to his dislike for the flashback of valka being taken and he gives an example of someone who does it and I quote "it sets him (Alex's father) as a character in this movie." I actually prefer the light twist not setting her up makes and makes it a surprise which in story telling isn't a bad thing as some people like making it
yeah its like astrid told him what he's searching for is inside himself shes always his voice of reason its cuz of her encouragement that he found his mother
@zoorockf1 No one in this thread is really acting like a spoiled child, we’re just stating our opinions which we’re entitled to, and giving our own interpretations of the movie. Also, the second movie answered many questions to the overarching story: What happened to Hiccup’s mom? How will Hiccup become chief? How do people outside of Berk coexist with dragons? What is the dragon hierarchy? Are there other dragon riders/tamers? All of this is answered in the second movie. Also, the third movie just lacks the strong character moments that the first and especially second movies excel at. In the second movie, most of the major characters have arcs, Hiccup becomes the chief and learns who he is, Valka opens up to people and realizes that some people can change, Astrid supports Hiccup and teaches Eret the loyalty of dragons, and Eret learns to appreciate dragons. In the third movie, Eret and Valka basically do nothing, and they don’t have as much of their interesting personalities from the second movie. Also, a big part of the third movie is the plot with Toothless and the Light Fury, but the Light Fury has no personality and only exists as a reason for Toothless to leave Hiccup
The reason for the breastplate is probably due to the books. In the books hiccup's mother was a warrior with great skill, and since vikings in the books had tamed their own dragons from the start of book 1 the fact that she was close to a dragon was less part of her character. She was more of an estranged mother, and hiccup was more of an oddity in the books They probably hadn't decided what to do with her character, so they stuck to how she was seen in the books
@Mustiboi Salman hell yes I really recommend the sequels. Some people find them underwhelming but I found them extremely entertaining and emotional. The villains are amazing too in my opinion.
I hate it that the HTTYD2 fans are treated like a bunch of opinion disrespecters yet the people that complain about the movie are treated like overhated victims.
The breastplate thing was probably based on Hiccup's mom in the book (who's a big burly warrior woman), but then Dreamworks changed a lot of ideas from the books in the film series at some point. Just my take.
That scene definitely gives the impression that she's big, so I was surprised to see how skinny Valca was when the sequel came around. But I still like the idea that she was offered to become a warrior woman and rejected it
valhallarama would have been awesome in movie form. i've read all of the books and valka was a huge disappointment when i first saw the movie. aren't the feminists asking for big, strong, independent women in films and other media? valhallarama basically spent all of her time out fighting without help. she was designed to be a viking badass, and she could have been that while also being sympathetic towards the dragons, but only big scary dad stoick and big scary bad guy get to be absolute chunks.
@@lettucehouse300 Honestly, it's almost better to think of the HTTYD movies and the HTTYD books as pretty much separate things, despite everything. But I agree, the fact that they decided to make Valhallarama into Valka instead, and that they redesigned her to be less intimidating-looking, sticks out a lot. The big burly Valhallarama has a lot more in common with Stoick, her equally big and burly husband, than the character Valka has. But I try to think of the books and movies as separate, since they're so vastly different. 🤷♀️
My take was that she was pretty big when she disappeared but got skinnier over time maybe because of age maybe because getting food was harder, people often change it's not this weird and i don't why why people act like everyone looks exactly the same for their whole life, you can lose weight you can lose muscles. And yes boobs gets smaller too when you lose weight actually they're first to go.
@@papkinn For sure, that's a good enough explanation if she wasn't also skinny in the flashback where Hiccup's a wee baby that they included in the second movie. But I agree, overthinking stuff like weight gain and weight loss in a fictional character can be kind of dumb, since it's not impossible irl for a person's appearance to change - plus, the writers clearly did not put as much thought into it as we are doing right now. :)
“You kill without reason! Why aren’t you killing him if you have a viable reason?!” Because the law states that if you kill without reason you can’t kill if you have a reason.
One thing you got to love about the 2nd movie is how Stoick views Hiccup. From seeing his own son as the pariah of the village in the first to being heads over heels of how great a chief he’ll be in the second was just so heartwarming and wholesome. The whole family dynamic in HTTYD2 specifically is one of the highlights of the trilogy for me.
Can we just talk about the fact that the father's death is NEVER. MENTIONED. AGAIN after movie 2? It's never touched upon as a way for toothless and hiccup to grow closer to deal with that trauma, we never see Toothless deal with the guilt of MURDERING someone. Nah just give him a girlfriend and be cute in movie 3. Ugh. I like HTTYD but that's always bothered me.
@@megashark1013 yeah that's called rushed storytelling and I think 3 is the weakest of the three for sure. I mean they're all good but if I were to have them go in order from best to worst it would be 1...2...3 lol
I mean, technically he didn't do it, so the line wouldn't make sense. When stoick found hiccup unconscious, He said "I did this" Because he is technically the cause of the red death coming out of his cave. hiccup Paid for stoick's mistake. while in the second movie, hiccup isn't the cause of his dad's death. Stoick sacrificed himself so that his son wouldn't have to die. the line wouldn't make sense at all and would probably end up confusing the audience.
AND to what Hiccup says when he sees Toothless tied up at the beginning of the first movie. I'm just disappointed that in the italian translation we've lost this and the two lines are different :\
11:30 I disagree with the "its just a low point" Stoics death puts hiccup in a position that changes his lookout on being chief. He realizes in this seen that a chief "protects his own" as stoic protected hiccup. And I feel like it was a good choice because him and hiccups mom just met then he died its a bit influenced by the scene of them dancing and singing.
Did you know they were originally gonna kill Gobber off but changed it to Stoick? Yeah if they actually went with killing Gobber off his death would have had like no impact whatsoever since Stoick would still be alive and Hiccup wouldn't learn a thing about taking responsibility as a leader.
@@robonaught Thank God for Guillermo del Toro (he was the one to suggest it). Fantasy movies would be so much less interesting without him, someone who understands monsters and the importance of dark elements in children's tales.
I'd argue that Valka wasn't even concieved during the writing of the first movie. It was a father/son type of deal. But what really ticked me off was Valka was revealed in the trailer! That's like showing the scene where Darth Vader reveals he's Luke's father in the trailer to Empire
@@tarnyowl6068 yeah but empire strikes back came way before revenge of the Sith, the actual film. With made before so back then people had no idea that Vader was Luke's father
Actually she was gonna be the villain originally. When looking at her first scenes, i still feel that, first time watching, i was shure she was gonna be the villain
Scott Karrasch I think because Valka was originally meant to be the villain of the movie, they kinda messed up her character a bit, especially because I believe it was a last minute decision to make her good. The movie kinda suffered bc of her character and I find it hard to sympathise with her reasons but I think but what we did get I think was brilliant and for me it’s still my favourite outta the trilogy Also it did really annoy me that she was shown in the trailer :// it would’ve been way more impactful if they’d kept her character a secret. If they wanted to show her in the trailer it would’ve been fine, but they could’ve kept who she was a secret
I'm two years late, but in response to why the audience (including me) liked this movie so much, it's because of the world building. The first movie was awesome but so relatively limited in the scope of the world. This movie gave us more dragons, the idea that other people actually exist in the world, and bonding between the characters we already love. I fully realize and accept that this film is not as strong as the others in the trilogy, but it is just so much fun, and it's so freaking cool.
I'm late. But you really need to watch Race To the Edge. It fixes the side characters and actually gives them character arcs. Snotlout suffers an inferiority complex. Yes really. And the twins, my least favorite aspect of the movies, became some of my favorite characters in the show. Also, it fixes Drago. Think about this. In Race To the Edge, there are 4 main villains. THREE of them got redemption arcs. That is why Hiccup is so convinced Drago can be saved. Drago is a stepping stone in Hiccup's arc. Ya, he's not going to see this. I need to show up earlier on the next dragon video.
Drago was supposed to have a redemption arc in the 3rd film but nope they scrapped it....😓 Also why is Drago deemed as an irredeemable lost cause because he wants to take over Berk with dragons, brainwashed Toothless, killed a few chiefs and Stoick? Alvin wanted to use dragons for the same reason, Viggo tried to starve Berk and even used biological warfare by trying to cause an outbreak the deadly Scourge Of Odin disease, Dagur flat out sacked Heather's village and killed her adopted parents before the whole twist that they're siblings. Why do they get to be redeemed and forgiven for their crimes yet Drago is somehow different so he doesn't deserve a chance?
I mean a lot of them weren't really Hiccups doing tho. All three of them made changes on thier own acord, not so much by Hiccups direct actions. Theres also multiple villains that don't get redeemed at all. The naivety of Hiccup is kinda confusing consdiering there was a whole twist villain situation that happned (Im trying not to spoil who it is lol). That guy never got redeemed and Hiccup never really tried to change his mind either. He is also rightfully suspicious of all three of the ones that get redeemed in the show and its not until they save his life that he starts to believe they've changed. Idk, i get your point but i truly feel like he has regressesd a lot in the second movie compared to the end of rtte.
I remember really wanting this to win Best Animated Feature that year. It's the second best animated film I saw that year, first being The LEGO Movie, which got snubbed.
"How come these movies dont teach me literally how to train my dragon?" The first movie is all about that, the second movie shows how to train your dragon to overpower and become the alpha, and the third shows how NOT to train your dragon via the disgusting use via the villain.
@@bellyjelly0812 True, but that's more of a secondary thought to the plot of how dragons outrank eachother. Besides, inthe third movie it shows that the ultimate act of caring for your dragon is to know what's best for them, even if to let them go, unlike the villain who ensnares his dragons in servitude for as long as he wishes for his own gain.
In Race to the Edge it show more themes on how not to treat dragons. The overall message I see is yes you can train them but the more respect you show them and knowing what best for them will in turn make them show more respect to you. In movie one when Hiccup finds out that Dragons hate eels. He also got rid of the eel in the best interest of Toothless. Like when he threw away his knife.
The only real issue I have with number 2 is how Stoick's funeral scene was *almost* perfect. It was beautiful, Gobber's speech was heartfelt, the score was on point, and for the first time ever the twins didn't ruin it just by being there. But it also seemed to come and go a bit quickly. The movie gives me just enough time to begin processing this loss before slingshotting me into an energetic scene with silly banter.
I think Grimmel was supposed to be a comparison to what Hiccup could have been. Both of them started in the same position, they were presented with a captured night-fury and could choose to either slay it and accept traditional glory, or spare it and accept the opportunity to change the future. While we all know what happens when Hiccup chooses to spare Toothless, but Grimmel is what would have happened if Hiccup had killed him. Hiccup had insecurities, and would likely have continued hunting night-furies to extinction for praise and status. Oh wait, guess what Grimmel's back story is.
That sounds a lot like Luke's relationship with Starkiller (Vader's apprentice in Legends). Galen Marek is everything Luke could have been if he joined Vader in Empire after he said: "I am your father." Unfortunately, he gets killed a few months before A New Hope.
@@Spore9996 He wasn't. The only canon events before the Disney purchase were projects Lucas himself had a hand in or approved. Basically the movies and TCW, but not the games, most books, or the Clone Wars miniseries.
Fun fact: Valka was originally planned to be the villain of the story the moment when she discovers that Hiccup was the one who took down Toothless, but they changed her arc and put Drago in out of nowhere, that would explain why he is the must rushed character in the movie
Drago was originally planned to just be mentioned as this approaching threat who would then be the villain of the 3rd movie. His fleet was still going to attack the nest resulting in Valka going paranoid and thinks Hiccup and Stoick are on Drago's side, but Drago wasn't gonna appear physically appear with the fleet. They just brought him in much earlier into the story then they originally intended too and not because they had to quickly come up with a new guy to take the role as villain. Dean DeBlois even admitted that Drago came off as rather flat because of this. Oh and screw them aborting Drago's redemption in the 3rd movie, denying him any chance of character development and leaving him with no proper conclusion.
To be honest, it.. felt kind of natural? That it doesn't mention Valka, anyway. Not only did Hiccup barely get to know her, it's been a really long time. They've probably supressed it by now, which is a kind of normal way to deal with greif.
