Even though there are many things that make me uncomfortable, this is still a very good animation film. I also scored four stars, and many places are remarkable.
*Due to the unfavorable box office in the first weekend of the film, DreamWorks stock has fallen a lot. Although I am not a person who believes in the quality of box office reflections, it can also explain the problem of this film in a sense. It's another summer vacation, and it's catching up with such a good weekend family market on Father's Day Sunday, and the fare advantage of IMAX and 3D. It is still no match for the box office of the R-rated comedy "22 Jump Street". The prospects are worrying... ...
I watched the first "How to Train Your Dragon" when I was in the high school entrance examination. Now that the times have changed, I feel a little nostalgic for my childhood. "How to Train Your Dragon 1" has a very special place in my heart. I went to the theater to watch it more than 5 times, and I was moved by all kinds of emotions, but it may be because the greater my expectations, the greater the disappointment.
Let me talk about the excellent part that does not involve spoilers.
-The use of light and shadow is extremely good
-can be said to be the best 3D effect in the industry. After "Avatar", there is very little real 3D, but the 3D technology of DreamWorks and Intel's cooperation is really not covered. It greatly enriches the viewing experience, the use of depth of field makes the scene much larger, and makes the relationship between the characters more intuitive. The scene of the war was enhanced by the use of 3D; the other very sentimental scene also made the space more magnificent because of the use of depth of field, thus enhancing the rendering of the protagonist’s feelings. These are very peculiar feelings. Let 3D become a member of the narrative technique. It is irreplaceable to watch in front of a computer screen. You can only go to the theater to experience it. If you watch 2D just because of the price difference, it means that you have missed a big plus point
-unique and self-contained music
-many flying shots and enjoy it
-the expansion of the Viking territory and various new scenes. The concept map at the end of the caption gives a glimpse of how much effort the entire team put in. The same is ice, with a texture different from Frozen
-There are a lot of surprises with various newly designed dragons. One of the shots of the Flurry of Dragons may take several months, and the producers must have spent a lot of thought (and rendering time).
-The addition of the role of Cate Blanchett is very fresh. Seeing her and Hiccup, the Stoic family kissed her heart, and there was a romantic song and dance.
-The coordination of foreground and background. There was a scene of hiccups chatting with Astrid, and their dragons ran back and forth playing like puppies. There are many examples of this in this film, but the background scene is sometimes more eye-catching than the foreground. Generally, an animated film only pays attention to the foreground and things in the focus, but DreamWorks has put more effort into the background to prove that it still pays great attention to details.
-The toothless boy is shamelessly selling cute (selling cute more frequently than the minions in "Despicable Me 2". A girl next to me was moaning an hour before listening to her because her cuteness was too low. Couples When watching movies, please trouble the men to take
care of your sister's paper. It is understandable that the cuteness is low, but the exaggerated moaning can not be tolerated) -Ruffnutt falls into the weird nympho mode, and the audience laughs once when she plays.
-Human and beast base sentiment upgrade. Those who suspect that the hero and his elk in "Frozen" will never be disappointed in this film. I can't see it in some places.
The second part may be for the benefit of viewers who have already watched the previous work, but it makes the overall narrative much scribbled. The narrative in the first part is actually very comfortable. First, slowly cut into the beautiful music, the narration introduces the new world, cleanly cuts into the invasion of the dragons, and the hiccup accidentally hurts the toothless boy and so on. Very efficient, until the end of the attack and the hiccups, the line "I just want to be like you", the characters and world settings are introduced, and the characters' personalities are also initially portrayed (the conflict between humans and dragons, the embarrassment of hiccups, The villagers didn't wait to see him, their secret love for the heroine, proof of their desires, and the relationship with their father...) So many things and elements were all explained in a short time at the beginning, and they all echoed in the back, which was perfect.
The sequel movie is difficult to do better, because the audience's familiarity with the characters and the world is both an advantage and a curse. "Despicable Me 2" is an example. Laughter makes you laugh, and cuteness will reach you too, but that's it. This film unfortunately gave me a similar feeling.
The first hour is all kinds of chaos. It can’t be said to be chaotic, too much jokes make me feel very superficial. The narrative is not as clean as the first one, and there is no sense of rhythm. It can only be said that it is a step-by-step process. The two separated lines dragged away at once, not as sharp as the first one, and the purpose was more clear.