Valka's absence early on is kind of the point. She's a cowardly version of Hiccup who cared for dragons but gave up on changing people, and so ran away. She even admits her shame over being absent. Hiccup reflects both his parents strengths: he tries to be caring and understanding like his mother, but also becomes strong, protective, and willing to stop the unredeemable at any lengths necessary after Stoick's death. That was him learning from his mistake and failure. Yeah it was rushed, but it was still there. Drago is simple, but his desire to rule by domination and fear contrasts Hiccup's desire to rule by care and loyalty.
Also Drago is the result of somebody that has grown up in the absolute worst environment a child can grow up in. He suffered the full brutality and horror dragons can be if they feel like it. They flat out destroyed everything he loved: His village, his family, his tribe, his way of life and culture. How much crap do you expect a child to take before they snap? He's basically Hiccup if he had an absolute shit life with no roof over his head or any loved ones.
never really thought of Valka as cowardly, makes me wonder how that would have played out if she remained a villain like she was suppsed to be early on.
"He changed his mind" "And look were that got him" That line is one of my favourits for many reasons and a small detail I love about it is that Grimmel is sitting in Stoicks chair. Its now Hiccups since hes become cheif but it once was Stoicks and for Grimmel to have the audacity to say such a thing in his thrown to his son for me just made it so much better.
@@abook2141 Obvious, but the other bows, like those of Aang, Katara or Sokka, are not far behind. I think it is one of the few series that develops all its characters
I feel like he would’ve been a lot more menacing if there was a gong or some kind of instrument (maybe made of bones or something for extra edge and menace) that controlled the Lorge Boi. Maybe have the screaming at the end as a kind of desperation sort of thing?
@@elizabethhicks4181 Drago's screaming is likely based on how they controlled dragons in the books. Dragons are implied to be affected by loud noises as shown in the first film where lots of noise can throw off their aim so it can probably affect them in other ways too. Also that stick Drago swings around? It's menacing as it is cuz it's a bullhook. Don't know what that is? It's a tool used to train elephants by hitting and prodding them. Drago controls the Bewilderbeast because it's scared of the bullhook. He's had it beaten ever since it hatched so even though it's massive now and could just dispose of him it doesn't cuz it's mentally broken and afraid of being beaten by the bullhook.
On Hiccup’s mom; we don’t know anything about her because Hiccup doesn’t know anything about her. That’s it. That’s the choice. We are supposed to experience the world with Hiccup, and they didn’t change that when it came to his mother. This is not a negative. Edit: Astrid IS smart, but she’s also arrogant. That’s why I think she goes after Drago; she feels she can. Drago is a lesson to Hiccup; he has more power than Hiccup could ever have and he uses it to benefit himself alone. This whole movie is about Hiccup, that’s why the other characters don’t HAVE to be fully fleshed out. Seeing Toothless come into his own power at the end of the movie, while he may not have “earned it” throughout the movie, empowers hiccup to really take over his father’s role as leader.
I agree that if the movie only focuses on Hiccup, it makes sense that Valka would not be really talked about in the beginning. However, I don't think that it needed to focus solely on Hiccup, because it never really did. It followed him more than anyone else because he's the main character, but they would take a break from him when they needed to get something across in the first film that couldn't be done when Hiccup was there. In the first film, they did take a break from Hiccup to have a scene just between Stoic and Gobber and explain Stoic's points in a way that Hiccup wouldn't see them. This could have been done again in the second one just briefly, and I think it would have added a lot. Or they could have had Hiccup talking to Stoic like was mentioned in the video, which could keep more of the focus on him and his perspective. So I think you are right in what you're saying, but I don't think the movie had to stick to that, or that there was no way to give Hiccup himself more information.
RTTE's logic kind of fell short on this one. I praise everything about RTTE, as it was all great. The visuals, the story, the character arcs, Viggo, how could you not love it? However it's literally narrated at the end of RTTE that the wing maidens knew someone who knew someone, etc, who knew Valka. They had this contact they trusted well enough with the king of dragons' egg, yet couldn't even introduce them to Hiccup, the one who got the egg to safety? While it wouldn't really work, as the 2nd movie came out before RTTE, I feel like it would be much more logical for them to be introduced this way, rather than through Hiccup getting kidnapped by accident then finding out it was his mother, and he was surprised by this??
This trilogy is really hiccup and toothless's story, the other characters are there to help him and while it would be cool to see the twins and snotlout grow up this story isn't about them
I disagree that Valka is a pointless character. The whole point of the movie is that Hiccup must learn to become the chief of Berk, but he wants to explore dragons. Valka is Hiccups mentor who helps him transition from a naive dragon explorer to a strong chief who is capable of making important decisions but still supports the dragons interests. One of the best lines in the movie is when Valka tells Hiccup, "you have the heart of a chief and the soul of a dragon." Also, at 22:36, those are Drago's ships, not the Vikings'. The Vikings are at Berk. Drago only came to kill the Alpha. As far as he was concerned, he was just there to kill the Alpha and raid Berk. He didn't care about the dragon riders. Schaf makes some good points, but, personally, I don't agree with what he is saying
i totally agree, my big issue was always how little impact stoick's death had on the story, and on Hiccup's character. Like the first half of the movie was so good, and then it just... rushed to get to the end. We went from Stoick's death to immediately a happy baby dragon ride?? It felt so disjointed???
Stoick's death DID have impact on the story. Hiccup was all "I'm not ready to be chief" even though by now Hiccup should know somebody needs to lead Berk after Stoick finally kicks the bucket. Stoick dying finally made Hiccup wake up and realise he has to take responsibility as a leader and stop being a push over thinking that everything can be sold by just talking to others. Also Stoick was the chief of Berk if Hiccup hadn't stopped Drago then Drago would have forced Berk with no choice but to accept him as their new leader. You want a death that has no impact on the story? The original plan was to kill Gobber off. Seriously nothing would have changed if they went with that. Stoick would be still alive and the chief so Hiccup learns nothing and somebody could easily take over Gobber's work in Berk
@@omegashenron8Meh, its not really the case of having not learned anything overall but its more of the case of reality making sure Hiccup learn that damn lesson and it will never leave his head again. After all by the end, he stops this so called messiah complex of his to dave any dragon he finds and place them in Berk despite how much of a logistical nightmare to look after such a place.
A bad HTTYD movie is like a bad Avatar: the last airbender episode. They can still be breathtaking, but are outclassed by other parts of their franchieses
I think it makes sense, because Hiccup almost fled Berk himself in the first movie before Astrid find them in the cove. I wish they had brought that up though.
@@ptitecame6688 Hiccup was going to leave Berk because he was lying to everyone, and if he told the truth they would kill his only friend. Valka had a new son and a husband who loved her when she left. But instead of coming back she was willing to a) let her son live his life not knowing his mother, b) let Stoick die of old age thinking she was dead, and c) let the Vikings of Berk keep killing dragons. All three of these could've been at least mentioned in the movie, but they weren't.
To really appreciate the side characters you must watch “race to the edge”. Really brings their characters to light. Especially fish legs and hiccups relationship
I honestly think that WTTYD 2 did a perfect job, and the way they introduced the mother is exactly how hiccup felt it. He never knew her, and then this mysterious character reveal its self to be his mother is beautifully done. We weren't supposed to know anything about his mother, and his father never spoke much about her, so why would we?
But Hiccup didn’t see the trailer for the movie. That’s why I don’t really watch trailers anymore cause they ruin potentially dramatic scenes that require a lack of knowledge for surprise
I hear you, but remeber - we are not Hiccup. If having the flashback in the beginning of the film could've made the film a more dramatically satisfying story FOR US, it would've been worth considering.
@@djjonasc Yes, I agree. Having the scene at the beginning would have at least added some dramatic purpose to her inclusion and not just out of the blue for no reason. I think Schaff explained it pretty well
Idk what you’re talkin’ bout’, I cried when stoic died. They were trying to make the scene powerful by not just having us care about the death of Stoic, but the guilt and sadness of toothless. I mean, it connects our emotional reaction with Toothless’, rather than with Hiccup’s.
You tell him! If anything, Schaffrillas Productions is the one of weakest ones for making a video about why How to Train Your Dragon 2 is far from one of the best animated sequels! I know I said this before, but I think that Schaffrillas’s criticisms towards How to Train Your Dragon 2 are just one of his ways for to lose people that used to follow/trust him until they watched his most biased and overpraised videos like this and “Every Disney Renaissance Film Ranked” to make The Little Mermaid sound like the (far) better film than HTTYD2 and The Rescuers Down Under, the original Mulan (DAMMIT, SCHAFF! THE SEQUEL IS A DOWNGRADE, NOT AN UPGRADE!!!!!) and Tarzan to a slightly lesser extent.
I cried for stoic, but that's just cuz I loved him as a character and was like wtf why are you killing him off. It just feels so pointless to me, too much shit happens. The tone is all over the place. I get to see stoic and valka reuniting and lovey dovey stuff and he dies 10 MINUTES AFTER MEETING HER. To me it just feels like "shit's getting boring let's KILL OFF SOMEONE".
Stoick's death was admittedly very heartbreaking, but it didn't leave the impact it deserved. Like Schaff said, it ultimately felt like an afterthought.
No its not as a HARDCORE httyd fan , its just no. You have to be a fan you have to grow with the show. These videos are all wrong most of the times because they are adults they just watch it and move on, the fanbase is 12-20 Now its because when HTTYD1 came 6-12 y.os were watching.
@@thepacific2933 Plenty of people of all ages watched the films as they came out and grew with them, and people who binge all three in one day are equally valid. Gatekeeping isn't.
Alright so hear me out: If Cloudjumper was the alpha instead of the giant white dragon, and they spent a little more time developing the relationship between Toothless and Cloudjumper, this could’ve fixed a bunch of the issues. 1) When Drago’s alpha fights Cloud for dominance, the loss of Cloud for Toothless could mirror the loss of Stoick for Hiccup. Consequently, the dynamic of Toothless becoming the alpha when Hiccup becomes chief feels much more cohesive. 2) Hiccup becoming a chief as toothless becomes alpha feels a lot more like Hiccup taking after both of his parents if he shares the leadership dynamic that Valka had with Cloudjumper. Also I think Astrid should’ve gone with Hiccup when he met Valka. Astrid and Hiccup both seeing the love between Stoick and Valka could’ve been a great way to set up the marriage conflict in the hidden world. Regardless I still like this movie, but I think these changes could’ve been cool.
Zeeyad B I think Nathan means by how Stoick keeps telling him that Bloodfist can’t be reasoned with, but he tried anyways and Bloodfist threatened his life with his own partner. In an act as a father protecting his son, Stoick jumped in front of Hiccup to protect him from Toothless, resulting in his death. I think at first, he would’ve been mad at Toothless (just like what we see) but right after all the dragons disappear, realizes it might’ve really been his own fault since his dad did tell him that Bloodfist couldn’t be reasoned with. Sorry if my take is a bit wordy,
@@LocalAceAJ Not to mention it would be poetic AF because that's what Stoik said when he thought Hiccup died, and what Hiccup had said when he hurt Toothless
@@jefftheevilrobot9351 why people are against sad endings or deaths? Grow up! The whole point of the finale of a franchise is give a closure, kill the protagonist, let the new generations start a new journey! By god is not wrong to feel sad!!!! In fact the best movies are the ones with emotional scenes
@@jefftheevilrobot9351 I actually found the ending to be quite bittersweet. Emotional, definitely, but a sad ending would be all the dragons getting killed off, for example. The ending brings about sad emotions in us because it relates to the grief of separation and letting go of people you love, but it's for a well-intentioned reason so I don't consider it a "sad ending." It's for the good of the world. I honestly think it's the perfect ending to the series. Also, the very final scene makes it far less sad than it could have been. We probably all would've emotionally perished if they didn't add that lol
I agree there should have been more stuff done with Stoick's death, he raises good points. More setup of their relationship beforehand to make the death scene sting more, and some self-blame from Hiccup to make the grieving / funeral scene more emotional (and realistic, to make it even more ouchy) rather than just being sad his dad is gone and nervous about being chief. Like keep those aspects, but maybe tone back the "aa chief scary not for me" in favor of self-blame. Hiccup hurts good, and if you're gonna kill off Stoick for a protagonist low point, you may as well commit. I think the death scene itself was top notch, in its screenplay, the suddenness, the character's reactions, etc. but Hiccup blaming himself would add a whole 'nother layer of emotional depth to Stoick's death and further impact the lesson Hiccup learns by the end, to protect his own rather than clinging to pacifism against reasonable odds.
I was so expecting Valka to be a badass mom, ass-kicking barbarian warrior, and she kinda sells that at first, walking on wings and standing on dragons in midflight like a druid using magic ...! but when Drago appears she just hands him the alpha, get caught in a fishnet and need her husband to save her from Drago attack. The rest of the movie resets her back to her helpless villager settings. Wow. What a waste.
I can see your point aside from the whole ''She just handed Drago the alpha'' In her defense on that part she had no idea or to assume that Drago had managed bring his own Bewilderbeast to challenge and kill hers to claim the title of alpha because it was underwater towing his ship and out of sight so she thought that it would be guaranteed victory with not only because her Bewilderbeast could just destroy the ships with it's icy breath and step on everything but also because Valka said to Drago that he can't just take all the dragons because the alpha controlled them.
If you didn’t watch the trailer, I didn’t, you wouldn’t have known. Personally, I still think it builds up the hype for the movie and was a good decision.
Everybody: “i believe the 3rd one was the weakest, YOUR OPINION IS WRONG” Me: 1:35 is that the instrumental of the the hit song “Busted” from the phenomenal tv series Phineas and Ferb?
I LIKE that they didn't mention Valka much before her appearance, I can't help meta-ing while watching movies/reading books. If you show me a chekhov's gun I know it's going to get used but the first time I saw HTTYD 2 I was as surprised as much as Hiccup he randomly bumped into his mother in a dragons nest.
Honestly, I thought that the way they introduced Valka was really good. In most films, the first film will have little / no mentions of the protagonist's parents. Then suddenly in a sequel, the protagonist will be constantly thinking about their parents, which is very convenient to the story line. But in httyd, there was (as you said) only one mention of Valka, like the first film, keeping it consistent and also making it unexpected.
Yee, Stoick and Hiccup don't really have the type of relationship that talks about their emotions alot. Them suddenly having a hearthfelt discussion about what happened to Valka would prolly feel out of place.
I feel like the surprise reveal would have been so... much better if they hadn't spoilt the reveal in the trailers - they really should have kept it secret, to make you believe this masked person was Drago on your first watch.
@@AtomixKingg But we already get an idea of what Drago looks like in Stoick's flashback. Even if they didn't spoil Valka in the trailers it would already be obvious the person in the mask is not Drago since even with his back turned we all easily see Drago is this huge hulk of a man with a mane of dreads while the person in the mask is a lot smaller and slimmer. Also no way Drago could hide his huge mane of dreads under a mask like that so the lack of dreads sticking out under the mask would also give away it ain't Drago. If Drago ever even did wear a mask he'd probably have to either cut his dreads or wear a mask that just covers his face. He'd look like a Predator if he did that.
Oh hey I watched 2 flims of the Httyd and I heard IN the first film Hiccup's Helmet is made out of a single breast armor or something of his mom I guess
Stoic dying really tugged my heart. Stoic reminds me of my own dad, my parents are a little older than most parents. And I always worry about them dying. It just really hurt to see him die.
It’s funny that you mention the pacing and poor character decisions being why you didn’t like 2 over 3, because I felt like 3’s pacing was all over the place and the character decisions were tragic just to be tragic. Edit: I think the character bit is really highlighted with Toothless in 3. Toothless was his best in 1, but I thought he was his worst in 3. The movie does express his ‘desires independent of his best friend’, but Toothless feels like he forgets all about Hiccup the second he doesn’t need him. It makes Toothless feel more like a wild animal who was Hiccup’s pet and was fine going wild when the time came. Which... I guess wouldn’t be a problem if it weren’t that all the creator interviews establish they want the dragons to be more significant than pets. More like companions. Which I think Toothless felt more like here in 2
I completely agree. The third one was pretty weak compared to the others. And whilst I liked the ending, I hated how the villain's whole motive was to kill the night furies just because. They should've fleshed him out more and maybe I would've liked the third one better.
7:09 i mean, if i may: I feel like the main idea behind the late reveal of Hiccup's mother was to remove expectation for the movie as a whole. No expectation means no build up. No build up means that the movie has freedom to introduce new things to viewers in their own pace without rushing the original pace of the movie. It could be argued that adding the flashback scene to the beginning wouldn't have changed anything but i think that would have affected us at the viewer. It would have given us a pre-conceived idea that "in this movie, Hiccup has to meet his mother and this whole movie will be revolved around it", which was almost exactly the case for the 2nd act of the movie. But it also drives away the main point of the movie, Hiccup. We move our focus away from Hiccup as a character because suddenly we have knowledge of his mother's existence before he does, and that leads to us being ahead of him and looking at his growth in this movie as "delayed". Anyway's that's just my thoughts on that topic.
All this sounds pretty good untill that you remember that hiccup's mother is revealed in the trailers. Although, I like both ways to reveal Valka in the movie.
@@lunarkomet I see both sides, surprises are fun, but when there is no foreshadowing whatsoever, and no hinting towards it at all or even discussing it, it feels unearned and you're kind of left feeling like there was no reason for it, i think if it comes early enough, and the surprise is important enough to the plot, it can usually work. idk how to explain it, it feels more like a plot device at some point if it's not foreshadowed in some way
I think it's interesting that Grimmel is considered the antithesis to Hiccup, the person he would have become had he killed Toothless in the first movie. But nobody ever talks about how Drago is the perfect antithesis to Stoick. They virtually have the same backstory as one another, but one chose to move on from his loss and embrace peace with dragons. Drago is what Stoick would have become had he never stopped killing dragons.
12:06 You really lost me here. He's not just sad or mad at Toothless. He's scared, filled with guilt, betrayal & grief. He's not seen talking to anyone during Stoick's ship sequence, because he's feeling less worthy to lead his own people. I don't see how anyone could miss this, especially if one is talking about narrative impact, character animation or the obvious show don't tell, which nearly every essay based YT brings up. It's a masterfully executed sequence from the script & animators part. To me it seems like you're just looking for reasons to tell a less vague, mysterious character of a film, which is reasonable and very mainstream to reach a wide audience, but that's not the only approach a film can take. Especially in how you made your point about Valka not being introduced in the opening. Had they gone that route the film would have been identical to a bunch of other films that always introduce the mysterious character in the opening, which still would have made for a good film ---- kinda-ish. Personally I found the approach they took to be a breathe of fresh air, while leaving room open for an intimidating sequence, where Hiccup is ambushed by an unknown dragon warrior. Had Valka been introduced earlier, audiences could have easily guessed away that she was the unknown dragon warrior judging from her physical build, Not to mention Cloud-jumper would've given away the reveal once he appeared on screen, whoops! That would've been quite a tame reaction. I certainly am looking forward to your take on THW.
@@clapah4995 It's a bit sad that a lot of trailers spoil a lot nowadays. However, as for someone who hadn't watched the trailers, I can tell you it was a pleasant surprise
I just don't know how he's going to justify the aweful ending of 3 that the specials after it point out was a bad idea as the absence of dragons just leads to more rest and hatred of them with the next generations, undoing everything from the triology. But hey we gotta follow the books this one exact time for a cool line in the trailers!
NinjaTyler I can’t remember exactly what he said about captain except something like “ITS BEAUTIFUL JUST ACCEPT IT” does it contradict? Yeah, but I fully ugly cry every time, I love that scene and how they cut to the credits with scenes with Forbidden Friendship and previous movies. Sometimes I think it’s ok to end with something purely emotional
schaffrillas: there are no scenes in this movie where our characters just hang out and I don't like that. also schaffrillas: this movie has a lot of useless scenes of our characters just hanging out and doing nothing productive. HmMmMmMm
I don’t agree. I believe 3, while having a good villain, good pacing and a heartbreaking yet satisfying ending, I still consider it to be the weakest one because of the choices it chooses to make. It completely neglects Hiccup and Toothless’ relationship which is the heart and core of this entire franchise. And it gets tossed to the side so Toothless can get with Light Fury. And I get it. The movie is trying to go with the “if you love something, let it go” metaphor. But honestly this happens for the majority of the movie and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth even though I sobbed uncontrollably at the end of 3. I respectfully do not agree with this review. The second one has some of the most powerful, humorous and touching moments of all three. It had no chance of topping one in my mind but it was so much better than I expected. 3 is the weakest one. It’s not a bad movie at all. Just the weakest for me.
Something I wish would have been done or expanded on are the Viking's rituals, more precisely when Hiccups becomes chief. I feel like it was such a huge source of anxiety for him to succeed his father, and the expectations he set on himself were so high, that when he nonchalantly accepts his new role at the end without hesitation or second thought, the scene feels incomplete. I believe it should have been a whole ceremony where he actually grasps the intensity of his new responsibilities and realizes that even though he doesn't feel ready, Stoic trusted him already to take the role. And the scene could end with something like Hiccups looking to the sea, thanking his dad for believing in him. That would have been very impactful.
@@lunarkomet tbh. I didn't like the third. I don't remember it much but. Idk a female night fury just seemed cliche and childish. It felt like a episode from the HTTYD TV show, not a movie. Idk tho haven't watched it in like 2 years.
Fun fact, the writers actually did plan on bringing drago back for the third movie to give him a redemption arc which wouldn’t have worked after the second movie but the decided to have a new villain instead which I think is for the best because grimmer is a much better villain than drago. Also I do love how to train your dragon 3 even though I still don’t like shrekilly ever after.
@@curtiswhyte3297 Spielberg. He didn't call for a new villain though. He 'advised' Deblois to write Drago off. Grimmel was already in the story too at this stage.
Also, regarding the second movie itself, Drago was initially not even in the movie. The villain would have been Valka, who was originally something of a dragon-rights extremist who believed that dragons should be free from humans, and attempts to “liberate” these dragons with the help of the Alpha. She would have undergone a redemption arc and reunited with her family. The second movie would have foreshadowed a coming invasion from Drago Bludvist, but he would have only showed up in the third film. The writers ultimately felt that proto-Valka was too unlikable to redeem, so they decided to scrap the whole thing entirely. I feel like this explains quite a few of this movie’s flaws. Why Valka doesn’t really have much of a narrative purpose and why Drago seems so underdeveloped as an antagonist. They were originally supposed to get one movie each to themselves, but the two plots ended up being squished together into one film.
11:06 counterpoint: the battle where Stoick dies comes right after he had reunited with Valka and Hiccup's family was whole again, but it only lasted a moment before it was taken away from him. This time for good.
Also I felt shell shocked by Stoick's death the surprise of the moment made it more heartbreaking you thought Hiccup was about to save the day and have a proper family but it will never happen
Ok. Drago is actually a better villain than you think, especially in terms of how he "controls" the dragons. He mimics the Bewilderbeast's alpha call and even appearance. He also waves his staff in a way that mimics the lower tones of the Bewilderbeast's alpha frequency. Also, yelling at the dragons in order to "control" them is a concept that was originally created in the HTTYD Book where it's stated that the only way to "train dragons" was to scream very loudly at them. His ideals of controlling the dragons through an "alpha" perfectly counter what would become Hiccup's ideals of protecting dragons through an "alpha," especially in the third movie. The Grimmel comes in and SHOWS HIM why that logic does not work.
I am convinced Drago has PTSD from flat out seeing his village die and having his arm ripped off by a dragon. Let's not forget this happened when he was just a child. I mean think about it. He's basically Hiccup if his life was indeed truly hell with no place to call home, no roof over his head, nobody to raise and guide him about what is right and wrong, if his village suffered the full brutality and worst things dragons are capable off and if he was never given a chance or sign to see the good in dragons. He's Hiccup if he became bitter. As Stoick's negative reaction to finding out he befriended Toothless in the first film possibly was he was fearing Hiccup may go down the same path Drago took. He was clearly forced to grow up fast and fight just so he could survive. Also he must have started out with good intentions but probably got drunk on power, or maybe it's not just dragons who have hurt him but people have hurt him too so he wants to control both people and dragons so he won't have to fear being hurt by them ever again..... Drago deserves better then what is said about him in this video......
drago also controls the bewilderbeast like an elephant trainer would. his staff is like an elephant hook and the chains on his bewilderbeast and scars show that he probably tortured it into obeying from a very young age. probably from birth, taking info from race the the edge. it's 2 years of like mustve been hell, so it was nice tk see the guy safe and comfortable in the hidden world
"You're as beautiful as the day I lost you"
still sticks with me after years
She also apparently lost a lot of weight considering that in the first movie Stoic gives Hiccup a helmet made out of "half of his moms breastplate" that was bigger than his head.