This is nothing, the point is that the arc of the hiccup in this department is not fully developed. The so-called arc is literally translated as "radian", which represents the transformation of the protagonist's character from the beginning to the end of the film. A better script usually has a protagonist with a larger arc, which means that there is a big contrast between the characters before and after. It's not necessarily a character, it needs to grow anyway. For example, in "The King's Speech", King George VI gave up on himself at the beginning. As a younger brother, he has been neglected and bullied. There was a scene where he was crying at the desk because he couldn't bear the pressure, so that Aunt Helena comforted him. What I saw was sad. Look at his later becoming the master of a country, which is a big arc. Even Logue has an arc, and he has become braver. A seemingly simple story, but the screenwriter abides by the traditional three-stage structure, which is probably why the Oscar won the best screenplay that year. Of course, this is not to say that non-compliance is not a good movie. Life-like movies like "Peach Sister" that are somewhat similar to documentaries can still move people's hearts.
The arc of the first hiccup is not small. From the loser at the beginning to the first dragon trainer in history and changed the fate of the entire village, he has gone through a lot of hardships, everyone’s misunderstanding of the dragon, and his own abilities. Not sure, his father's expectations...so many things hindered his growth. Movies are dramas, and dramas come from conflict, so a good script will definitely throw a lot of difficulties for the protagonist. The more the better, the villains also play this role. In a sense, the first Hiccup Hiccup his dad is also a villain, which is more interesting, because relatives are more risky for the protagonist to be a villain. I think the beauty of the first movie is that it is not a simple story about an innocent boy defeating the wonderful Tyrannosaurus (the villain in the traditional sense), but a story about his growth. Struggling with faith, the lost leg also alludes to the cost of growth, so it may have moved me so much at that time.
The first arc already has such an excellent arc, which greatly reduces the development space for the sequel. After watching "How to Train Your Dragon 2", I felt like I had drunk boiled water. The hiccups were basically unchanged. I was still so good, so brave, and so idealistic. Although I have experienced difficulties, these difficulties are not internal struggles, so the level is low. In the first part, if you hiccup and continue to be yourself, you have to bear the consequences of being laughed at for the rest of your life, not being recognized by your father, and putting the people in danger. These struggles are more interesting, far more three-dimensional than the struggle to fight monsters. He must not only protect the safety of his people, but also prove himself and pursue his own heart. This kind of conflict is a drama.
The second part has a lot less inner struggle, not to say that there is no, it can be seen that the screenwriter is trying hard to make him entangled. The main reason was that his father wanted him to be the patriarch. He hesitated. He felt that he was not a patriarch. He felt that his best part was to reason with others and advocate peace. This may also explain why he must take the initiative to talk to the villain. Because he wants the villain to change his mind, in a sense, he also proves his most unique point from the side.
These entanglements are all good, but I don't think they are handled well enough. Most of his knowledge about himself was told by his mother for him, so he seemed very passive. "You have a patriarch's heart, a dragon's soul. This is who you are." Is there anything more straightforward and preaching than this? This may be why I am a little bit resistant. He himself was very confused about who he is, but the answers were all given by others, which made me feel a bit false, as if the screenwriter deliberately made him entangled, and then others helped him find the answer.
Fortunately, hiccups are still active, and an inactive protagonist can't promote the story. His purpose of always talking to the villain is also to promote his driving need.
Astrid has also become boring. From the first game, the tomboy who was competitive and a little damaged has become an ordinary follower with no characteristics. It's a pity that only Ruffnut can grab the show. It is estimated that the director has put his pen and ink on the hiccup mother.
——————————Seriously spoiler the dividing line. Please choose carefully to read——————————————
After the hiccup met his mother, it was divided into two lines, one for him and his mother to learn about the relationship between him, and the other line for Astrid and others to prepare for the conflict. The protagonist hiccup was not clear because the scene was robbed by others. , The main motivation (to protect the tribe to maintain peace) was blurred, and everyone was busy watching Kate’s new character and the toothless boy’s cuteness gone.
What disappointed me the most was the handling of the death of Hiccup his dad Stoic. What I saw at the time was annoyed. There is no need to let people die. It doesn’t matter if you die. At any rate, leave a mark and struggle for the protagonist. As a result, everyone’s facial expressions fired rockets, cremated people and hiccups. Finally, it was logical to be the patriarch and deliberately used his death to make hiccups. Comprehend something. At the end of the film is still a happy ending, as if stoic didn't leave any pain, come to a statue to commemorate, everyone moved on. Naked use of this death to make tears, to make up for the incomprehensible mess in the previous hour. Then I felt that Kate’s new role was also arranged, and when my dad died, a mom would come to take care of it. Nimana is called a pit dad. I may be old-fashioned, and I think this kind of important death is always useful. Look at "Man of Steel", Superman’s earth father was willing to sacrifice because he wanted him to hide his abilities. Since then, this death has left a shadow on Superman. This shadow makes him wonder whether he should integrate or stand up in the future. A good inner conflict, death left a mark on the protagonist, allowing him to grow, become more complicated, and become entangled. This is the goal that the death of an important person in my mind must at least achieve.