Blobbert Mcblob Breast plates didn’t just cover the breasts, they covered the entire chest and stomach. So I doubt that she’s lost a lot of weight.
I forgot that- until you mentioned it - -
That's actually a meme, how would do you actually forget that? (Unless that you don't see memes)
@@cthonisprincess4011 Yes, but Stoic specifically says his helmet and the one he gave Hiccup was a "matching set", which was meant to imply that it was basically her bra lol.
My issue with the movie: *trailers*
Literally every HTTYD movie RUINS any and all twists in their trailers. Rewatch the 2nd movies trailer and it tells you everything that happens.
The mother reveal loses so much weight by telling us about it in the trailers
Mac Kirkman it’s like what disney did with treasure planet to make it do poorly in the box office
And that's exactly why I stopped watching trailers (of anything; movies, games, etc.) years ago
Same happened with Megamind
It spoiled Metro Man was still alive
I agree that should've been kept strictly as movie revelation. Walking into the movie knowing that was coming took away some of its dramatic weight. I also agree with how the the underlining comedic elements of Stoick giving Hiccup a memento of his mother in the first film was also problematic because each time I watched that scene, I found it more funny than heartfelt.
I only saw a couple of trailers and i was never spoiled about it. I love the second and it's the strongest movie
In DreamWorks, the protagonist meets his long lost father
Disney: kill them all
???????
Familia Flores Marroquin this is a dreamworks movie bro wtf you talkin bout
Familia Flores Marroquin father?
Dreamsworks: So here is the characters' parents and their backstory-
Disney: Someone said PARENTS? *pulls out gun*
T H A T W A S H I S M I S T A K E .
well, it's established that Drago "kills without reason", and he didn't kill Hiccup when he had a reason, so that's dedication to character.
Based
@@NotRay1995 eh
Hiccup got his attention, he was infatuated by him and that was his deathly flaw.
He found someone that not only was his opposite, but a real enemy that even though was kinda naive and hasn't much resources was a real treat to him.
It's now a character writing flaw, it was his flaw that lead to his death.
yeah you are most certainly right but the real problem is that it doesn’t make him seem all that threatening. 🤔
Everytime he talks about Drago im always expecting him to do something with his shouting/screaming
It’s not a schaffrillas video without a “THAT WAS HIS MISTAKE”
or without mentioning shrek in some way.
Or without tamatoa fanboyism
Or a skill share ad.
Slappuku his mistake was that
Slappuku honestly schaffrilas is making me like the villain from big hero 6 a bit more
The evolution of “That was his mistake” is glorious.
I agree... 😄😄
It is a bit of a mistake, tho, that he "blames Toothless for what happened" ( 12:00 )
Not being the peacemaker he thot he was? okay, but in the 1st two movies he never saw himself as responsible 4 anything that goes wrong until part 3. He never blames himself for losing Tooth to Drago & never admits he had the wrong approach, he & the movie itself is like "Drago bad. Dragons good. Hiccup right.", & I like Hic & all but... he doesn't regret. That is 1 thing I will giv Brave is that it's not just the 'hero' learning a new truth, they confess to their flaws. Hic says "they made you do it" instead of "I let them take you".
And it's gr8 that he embraces his responsibilities by the end of the movie sense he's trying to avoid/prevent/outrun them at the start, but he doesn't blame himself for Tooth makes me notice even mor that he tends to want to take no responsibilities he thinks aren't "his thing", or not admit his approach could be flawed. (Not wrong but flawed).
It's kinda why I enjoyed the end of Hidden World b'coz he has to get over his ego & feelings to do what is best for both humans & dragons.
He needed to compromise. He could provide dragons w/ their unique needs & let his story "change the world 4ever" instead of asserting a positive change. In my opinion, dragons & humans fighting is an endless cycle b'coz both are going to be fighting to survive & fear each other.
Hic learns dragons aren't pets/domesticated, but wild creatures w/ wild animal needs, & not all ppl/cultures want to be shoehorned into *his idea* of a peaceful life, so it was a win win: Dragons could be safe, ppl couldn't/wouldn't hurt them, & ppl wouldn't hav to be hurt by them.
that was his steak!
@@totallynottakingthepiss490 not anymore
That is the true franchise
When Fat Thor finally meets up with that was his mistake: Finally a worthy opponent out battle will be Legendary!
Still waiting on “why the LEGO movie is a cinematic masterpiece”
because EVERYTHING IS AWESOME
~ roll credits~
Didn't the Lego Movie rip off the Matrix?
Cole Krumrey don’t think you did. get better at reading comprehension.
Yes
Why LEGO Movie 2 is an underrated gem
I think httyd2 has more of an impact if you've watched the Netflix show as well because you see more development of the side characters in it and you also see more development between stoick and hiccup making his death even more sad
httyd race to the edge was definitely a good and enjoyable show to watch
@@spartanking1405 I watched it on a whim because it was on Nerflix and HOLY SHot, best decision ever because the HTTYD series, to the book, shows, movies, and comics are my special interest now.
Don't forget the two other shows as well, even though their animation is pretty bad, they contributed a lot in two seasons
It's exactly like order 66 in revenge of the sith were It's more impactful if you watched clone wars
yeah also his other dragon and the sadness skull crusher must be going through
“That was belonging to a person of the male gender’s previously mentioned action that is misguided” ok that was the best version of that running joke ever
timestamp?
I think 1:25 is absolutely the best
ImmaPopo pecking order
@@chroinglepersonal I like you
Timestamp please?
in DreamWorks, you find your parents.
in Disney, you find your parent's grave
BIG DIFFERENCE
Katzenberg definitely despised Disney.
it's because walt disney himself was an orphan, it was justified in the first movies, but they do it in 70 percent of all of their movies, locking away creativity for new storylines or characters, why can't we have for once two parents alive disney, it's so boring and lame and it stopped being sad a long time ago
@santiago carrer is it still done that often, tho? There's a fair amount of main characters with both parents (Zootopia, Moana, Tangled, Finding Dory, Inside Out) Sometimes there's only one parent, but actual orphans seem pretty rare now.
And in Illumination, you get adopted.
You know what line would have made the death of his father impactful.
"I did this."
You know you remember that line from the first film.
Yeah you’re totally right. Three little words and this movie could have been so much more emotionally impactful
@@echomoon4693 The use of repeated phrases in the first movie was such a simple trick, but it made it a movie with huge writing complexities. Paying attention to the intentional words someone said would say made the scenes connect without any visual cues at all.
Bruh. I got goosebumps.
That would have been SO MUCH BETTER.
Also it wouldn’t have taken much because hiccup said that in the first movie I think when either when he found toothless or realised that he was the reason he couldn’t fly
Honestly if Hiccup had said aloud "I did this" after Stoic died, that would've satisfied the need for his self-regret AND called back to the first film really well
I agree and nice pfp
ironic
Whoa, for once he didn’t call a movie painfully average.
I think he said he was gonna stop doing that, I forget why though.
PaperTiger i think he calls it “a movie that exist” now
PaperTiger when did he say that?
@@sebastianrivera3527 "Painfully average" and "a movie that exists" are very different descriptions
Heh
Hiccup blames Toothless for the death of his father. Little does he know...
That was his mistake
*y o u .*
More like that was his steak XD
The perfect comment doesn't exist Vertic:
Gobber: “When you are faced with the option of choosing a sword or a shield, take the shield.”
*Father sacrifices himself because Hiccup was defenseless*
Hiccup: “oops. Maybe big fire sword was not best idea for a pacifist... (But it does make me look cool.)
THAT WAS HIS S T E A K
toothless: can't control himself
hiccup: THAT WAS HIS MISTAKE
THAT WAS HIS STEAK
That was his MISCALCULATION
THAT WAS HIS STUDID CHOICE!
THAT WAS HIS OOPSIE
THAT WAS HIS MISJUDGEMENT
personally one thing i would've liked to see in this movie was a bonding scene between stoick and toothless. the two never really interact at any point after stoick changes his view on dragons, and in the second film all we really get is them being in the same room without directly acknowledging each other. having a scene where the two directly interact before toothless kills stoick would've not only added another level of emotion to the scene, but it also would make toothless feel more like a character outside of his relationship to hiccup imo
They actually interacted more in the series
@@annivilen but a film must be able to stand on its own feet. It`s like saying you gotta watch clone wars to understand revenge of the sith. You dont have to, but it is fun and knowledgeable. however, the impact that revenge of the sith presents is great on its own, and even better with clone wars.
@@mars4105THANK YOU
@@mars4105But series helps tp flesh out elements not present in the story like Clone Wars for example fleshes out the factors in the prequels
"We never actually meet shrek's parents"
Shows a picture of shrek's parents from the musical.
That’s part of the joke, Because Shrek the Musical is a joke
@@andyblanton6570 SHREK THE MUSICAL IS NOT CANON
@@andyblanton6570 SHREK THE MUSICAL IS CANON!
WAIT!!! NOOO DAMNIT!!!
Darth Vader *Darth Vader you little galactic crybaby, it’s not canon*
Oof TvT really ruined it, nice
"Scar on his neck"
That's a chin, Schaffrillas.
Cmon man
Can't believe he made that mistake. He has lost a sub.
Jk.
Thomas Modrich that was his mistake
That was his miscalculation
Insert big hero 6 clip here
He thought that hiccup was a joestar
Valka’s purpose in the movie is how she represents half of Hiccup. In the second movie, Hiccup’s parents represent the two halves of Hiccup: the chief and the dragon rider. At the beginning of the movie, Hiccup is being pulled in two different directions. His dad wants him to be the chief, but he wants to explore and map out the world. Hiccup, at the beginning of the movie, doesn’t know who he is, he thinks that he can’t be the chief. When he meets his mom, he he meets the half of himself that he thinks is his whole: the Dragon tamer side, Valka even tells him “this is who you are, who we are.” Then, when Hiccup’s parents reunite, it represents how Hiccup’s two halves have come together. Valka reinforces this at Stoick’s funeral when she says that Hiccup has “the heart of a chief and the soul of a dragon”. Hiccup is both of his parents, he is a chief and a dragon tamer, and this is what the movie is about, Hiccup learning who he is, and him and Toothless becoming leaders of their respective races.
So far I've only gotten to his dislike for the flashback of valka being taken and he gives an example of someone who does it and I quote "it sets him (Alex's father) as a character in this movie." I actually prefer the light twist not setting her up makes and makes it a surprise which in story telling isn't a bad thing as some people like making it
yeah its like astrid told him what he's searching for is inside himself shes always his voice of reason its cuz of her encouragement that he found his mother
Bro your gonna make me cry 🥺
@@isdrakon9802 it makes me wonder if a third film was needed cuz they both became leaders
@zoorockf1 No one in this thread is really acting like a spoiled child, we’re just stating our opinions which we’re entitled to, and giving our own interpretations of the movie. Also, the second movie answered many questions to the overarching story: What happened to Hiccup’s mom? How will Hiccup become chief? How do people outside of Berk coexist with dragons? What is the dragon hierarchy? Are there other dragon riders/tamers? All of this is answered in the second movie. Also, the third movie just lacks the strong character moments that the first and especially second movies excel at. In the second movie, most of the major characters have arcs, Hiccup becomes the chief and learns who he is, Valka opens up to people and realizes that some people can change, Astrid supports Hiccup and teaches Eret the loyalty of dragons, and Eret learns to appreciate dragons. In the third movie, Eret and Valka basically do nothing, and they don’t have as much of their interesting personalities from the second movie. Also, a big part of the third movie is the plot with Toothless and the Light Fury, but the Light Fury has no personality and only exists as a reason for Toothless to leave Hiccup
The reason for the breastplate is probably due to the books. In the books hiccup's mother was a warrior with great skill, and since vikings in the books had tamed their own dragons from the start of book 1 the fact that she was close to a dragon was less part of her character. She was more of an estranged mother, and hiccup was more of an oddity in the books
They probably hadn't decided what to do with her character, so they stuck to how she was seen in the books
Schaffrillas Productions: *makes this video*
HTTYD fans: Peace was never an option
@Mustiboi Salman hell yes I really recommend the sequels. Some people find them underwhelming but I found them extremely entertaining and emotional. The villains are amazing too in my opinion.
I hate it that the HTTYD2 fans are treated like a bunch of opinion disrespecters yet the people that complain about the movie are treated like overhated victims.
I loved the first one and the second one I think that the third is the weakest it is still amazing but it is weak
@Mustiboi Salman KFP 2 > KFP
@Mustiboi Salman imo first and third HTTYD are the best of Dreamworks, followed by Prince of Epypt, Spirit and KFP2. Shrek 2 comes right after those.
The breastplate thing was probably based on Hiccup's mom in the book (who's a big burly warrior woman), but then Dreamworks changed a lot of ideas from the books in the film series at some point. Just my take.
That scene definitely gives the impression that she's big, so I was surprised to see how skinny Valca was when the sequel came around. But I still like the idea that she was offered to become a warrior woman and rejected it
valhallarama would have been awesome in movie form. i've read all of the books and valka was a huge disappointment when i first saw the movie.
aren't the feminists asking for big, strong, independent women in films and other media? valhallarama basically spent all of her time out fighting without help. she was designed to be a viking badass, and she could have been that while also being sympathetic towards the dragons, but only big scary dad stoick and big scary bad guy get to be absolute chunks.
@@lettucehouse300 Honestly, it's almost better to think of the HTTYD movies and the HTTYD books as pretty much separate things, despite everything. But I agree, the fact that they decided to make Valhallarama into Valka instead, and that they redesigned her to be less intimidating-looking, sticks out a lot. The big burly Valhallarama has a lot more in common with Stoick, her equally big and burly husband, than the character Valka has. But I try to think of the books and movies as separate, since they're so vastly different. 🤷♀️
My take was that she was pretty big when she disappeared but got skinnier over time maybe because of age maybe because getting food was harder, people often change it's not this weird and i don't why why people act like everyone looks exactly the same for their whole life, you can lose weight you can lose muscles.
And yes boobs gets smaller too when you lose weight actually they're first to go.
@@papkinn For sure, that's a good enough explanation if she wasn't also skinny in the flashback where Hiccup's a wee baby that they included in the second movie. But I agree, overthinking stuff like weight gain and weight loss in a fictional character can be kind of dumb, since it's not impossible irl for a person's appearance to change - plus, the writers clearly did not put as much thought into it as we are doing right now. :)
“You kill without reason! Why aren’t you killing him if you have a viable reason?!” Because the law states that if you kill without reason you can’t kill if you have a reason.
Totally agree, the chaos compels him to wait until he no longer has a reason before he can attempt to kill the boy again.
@@Shalakor You do realise hes joking? And if you are being sarcastic dont attack me, its hard to tell sarcasm over text
*No no. he’s got a point*
One thing you got to love about the 2nd movie is how Stoick views Hiccup. From seeing his own son as the pariah of the village in the first to being heads over heels of how great a chief he’ll be in the second was just so heartwarming and wholesome. The whole family dynamic in HTTYD2 specifically is one of the highlights of the trilogy for me.
Can we just talk about the fact that the father's death is NEVER. MENTIONED. AGAIN after movie 2? It's never touched upon as a way for toothless and hiccup to grow closer to deal with that trauma, we never see Toothless deal with the guilt of MURDERING someone. Nah just give him a girlfriend and be cute in movie 3. Ugh. I like HTTYD but that's always bothered me.
That's definitely the fault of 3, though.
Um but it is in The Hidden World. And in the 2nd film itself
@@megashark1013 yeah that's called rushed storytelling and I think 3 is the weakest of the three for sure. I mean they're all good but if I were to have them go in order from best to worst it would be 1...2...3 lol
They touch upon it in the newest holiday special, HTTYD: Homecoming
How long is the timeskip between 2 and 3? Cause if it’s months, then yeah it’s rushed. But IF it’s over 2 years I feel like it would be unnecessary.
"We live in an age of hyperbole where every movie has to be perfect..."
* Shows Killer Bean *
Ah, I see you're a man of culture as well
I need a timestamp so I can repeat that over and over again
let me put this in a language you can understand. 23:30
Hiccup should’ve said “I did this” during stoicks funeral, alluding to what stoick said about hiccup after thinking he died
Jake Ferus dang, that would’ve broken my heart even more
I was JUST about to say that! You beat me to it lol
Hiccup also said it after he found the wounded Toothless in the first one
I mean, technically he didn't do it, so the line wouldn't make sense. When stoick found hiccup unconscious, He said "I did this" Because he is technically the cause of the red death coming out of his cave. hiccup Paid for stoick's mistake. while in the second movie, hiccup isn't the cause of his dad's death. Stoick sacrificed himself so that his son wouldn't have to die. the line wouldn't make sense at all and would probably end up confusing the audience.
AND to what Hiccup says when he sees Toothless tied up at the beginning of the first movie.
I'm just disappointed that in the italian translation we've lost this and the two lines are different :\
11:30 I disagree with the "its just a low point" Stoics death puts hiccup in a position that changes his lookout on being chief. He realizes in this seen that a chief "protects his own" as stoic protected hiccup. And I feel like it was a good choice because him and hiccups mom just met then he died its a bit influenced by the scene of them dancing and singing.
Did you know they were originally gonna kill Gobber off but changed it to Stoick? Yeah if they actually went with killing Gobber off his death would have had like no impact whatsoever since Stoick would still be alive and Hiccup wouldn't learn a thing about taking responsibility as a leader.
"The people are not the slaves of the people, the King is the Slave of the people"
@@robonaught Thank God for Guillermo del Toro (he was the one to suggest it). Fantasy movies would be so much less interesting without him, someone who understands monsters and the importance of dark elements in children's tales.
@@robonaught Gobber was the main person who gave Stoick advice in the first movie wdym no impact?!
I'd argue that Valka wasn't even concieved during the writing of the first movie. It was a father/son type of deal.
But what really ticked me off was Valka was revealed in the trailer! That's like showing the scene where Darth Vader reveals he's Luke's father in the trailer to Empire
But we already knew Vader was Anakin Skywalker it was in episode 3?
@@tarnyowl6068 yeah but empire strikes back came way before revenge of the Sith, the actual film. With made before so back then people had no idea that Vader was Luke's father
Actually she was gonna be the villain originally. When looking at her first scenes, i still feel that, first time watching, i was shure she was gonna be the villain
Valka was written to be in the first movie but was cut early on so she wouldn't get in the way of the father/son relationship.
Scott Karrasch I think because Valka was originally meant to be the villain of the movie, they kinda messed up her character a bit, especially because I believe it was a last minute decision to make her good. The movie kinda suffered bc of her character and I find it hard to sympathise with her reasons but I think but what we did get I think was brilliant and for me it’s still my favourite outta the trilogy
Also it did really annoy me that she was shown in the trailer :// it would’ve been way more impactful if they’d kept her character a secret. If they wanted to show her in the trailer it would’ve been fine, but they could’ve kept who she was a secret
"HAHA
Hiccup is holding his mom's BOOOOB container!"
- Schafrillas Productions, 2020
That was his mistake
“HA!”
That first "THAT WAS HIS MISTAKE" absolutely killed me, I was expecting it, but the editing style caught me off guard.
At this point that's a running joke on this channel
I'm two years late, but in response to why the audience (including me) liked this movie so much, it's because of the world building. The first movie was awesome but so relatively limited in the scope of the world. This movie gave us more dragons, the idea that other people actually exist in the world, and bonding between the characters we already love. I fully realize and accept that this film is not as strong as the others in the trilogy, but it is just so much fun, and it's so freaking cool.
I'm late. But you really need to watch Race To the Edge. It fixes the side characters and actually gives them character arcs. Snotlout suffers an inferiority complex. Yes really. And the twins, my least favorite aspect of the movies, became some of my favorite characters in the show. Also, it fixes Drago. Think about this. In Race To the Edge, there are 4 main villains. THREE of them got redemption arcs. That is why Hiccup is so convinced Drago can be saved. Drago is a stepping stone in Hiccup's arc.
Ya, he's not going to see this. I need to show up earlier on the next dragon video.
Drago was supposed to have a redemption arc in the 3rd film but nope they scrapped it....😓
Also why is Drago deemed as an irredeemable lost cause because he wants to take over Berk with dragons, brainwashed Toothless, killed a few chiefs and Stoick? Alvin wanted to use dragons for the same reason, Viggo tried to starve Berk and even used biological warfare by trying to cause an outbreak the deadly Scourge Of Odin disease, Dagur flat out sacked Heather's village and killed her adopted parents before the whole twist that they're siblings.
Why do they get to be redeemed and forgiven for their crimes yet Drago is somehow different so he doesn't deserve a chance?
thers only four? Including the first two series i count at least 5 (6 if including Ryker)
@@lucyandecember2843 I counted Daggur, Viggo, Krogan, and Yohan (spelling is bad). Ryker is a glorified henchmen.
I mean a lot of them weren't really Hiccups doing tho. All three of them made changes on thier own acord, not so much by Hiccups direct actions. Theres also multiple villains that don't get redeemed at all.
The naivety of Hiccup is kinda confusing consdiering there was a whole twist villain situation that happned (Im trying not to spoil who it is lol). That guy never got redeemed and Hiccup never really tried to change his mind either.
He is also rightfully suspicious of all three of the ones that get redeemed in the show and its not until they save his life that he starts to believe they've changed.
Idk, i get your point but i truly feel like he has regressesd a lot in the second movie compared to the end of rtte.
@@lucyandecember2843 That's really fair. That's technically the fault of Race to the Edge for making him actually intelligent.
Big hero 6 won over this
THAT WAS HIS MISTAKE.
I remember really wanting this to win Best Animated Feature that year. It's the second best animated film I saw that year, first being The LEGO Movie, which got snubbed.
The same thing I said when Toy Story 4 won over Klaus
BH6 is better
Megamind should have won the Oscar instead of Toy Story 3 (even tho I really like TS3)
Baymax: (°_°)
"How come these movies dont teach me literally how to train my dragon?"
The first movie is all about that, the second movie shows how to train your dragon to overpower and become the alpha, and the third shows how NOT to train your dragon via the disgusting use via the villain.
Literally the See You Tomorrow montage is training dragons
Well the second film shows you how not to train your dragon with the villian too.
@@bellyjelly0812 True, but that's more of a secondary thought to the plot of how dragons outrank eachother.
Besides, inthe third movie it shows that the ultimate act of caring for your dragon is to know what's best for them, even if to let them go, unlike the villain who ensnares his dragons in servitude for as long as he wishes for his own gain.
Thousandth like
In Race to the Edge it show more themes on how not to treat dragons.
The overall message I see is yes you can train them but the more respect you show them and knowing what best for them will in turn make them show more respect to you.
In movie one when Hiccup finds out that Dragons hate eels. He also got rid of the eel in the best interest of Toothless. Like when he threw away his knife.
The only real issue I have with number 2 is how Stoick's funeral scene was *almost* perfect. It was beautiful, Gobber's speech was heartfelt, the score was on point, and for the first time ever the twins didn't ruin it just by being there. But it also seemed to come and go a bit quickly. The movie gives me just enough time to begin processing this loss before slingshotting me into an energetic scene with silly banter.
I think Grimmel was supposed to be a comparison to what Hiccup could have been. Both of them started in the same position, they were presented with a captured night-fury and could choose to either slay it and accept traditional glory, or spare it and accept the opportunity to change the future. While we all know what happens when Hiccup chooses to spare Toothless, but Grimmel is what would have happened if Hiccup had killed him. Hiccup had insecurities, and would likely have continued hunting night-furies to extinction for praise and status. Oh wait, guess what Grimmel's back story is.
That sounds a lot like Luke's relationship with Starkiller (Vader's apprentice in Legends). Galen Marek is everything Luke could have been if he joined Vader in Empire after he said: "I am your father." Unfortunately, he gets killed a few months before A New Hope.
@@mikeor- He was Vader's apprentice in Force Unleashed. Unfortunately, Starkiller was never canon.
@@viperblitz11 He WAS canon until Disney threw out the extended universe...
@@Spore9996 He wasn't. The only canon events before the Disney purchase were projects Lucas himself had a hand in or approved. Basically the movies and TCW, but not the games, most books, or the Clone Wars miniseries.
@@viperblitz11 I'd like to see your sources for that factoid, please.
For me, nothing will ever top the first flight scene from the first movie.
Yes.
The flight scene at the beginning of this movie is pretty amazing though.
@@cameronmarshall4061 Their both unique and amazing, I don´t think it would be fair to compare
For me, it was stoicks death
The cloud scene of the first movie topped the flight scene of the first movie
Fun fact: Valka was originally planned to be the villain of the story the moment when she discovers that Hiccup was the one who took down Toothless, but they changed her arc and put Drago in out of nowhere, that would explain why he is the must rushed character in the movie
Drago was originally planned to just be mentioned as this approaching threat who would then be the villain of the 3rd movie. His fleet was still going to attack the nest resulting in Valka going paranoid and thinks Hiccup and Stoick are on Drago's side, but Drago wasn't gonna appear physically appear with the fleet. They just brought him in much earlier into the story then they originally intended too and not because they had to quickly come up with a new guy to take the role as villain. Dean DeBlois even admitted that Drago came off as rather flat because of this.
Oh and screw them aborting Drago's redemption in the 3rd movie, denying him any chance of character development and leaving him with no proper conclusion.
Source: trust me bro
@AACMBirdzilla23 I guess that explains the look she gave Hiccup when he told her that he was the one that shot him down.
That’s one of the most overused cliches in animation
plus, they had to ad drago because if they didnt then him being at the end of race to the edge would be absolute useless
To be honest, it.. felt kind of natural? That it doesn't mention Valka, anyway. Not only did Hiccup barely get to know her, it's been a really long time. They've probably supressed it by now, which is a kind of normal way to deal with greif.
Valka's absence early on is kind of the point. She's a cowardly version of Hiccup who cared for dragons but gave up on changing people, and so ran away. She even admits her shame over being absent. Hiccup reflects both his parents strengths: he tries to be caring and understanding like his mother, but also becomes strong, protective, and willing to stop the unredeemable at any lengths necessary after Stoick's death. That was him learning from his mistake and failure. Yeah it was rushed, but it was still there.
Drago is simple, but his desire to rule by domination and fear contrasts Hiccup's desire to rule by care and loyalty.
Also Drago is the result of somebody that has grown up in the absolute worst environment a child can grow up in. He suffered the full brutality and horror dragons can be if they feel like it. They flat out destroyed everything he loved: His village, his family, his tribe, his way of life and culture. How much crap do you expect a child to take before they snap?
He's basically Hiccup if he had an absolute shit life with no roof over his head or any loved ones.
never really thought of Valka as cowardly, makes me wonder how that would have played out if she remained a villain like she was suppsed to be early on.
Well I rate it 10/10 based on the simple fact that it doesn’t have Ice Age Baby in it
Agreed
^^agreed
You got me there
ice age baby meme
funny
I am going to laugh rn
@@bageltoo very funny.
***forceful exhale of vibration and sound from mouth***
If hiccup killed and cooked toothless
*THAT WOULD BE HIS STEAK*
Thing is, he didn’t kill and cook toothless.
A missed opportunity to obtain steak. You could even say...
The steaks were low.
*SEINFELD THEME PLAYS*
insert laughing woody
But if he misses...
THAT WOULD BE HIS MISSED STEAK
thanks man you made my day
"He changed his mind"
"And look were that got him"
That line is one of my favourits for many reasons and a small detail I love about it is that Grimmel is sitting in Stoicks chair. Its now Hiccups since hes become cheif but it once was Stoicks and for Grimmel to have the audacity to say such a thing in his thrown to his son for me just made it so much better.
And it shows how it is truly Hiccup's fault why it happened. Had he just listened to Stoick to not redeem him, none of it would have happened.
He ROASTED him and his dad.
"I get that not every character can be a Zuko, emotionally complex."
SOMEONE NEEDED TO SAY IT! I just did expect it from you 😅
Zuko needs to be retired from that comparison, though. It's getting tired.
@@CreditR01 I would love for someone to upstage Zuko in the character development. I live for the day.
let's face it, every avatar character is emotionally complex
@@atanor9787 sure, but zuko remains superior
@@abook2141 Obvious, but the other bows, like those of Aang, Katara or Sokka, are not far behind. I think it is one of the few series that develops all its characters
Me: wow that drago guy seems pretty scary
Drago: *moronic yells*
Me: I take it back.
Bruh that scene has me cackling every time
I feel like he would’ve been a lot more menacing if there was a gong or some kind of instrument (maybe made of bones or something for extra edge and menace) that controlled the Lorge Boi. Maybe have the screaming at the end as a kind of desperation sort of thing?
@@elizabethhicks4181 Drago's screaming is likely based on how they controlled dragons in the books. Dragons are implied to be affected by loud noises as shown in the first film where lots of noise can throw off their aim so it can probably affect them in other ways too. Also that stick Drago swings around? It's menacing as it is cuz it's a bullhook. Don't know what that is? It's a tool used to train elephants by hitting and prodding them. Drago controls the Bewilderbeast because it's scared of the bullhook. He's had it beaten ever since it hatched so even though it's massive now and could just dispose of him it doesn't cuz it's mentally broken and afraid of being beaten by the bullhook.
Grimmel: *cold, slimy, intimidating, calculating*
Drago: *AAAAAAAÆ*
That was your mistake
On Hiccup’s mom; we don’t know anything about her because Hiccup doesn’t know anything about her. That’s it. That’s the choice. We are supposed to experience the world with Hiccup, and they didn’t change that when it came to his mother. This is not a negative.
Edit: Astrid IS smart, but she’s also arrogant. That’s why I think she goes after Drago; she feels she can. Drago is a lesson to Hiccup; he has more power than Hiccup could ever have and he uses it to benefit himself alone. This whole movie is about Hiccup, that’s why the other characters don’t HAVE to be fully fleshed out. Seeing Toothless come into his own power at the end of the movie, while he may not have “earned it” throughout the movie, empowers hiccup to really take over his father’s role as leader.
I agree that if the movie only focuses on Hiccup, it makes sense that Valka would not be really talked about in the beginning. However, I don't think that it needed to focus solely on Hiccup, because it never really did. It followed him more than anyone else because he's the main character, but they would take a break from him when they needed to get something across in the first film that couldn't be done when Hiccup was there. In the first film, they did take a break from Hiccup to have a scene just between Stoic and Gobber and explain Stoic's points in a way that Hiccup wouldn't see them. This could have been done again in the second one just briefly, and I think it would have added a lot. Or they could have had Hiccup talking to Stoic like was mentioned in the video, which could keep more of the focus on him and his perspective. So I think you are right in what you're saying, but I don't think the movie had to stick to that, or that there was no way to give Hiccup himself more information.
RTTE's logic kind of fell short on this one. I praise everything about RTTE, as it was all great. The visuals, the story, the character arcs, Viggo, how could you not love it? However it's literally narrated at the end of RTTE that the wing maidens knew someone who knew someone, etc, who knew Valka. They had this contact they trusted well enough with the king of dragons' egg, yet couldn't even introduce them to Hiccup, the one who got the egg to safety?
While it wouldn't really work, as the 2nd movie came out before RTTE, I feel like it would be much more logical for them to be introduced this way, rather than through Hiccup getting kidnapped by accident then finding out it was his mother, and he was surprised by this??
@Mustiboi Salman oof, Astrid was not annoying in the second movie. She was charismatic, fun, and competent. I like her best in httyd 2.
@Mustiboi Salman i guess my question would be what about her did you not like?
This trilogy is really hiccup and toothless's story, the other characters are there to help him and while it would be cool to see the twins and snotlout grow up this story isn't about them
It's actually the most impactfull for hiccup's growth and most important for the continuation of the story
I disagree that Valka is a pointless character. The whole point of the movie is that Hiccup must learn to become the chief of Berk, but he wants to explore dragons. Valka is Hiccups mentor who helps him transition from a naive dragon explorer to a strong chief who is capable of making important decisions but still supports the dragons interests. One of the best lines in the movie is when Valka tells Hiccup, "you have the heart of a chief and the soul of a dragon."
Also, at 22:36, those are Drago's ships, not the Vikings'. The Vikings are at Berk. Drago only came to kill the Alpha. As far as he was concerned, he was just there to kill the Alpha and raid Berk. He didn't care about the dragon riders.
Schaf makes some good points, but, personally, I don't agree with what he is saying
I hope there’s a “that was his mistake!” in this vid
TWHM Count: 2
dull icecream thththth whwhwhwh hihihihi mimimimistastastasta
@@raggabrashbastard Is there a global TWHM count?
technically 3 if you count 24:11
*_THAT WAS HIS _**_-MIS-_**_ STEAK_*
Hiccup: loses mom
Also Hiccup: gets mom back
Also also Hiccup: loses dad
*poor guy*
Homeboi had his entire family for like, an hour. Only an hour. Poor guy can’t catch a break
a soup for a soul i guess
@@farateq hnnnnnng soup
@@farateq i love soup
@@farateq soup > dad
i totally agree, my big issue was always how little impact stoick's death had on the story, and on Hiccup's character. Like the first half of the movie was so good, and then it just... rushed to get to the end. We went from Stoick's death to immediately a happy baby dragon ride?? It felt so disjointed???
Stoick's death DID have impact on the story. Hiccup was all "I'm not ready to be chief" even though by now Hiccup should know somebody needs to lead Berk after Stoick finally kicks the bucket. Stoick dying finally made Hiccup wake up and realise he has to take responsibility as a leader and stop being a push over thinking that everything can be sold by just talking to others. Also Stoick was the chief of Berk if Hiccup hadn't stopped Drago then Drago would have forced Berk with no choice but to accept him as their new leader.
You want a death that has no impact on the story? The original plan was to kill Gobber off. Seriously nothing would have changed if they went with that. Stoick would be still alive and the chief so Hiccup learns nothing and somebody could easily take over Gobber's work in Berk
@zoorockf1 YES
@@robonaught not enough impact, movie shouldn't force the audience to watch it spinoff by any mean
@@robonaught He doesn't learn anything in the end though as he tries to talk it out with the villain of the 3rd movie..
@@omegashenron8Meh, its not really the case of having not learned anything overall but its more of the case of reality making sure Hiccup learn that damn lesson and it will never leave his head again.
After all by the end, he stops this so called messiah complex of his to dave any dragon he finds and place them in Berk despite how much of a logistical nightmare to look after such a place.
I cannot wait for Why How To Train Your Dragon:The Hidden World is a cinematic masterpiece.I like to hear his reviews.
Me too, he’s given a few minor reasons why he likes the film but I need a full video.
Yeah, I'm still waiting for his review
The art alone was masterful
@ScuddyX ScuddyX I mean it's your opinion but I like all the movies a lot
I’d really like to see his opinion on that ending, definitely got my feelings since I have nostalgia for the first one
A bad HTTYD movie is like a bad Avatar: the last airbender episode. They can still be breathtaking, but are outclassed by other parts of their franchieses
Obligatory avatar was the best animated thing I've witnessed in my life
Nostalgia critic?
Then, you’ve probably never seen “The Great Divide.” It’s just so painful to watch
*insert M. Night joke*
Kung Fu Panda 3 also fits that mold. It's the prettiest movie in the franchise, but also easily the weakest in terms of plot.
To me, Valka's reason for never coming back didn't make sense.
The excuses she gave were vague and selfish
@WillFanofMany And EVERYBODY forgave her for it
I think there's some good material with her character, but it doesn't quite connect all the way.
@Mattias Lindell 18ESD Elev Or missed character development
I think it makes sense, because Hiccup almost fled Berk himself in the first movie before Astrid find them in the cove. I wish they had brought that up though.
@@ptitecame6688 Hiccup was going to leave Berk because he was lying to everyone, and if he told the truth they would kill his only friend.
Valka had a new son and a husband who loved her when she left. But instead of coming back she was willing to a) let her son live his life not knowing his mother, b) let Stoick die of old age thinking she was dead, and c) let the Vikings of Berk keep killing dragons.
All three of these could've been at least mentioned in the movie, but they weren't.
To really appreciate the side characters you must watch “race to the edge”. Really brings their characters to light. Especially fish legs and hiccups relationship
I honestly think that WTTYD 2 did a perfect job, and the way they introduced the mother is exactly how hiccup felt it. He never knew her, and then this mysterious character reveal its self to be his mother is beautifully done. We weren't supposed to know anything about his mother, and his father never spoke much about her, so why would we?
But Hiccup didn’t see the trailer for the movie. That’s why I don’t really watch trailers anymore cause they ruin potentially dramatic scenes that require a lack of knowledge for surprise
Ah yes, WTTYD aka Wow To Train Your Dragon.
I hear you, but remeber - we are not Hiccup. If having the flashback in the beginning of the film could've made the film a more dramatically satisfying story FOR US, it would've been worth considering.
@@djjonasc Yes, I agree. Having the scene at the beginning would have at least added some dramatic purpose to her inclusion and not just out of the blue for no reason. I think Schaff explained it pretty well
@Mosi (Musi) Brown i will refer to this franchise as why to train your dragon from now on lol
Idk what you’re talkin’ bout’, I cried when stoic died. They were trying to make the scene powerful by not just having us care about the death of Stoic, but the guilt and sadness of toothless. I mean, it connects our emotional reaction with Toothless’, rather than with Hiccup’s.
You tell him!
If anything, Schaffrillas Productions is the one of weakest ones for making a video about why How to Train Your Dragon 2 is far from one of the best animated sequels!
I know I said this before, but I think that Schaffrillas’s criticisms towards How to Train Your Dragon 2 are just one of his ways for to lose people that used to follow/trust him until they watched his most biased and overpraised videos like this and “Every Disney Renaissance Film Ranked” to make The Little Mermaid sound like the (far) better film than HTTYD2 and The Rescuers Down Under, the original Mulan (DAMMIT, SCHAFF! THE SEQUEL IS A DOWNGRADE, NOT AN UPGRADE!!!!!) and Tarzan to a slightly lesser extent.
Yeah thats true, but the fact they are not aiming for hiccups emotions is kind of weak in itself
I cried for stoic, but that's just cuz I loved him as a character and was like wtf why are you killing him off. It just feels so pointless to me, too much shit happens. The tone is all over the place. I get to see stoic and valka reuniting and lovey dovey stuff and he dies 10 MINUTES AFTER MEETING HER. To me it just feels like "shit's getting boring let's KILL OFF SOMEONE".
@@kieranstark7213 dude clam down he has opinions and honestly I kinda agreed with him
Stoick's death was admittedly very heartbreaking, but it didn't leave the impact it deserved. Like Schaff said, it ultimately felt like an afterthought.
Schaffrillas: **opinion**
My brain as soon as I read the title: *W R O N G*
edit: My brain after watching the video: *O K M A Y B E*
If this isn’t me every fucking time
Same
I still don’t agree with him
No its not as a HARDCORE httyd fan , its just no. You have to be a fan you have to grow with the show. These videos are all wrong most of the times because they are adults they just watch it and move on, the fanbase is 12-20 Now its because when HTTYD1 came 6-12 y.os were watching.
@@thepacific2933 Plenty of people of all ages watched the films as they came out and grew with them, and people who binge all three in one day are equally valid. Gatekeeping isn't.
Alright so hear me out: If Cloudjumper was the alpha instead of the giant white dragon, and they spent a little more time developing the relationship between Toothless and Cloudjumper, this could’ve fixed a bunch of the issues. 1) When Drago’s alpha fights Cloud for dominance, the loss of Cloud for Toothless could mirror the loss of Stoick for Hiccup. Consequently, the dynamic of Toothless becoming the alpha when Hiccup becomes chief feels much more cohesive. 2) Hiccup becoming a chief as toothless becomes alpha feels a lot more like Hiccup taking after both of his parents if he shares the leadership dynamic that Valka had with Cloudjumper.
Also I think Astrid should’ve gone with Hiccup when he met Valka. Astrid and Hiccup both seeing the love between Stoick and Valka could’ve been a great way to set up the marriage conflict in the hidden world.
Regardless I still like this movie, but I think these changes could’ve been cool.
hiccup should have realized it was his fault Stoick died, and said.
"I did this..."
Zeeyad B I think Nathan means by how Stoick keeps telling him that Bloodfist can’t be reasoned with, but he tried anyways and Bloodfist threatened his life with his own partner. In an act as a father protecting his son, Stoick jumped in front of Hiccup to protect him from Toothless, resulting in his death.
I think at first, he would’ve been mad at Toothless (just like what we see) but right after all the dragons disappear, realizes it might’ve really been his own fault since his dad did tell him that Bloodfist couldn’t be reasoned with.
Sorry if my take is a bit wordy,
yikes that would have made me cry
@@LocalAceAJ Not to mention it would be poetic AF because that's what Stoik said when he thought Hiccup died, and what Hiccup had said when he hurt Toothless
The nauseating and cliche guilt plot point I wouldn't care to endure.
19:43 “THAT WAS HIS MISTAKE” Missed opportunity. :p
I saw How To Train Your Dragon 3 in theaters and really liked it, and didn’t realize until recently that others didn’t feel the same
I haven't watched it yet. And i do not plan. I prefer playing with the world and write fanfics. not cliche ones, thou.
Ella Nettling just don’t write anything that had as sad of an ending as HTTYD 3
i love it
@@jefftheevilrobot9351 why people are against sad endings or deaths? Grow up! The whole point of the finale of a franchise is give a closure, kill the protagonist, let the new generations start a new journey!
By god is not wrong to feel sad!!!!
In fact the best movies are the ones with emotional scenes
@@jefftheevilrobot9351 I actually found the ending to be quite bittersweet. Emotional, definitely, but a sad ending would be all the dragons getting killed off, for example. The ending brings about sad emotions in us because it relates to the grief of separation and letting go of people you love, but it's for a well-intentioned reason so I don't consider it a "sad ending." It's for the good of the world. I honestly think it's the perfect ending to the series. Also, the very final scene makes it far less sad than it could have been. We probably all would've emotionally perished if they didn't add that lol
I agree there should have been more stuff done with Stoick's death, he raises good points.
More setup of their relationship beforehand to make the death scene sting more, and some self-blame from Hiccup to make the grieving / funeral scene more emotional (and realistic, to make it even more ouchy) rather than just being sad his dad is gone and nervous about being chief. Like keep those aspects, but maybe tone back the "aa chief scary not for me" in favor of self-blame. Hiccup hurts good, and if you're gonna kill off Stoick for a protagonist low point, you may as well commit.
I think the death scene itself was top notch, in its screenplay, the suddenness, the character's reactions, etc. but Hiccup blaming himself would add a whole 'nother layer of emotional depth to Stoick's death and further impact the lesson Hiccup learns by the end, to protect his own rather than clinging to pacifism against reasonable odds.
I was so expecting Valka to be a badass mom, ass-kicking barbarian warrior, and she kinda sells that at first, walking on wings and standing on dragons in midflight like a druid using magic ...! but when Drago appears she just hands him the alpha, get caught in a fishnet and need her husband to save her from Drago attack. The rest of the movie resets her back to her helpless villager settings. Wow. What a waste.
I can see your point aside from the whole ''She just handed Drago the alpha'' In her defense on that part she had no idea or to assume that Drago had managed bring his own Bewilderbeast to challenge and kill hers to claim the title of alpha because it was underwater towing his ship and out of sight so she thought that it would be guaranteed victory with not only because her Bewilderbeast could just destroy the ships with it's icy breath and step on everything but also because Valka said to Drago that he can't just take all the dragons because the alpha controlled them.
This whole movie would’ve completely changed if that flashback was at the very start lol
It would've seemed more scripted then natural in my opinion
And the introduction of Valka should've been at the start too.
Doesn’t that ruin the whole surprise reveal?
@@milkshakedraws6944 maybe it would if they didn't show valka in the trailer 💁
If you didn’t watch the trailer, I didn’t, you wouldn’t have known.
Personally, I still think it builds up the hype for the movie and was a good decision.
Everybody: “i believe the 3rd one was the weakest, YOUR OPINION IS WRONG”
Me: 1:35 is that the instrumental of the the hit song “Busted” from the phenomenal tv series Phineas and Ferb?
Jilly Jill same.
OMG I was stressing out bc I knew the sound but I couldn't for the life of me remember the song
I still think the 3rd is the weakest by a huge margin
Yep.
Okay but the third movie is the best of the three.
I LIKE that they didn't mention Valka much before her appearance, I can't help meta-ing while watching movies/reading books. If you show me a chekhov's gun I know it's going to get used but the first time I saw HTTYD 2 I was as surprised as much as Hiccup he randomly bumped into his mother in a dragons nest.
Honestly, I thought that the way they introduced Valka was really good. In most films, the first film will have little / no mentions of the protagonist's parents. Then suddenly in a sequel, the protagonist will be constantly thinking about their parents, which is very convenient to the story line. But in httyd, there was (as you said) only one mention of Valka, like the first film, keeping it consistent and also making it unexpected.
Yee, Stoick and Hiccup don't really have the type of relationship that talks about their emotions alot. Them suddenly having a hearthfelt discussion about what happened to Valka would prolly feel out of place.
I feel like the surprise reveal would have been so... much better if they hadn't spoilt the reveal in the trailers - they really should have kept it secret, to make you believe this masked person was Drago on your first watch.
@@AtomixKingg But we already get an idea of what Drago looks like in Stoick's flashback. Even if they didn't spoil Valka in the trailers it would already be obvious the person in the mask is not Drago since even with his back turned we all easily see Drago is this huge hulk of a man with a mane of dreads while the person in the mask is a lot smaller and slimmer. Also no way Drago could hide his huge mane of dreads under a mask like that so the lack of dreads sticking out under the mask would also give away it ain't Drago. If Drago ever even did wear a mask he'd probably have to either cut his dreads or wear a mask that just covers his face. He'd look like a Predator if he did that.
Yea if it started with a flash back it would have felt unoriginal and overused
Oh hey I watched 2 flims of the Httyd and I heard IN the first film Hiccup's Helmet is made out of a single breast armor or something of his mom I guess
Stoic dying really tugged my heart. Stoic reminds me of my own dad, my parents are a little older than most parents. And I always worry about them dying. It just really hurt to see him die.
Welcome to my parents are in their 50' and I'm a teenager (16)
@@breania_inekora5069 I'm 18 but yea they're both above 50
@@breania_inekora5069 a lot of people are lmfao. i’m 14 and my parents are both in their mid 50’s
WTF DO U KNOW?! I have old parents as well and I’m 15 mom is 50, dad is approaching 70
@@ghidoriyah9676 you're just like my friend will. His mom is like 67 and he's 18
7:27 - While I agree, it would have also spoiled the reveal that his mum is alive. Though... the trailers did that anyway
Did you notice that in every How to train your dragon the main characters discovers a new hidden beautiful dragon world ?
The dragon nest in the original movie was NOT beautiful
@@robonaught I mean it was kinda cool, a bit crowded tho lol
It’s funny that you mention the pacing and poor character decisions being why you didn’t like 2 over 3, because I felt like 3’s pacing was all over the place and the character decisions were tragic just to be tragic.
Edit: I think the character bit is really highlighted with Toothless in 3. Toothless was his best in 1, but I thought he was his worst in 3. The movie does express his ‘desires independent of his best friend’, but Toothless feels like he forgets all about Hiccup the second he doesn’t need him. It makes Toothless feel more like a wild animal who was Hiccup’s pet and was fine going wild when the time came.
Which... I guess wouldn’t be a problem if it weren’t that all the creator interviews establish they want the dragons to be more significant than pets. More like companions. Which I think Toothless felt more like here in 2
The Light Fury in 3 is also a great example of an outright Toxic Friend/thot, who hates having Toothless be around anyone but her
@@ralphbeez1411 what? She didn't like humans and it's pretty obvious why
I completely agree. The third one was pretty weak compared to the others. And whilst I liked the ending, I hated how the villain's whole motive was to kill the night furies just because. They should've fleshed him out more and maybe I would've liked the third one better.
Well, I don't blame toothless, he was driven because the light fury, and obviously he was finally free. It doesn't mean he didn't like hiccup.
i understand where you’re coming from, but i think he’s right. or at least i agree with him
I love every single inclusion of “That was his mistake” clip
Tomarz that was your mistake
WELL The Elemental Penguin I love that gag
7:09
i mean, if i may:
I feel like the main idea behind the late reveal of Hiccup's mother was to remove expectation for the movie as a whole.
No expectation means no build up. No build up means that the movie has freedom to introduce new things to viewers in their own pace without rushing the original pace of the movie. It could be argued that adding the flashback scene to the beginning wouldn't have changed anything but i think that would have affected us at the viewer. It would have given us a pre-conceived idea that "in this movie, Hiccup has to meet his mother and this whole movie will be revolved around it", which was almost exactly the case for the 2nd act of the movie.
But it also drives away the main point of the movie, Hiccup. We move our focus away from Hiccup as a character because suddenly we have knowledge of his mother's existence before he does, and that leads to us being ahead of him and looking at his growth in this movie as "delayed". Anyway's that's just my thoughts on that topic.
All this sounds pretty good untill that you remember that hiccup's mother is revealed in the trailers. Although, I like both ways to reveal Valka in the movie.
Exactly this
I feel like people always want their hand to be held all throughout... do they really hate surprises in fiction that much?
@@lunarkomet I see both sides, surprises are fun, but when there is no foreshadowing whatsoever, and no hinting towards it at all or even discussing it, it feels unearned and you're kind of left feeling like there was no reason for it, i think if it comes early enough, and the surprise is important enough to the plot, it can usually work. idk how to explain it, it feels more like a plot device at some point if it's not foreshadowed in some way
Yeah if the reveal of Hiccup's mother was actually a surprise it would be huge. Shame that the trailers spoiled it.
I think it's interesting that Grimmel is considered the antithesis to Hiccup, the person he would have become had he killed Toothless in the first movie. But nobody ever talks about how Drago is the perfect antithesis to Stoick. They virtually have the same backstory as one another, but one chose to move on from his loss and embrace peace with dragons. Drago is what Stoick would have become had he never stopped killing dragons.
12:06 You really lost me here. He's not just sad or mad at Toothless. He's scared, filled with guilt, betrayal & grief. He's not seen talking to anyone during Stoick's ship sequence, because he's feeling less worthy to lead his own people. I don't see how anyone could miss this, especially if one is talking about narrative impact, character animation or the obvious show don't tell, which nearly every essay based YT brings up. It's a masterfully executed sequence from the script & animators part.
To me it seems like you're just looking for reasons to tell a less vague, mysterious character of a film, which is reasonable and very mainstream to reach a wide audience, but that's not the only approach a film can take. Especially in how you made your point about Valka not being introduced in the opening. Had they gone that route the film would have been identical to a bunch of other films that always introduce the mysterious character in the opening, which still would have made for a good film ---- kinda-ish. Personally I found the approach they took to be a breathe of fresh air, while leaving room open for an intimidating sequence, where Hiccup is ambushed by an unknown dragon warrior. Had Valka been introduced earlier, audiences could have easily guessed away that she was the unknown dragon warrior judging from her physical build, Not to mention Cloud-jumper would've given away the reveal once he appeared on screen, whoops! That would've been quite a tame reaction.
I certainly am looking forward to your take on THW.
True
Yeah, but I think audiences still would have known that it was Valka because she was in trailers, as schaff mentions
@@clapah4995 It's a bit sad that a lot of trailers spoil a lot nowadays. However, as for someone who hadn't watched the trailers, I can tell you it was a pleasant surprise
I just don't know how he's going to justify the aweful ending of 3 that the specials after it point out was a bad idea as the absence of dragons just leads to more rest and hatred of them with the next generations, undoing everything from the triology. But hey we gotta follow the books this one exact time for a cool line in the trailers!
NinjaTyler I can’t remember exactly what he said about captain except something like “ITS BEAUTIFUL JUST ACCEPT IT” does it contradict? Yeah, but I fully ugly cry every time, I love that scene and how they cut to the credits with scenes with Forbidden Friendship and previous movies. Sometimes I think it’s ok to end with something purely emotional
“That was belonging to a person of the male gender’s previously mentioned action that is misguided” omg I couldn’t contain my laughter.
schaffrillas: there are no scenes in this movie where our characters just hang out and I don't like that.
also schaffrillas: this movie has a lot of useless scenes of our characters just hanging out and doing nothing productive.
HmMmMmMm
Kim Wong Spoon I think he’s trying to say that when they DO just hang out, it adds little to nothing to development NOR story.
7:21 Coughs in deleted opening scene where Valka destroys Eret's base with her Bewilderbeast and saving every captured dragon that was there.
Why is that not in the movie
One of the rare times where Schaff considers the 3rd part in the trilogy rather than the 2nd , now that's a Subversion .
Nathaniel Foga that stake was his mis
I think this is the only trilogy he thinks that other than Iron Man and Avengers and Raimi’s Spider-Man
“We live in an age where every movie has to be perfect...”
>Shows _Killer Bean Forever_
*You’re goddam right.*
Hell yeah
@Mosi (Musi) Brown
The sad truth.
Its evolving, just backwards.
I don’t agree. I believe 3, while having a good villain, good pacing and a heartbreaking yet satisfying ending, I still consider it to be the weakest one because of the choices it chooses to make. It completely neglects Hiccup and Toothless’ relationship which is the heart and core of this entire franchise. And it gets tossed to the side so Toothless can get with Light Fury. And I get it. The movie is trying to go with the “if you love something, let it go” metaphor. But honestly this happens for the majority of the movie and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth even though I sobbed uncontrollably at the end of 3. I respectfully do not agree with this review. The second one has some of the most powerful, humorous and touching moments of all three. It had no chance of topping one in my mind but it was so much better than I expected. 3 is the weakest one. It’s not a bad movie at all. Just the weakest for me.
I also think 3 is the weakest but it’s an abysmal conclusion IMO
Totally agree, the third movie also has a lot of issues with pacing, the damn jokes of the other vikings kill the mood of the movie.
yeah, i wanted more bro moments in the third
I also agree. 3 was a good send off but the WEAKEST of the the three movies. HTTYD 2 is hands down my favorite of the trilogy.
Sophie Leiton Toomey I think 3 was also the weakest one, but it would’ve been slightly better if the trailers didn’t spoil the ending
Something I wish would have been done or expanded on are the Viking's rituals, more precisely when Hiccups becomes chief. I feel like it was such a huge source of anxiety for him to succeed his father, and the expectations he set on himself were so high, that when he nonchalantly accepts his new role at the end without hesitation or second thought, the scene feels incomplete. I believe it should have been a whole ceremony where he actually grasps the intensity of his new responsibilities and realizes that even though he doesn't feel ready, Stoic trusted him already to take the role. And the scene could end with something like Hiccups looking to the sea, thanking his dad for believing in him. That would have been very impactful.
Seeing "Why How" in the title like that triggered a weird language part in my brain. It gave me like this bizarre confusion I can't describe
Even if its the weakest, its still a fantastic movie
True, indeed
When even the weakest movie is a great movie, that’s amazing
Cursed profile picture
The weakest movie of this trilogy is way better than a looot of other recent movies combined
@@gganbp yes, I can totally agree with that. I felt so touched when they were doing the Viking funeral for Stoick.
The whole trilogy is fantastic tho. Hard to top the first.
Tyler Hackner totally agree
"Worst" does not imply bad... it implies that it's just the worst... people just assume that it implies bad...
That's their mistake
that was belonging to a person of the male genders previously mentioned action that is misguided
*Ahem* That was his mistake!
Iron Collie *Ahem* That mistake was his!
@@gamebawesome *Ahem* His mistake, that was!
Nothing extremely wrong with it, just could have been better.
I feel like that's the case with too many movies
SHOULD have been better.
The same could be said about the third one... times 5
@@lunarkomet tbh. I didn't like the third. I don't remember it much but. Idk a female night fury just seemed cliche and childish. It felt like a episode from the HTTYD TV show, not a movie. Idk tho haven't watched it in like 2 years.
Any Character makes any error at all
Schaffrillas: *THAT WAS HIS STEAK*
“We’ll explore why the third movie is a cinimatic masterpiece at a later date.”
WHEN????
Fun fact, the writers actually did plan on bringing drago back for the third movie to give him a redemption arc which wouldn’t have worked after the second movie but the decided to have a new villain instead which I think is for the best because grimmer is a much better villain than drago. Also I do love how to train your dragon 3 even though I still don’t like shrekilly ever after.
@@curtiswhyte3297 Spielberg. He didn't call for a new villain though. He 'advised' Deblois to write Drago off. Grimmel was already in the story too at this stage.
A good choice tbh. Villain redemptions are overdone, especially since Steven Universe took them way too far recently.
Henry Smith
I like drago more and it sucks he wasn’t redeemed.
Bay Angelo
Wrong
Also, regarding the second movie itself, Drago was initially not even in the movie. The villain would have been Valka, who was originally something of a dragon-rights extremist who believed that dragons should be free from humans, and attempts to “liberate” these dragons with the help of the Alpha. She would have undergone a redemption arc and reunited with her family.
The second movie would have foreshadowed a coming invasion from Drago Bludvist, but he would have only showed up in the third film.
The writers ultimately felt that proto-Valka was too unlikable to redeem, so they decided to scrap the whole thing entirely. I feel like this explains quite a few of this movie’s flaws. Why Valka doesn’t really have much of a narrative purpose and why Drago seems so underdeveloped as an antagonist. They were originally supposed to get one movie each to themselves, but the two plots ended up being squished together into one film.
Guys let's be true right here, we all cry when his parents sing
I don't, but I had a good feeling
Me and my dad watched how to train your Dragon 2 on father's day. Couldn't of been planed worse.
11:06 counterpoint: the battle where Stoick dies comes right after he had reunited with Valka and Hiccup's family was whole again, but it only lasted a moment before it was taken away from him. This time for good.
Also I felt shell shocked by Stoick's death the surprise of the moment made it more heartbreaking you thought Hiccup was about to save the day and have a proper family but it will never happen
When are you gonna make a movie on the greatest animated movie of all time: Rango
Rango is pretty fucking the absolute best.
he don’t want to tango with the rango
It bothers me that none of my family seems to like it.
@@isaywhateveriwantandyougot7421 that's not good enough it needs its own 24 year long video about how it's the best movie ever made
Ryebread the White It is covered in the video Every Best Animated Feature Winner Ranked
"I miss my wife, Gobber. I miss her a lot. I'll be back"
"I've got to make an announcement. The Alpha Dragon pissed on my wife"
"i know who your Mother is"
Fran's Room “ I have 70 alternate accounts”
Put the Piss Stone down, you know what they do to your (~~)!
I’m disappointed in how long it took me to realize he was setting up for the skillshare add at the end.
Really? Im pretty sure he was making it obvious on purpose
@@fangerzstanky hence why Jay Holland is disappointed in himself.
Nah, totally justified. That transition should have lead into mentioning the TV series instead, and then do another transition into the ad.
Ok. Drago is actually a better villain than you think, especially in terms of how he "controls" the dragons.
He mimics the Bewilderbeast's alpha call and even appearance.
He also waves his staff in a way that mimics the lower tones of the Bewilderbeast's alpha frequency.
Also, yelling at the dragons in order to "control" them is a concept that was originally created in the HTTYD Book where it's stated that the only way to "train dragons" was to scream very loudly at them.
His ideals of controlling the dragons through an "alpha" perfectly counter what would become Hiccup's ideals of protecting dragons through an "alpha," especially in the third movie. The Grimmel comes in and SHOWS HIM why that logic does not work.
I am convinced Drago has PTSD from flat out seeing his village die and having his arm ripped off by a dragon. Let's not forget this happened when he was just a child.
I mean think about it. He's basically Hiccup if his life was indeed truly hell with no place to call home, no roof over his head, nobody to raise and guide him about what is right and wrong, if his village suffered the full brutality and worst things dragons are capable off and if he was never given a chance or sign to see the good in dragons. He's Hiccup if he became bitter. As Stoick's negative reaction to finding out he befriended Toothless in the first film possibly was he was fearing Hiccup may go down the same path Drago took.
He was clearly forced to grow up fast and fight just so he could survive.
Also he must have started out with good intentions but probably got drunk on power, or maybe it's not just dragons who have hurt him but people have hurt him too so he wants to control both people and dragons so he won't have to fear being hurt by them ever again.....
Drago deserves better then what is said about him in this video......
drago also controls the bewilderbeast like an elephant trainer would. his staff is like an elephant hook and the chains on his bewilderbeast
and scars show that he probably tortured it into obeying from a very young age. probably from birth, taking info from race the the edge.
it's 2 years of like mustve been hell, so it was nice tk see the guy safe and comfortable in the hidden world
What wat
@@robonaughtAfter directly causing Stoick's murder he doesn't deserve anything better.