Let's look at this film's treatment of the death of important people. In order to protect the hiccup, Stoic was shot to death by the toothless boy who lost control. Hiccup broke with Toothless in anger, even if he knew it was not Toothless's fault. This conflict can be digging deeper. For example, he began to doubt whether his friendship with Yazi was worth it, and it was not superficial. No matter how deep the friendship was, would it not be enough for Yazi’s physiological submission to Alpha. Friendship What is the meaning of the relationship between man and dragon, is it the relationship between the master and the servant or the relationship between friends, does he have a price for his blind confidence in his beliefs, etc.? His father's death can make him more entangled and struggling.
As a result, hiccups won the war in order to protect the tribe, renewed his belief in the friendship between himself and Yazi, and tried to remove it from Alpha's control. This "re-confirmation" makes me feel inexplicable. My dear, you broke with the toothless boy a second ago. How could it be done so soon? It makes me feel that he is forced to believe that friendship is better than physical control, because if he doesn't believe it, he won't win the help of the toothless boy and won't win the war. Looking back on the first movie, there were so many conflicts but hiccups still believe that people and dragons can live in peace. It is this kind of inner belief that made him win, but this made me feel that he is passive and he is not an active choice. Believe that friendship is stronger than physical control, but to fight to win the war, and see if you can strengthen your physical control. The taste has changed.
But I think my father's death will finally make hiccups "secular". Both parents said that Drago is a person who cannot be persuaded, and all he can do is protect his people (and dragons). The hiccup is still in the youth mentality. I think everyone can be persuaded. It is inevitable that it is too young too simple. In a sense, it is because of too much belief in oneself (the dragon does not harm people). Self-confidence, the consequence is that he paid the price of his father's life. As a result, he finally admitted at the funeral that the role of the patriarch is to protect, not to go out and persuade people to keep peace. This made me feel very sad, and I felt that he finally compromised and gave up the childish side of his sexuality. Of course, some people regard this as growth. I am a pessimist. I feel that he finally can't afford to become "secular", to perform his duties, to assume the responsibilities that others want him to bear, and to accept the beliefs that others want him to accept. .
*By the way, spit out Dad's crow's mouth. He said to Hiccup Niang, "I thought I could dance with you again before I die", and then he died soon after the dance...
But it's too early to say that his father's death will have little effect on hiccups. If it can be seen a little bit more, Hiccup's father's death is also inevitable in a sense. What I call "see a little more open" is from the perspective of a trilogy. When DreamWorks decided to make this sequel, of course, it invited the two directors of the first film to continue joining. Chris is busy with "Crazy Primitives", so it doesn't work, only Dean. The condition for Dean to continue to direct is for DreamWorks to agree to make "How to Train the Dragon" as a trilogy. The implication is to make the second part as a slightly less complete individual, but to achieve the purpose of expanding the series and let the whole trilogy Form an arc. Obviously, the executives of DreamWorks have been persuaded (the CEO of DreamWorks has never been a good deal, and he often cuts down if he feels bad at the script stage, without mercy at all). In short, the second part is a stepping stone to the third part.
The director of the film, Dean himself, said that he was heavily influenced by "Star Wars 2: The Empire Strikes Back" when filming "How to Train Your Dragon 2," because he felt that "Star Wars 2" opened up a lot of the Star Wars series at once. If you look closely, there are a lot of tribute and similar elements. For example, the burning sword of Hiccup, I crossed over to the lightsaber in Star Wars the first time I watched it. In "Star 2", the hero finally found out that the villain Vader was his father, and kept Hiccup. I don’t know who my mother is.
I think this film is a bit similar to "Star Wars Episode 2". The mother of the hero in "Star Wars 2" is dead, which has a lot of influence on the hero's degeneration to the dark side in "Star Wars 3". At the same time, the crazy and sloppy marriage with the heroine is also later. The destruction of the foreshadowed. The death of a loved one will have a great impact on the protagonist, whether it is a good effect (such as a hiccup) or a bad influence (such as the hero of the Star Wars Prequel), it is a process. From the perspective of the trilogy, you can’t let Dad hang up in the third part, of course, you can only lose the motivation to become the protagonist in the second part, the only way to grow, let the third part The ultimate battle is even more brilliant. I guess there will be more hiccups in the third part, not like the second one. The second "Dark Knight" in the Batman trilogy is a great independent individual, and it also greatly enriches the connotation of the series, making the sacrifice of the second part a tragic stroke for the third part. But no matter how many villains, the protagonist will have to be like Bruce in "The Dark Knight Rises". Only by working hard alone can he climb out of the impossible abyss. I guess hiccups will be no exception. In the third part, the two of them will be more challenged.
The mention of this brought me the most disappointing climax of the film, which made me feel deceived and sentimental.
When writing a script, there is a term called cheating. It means to let the plot replace the protagonist to solve the problem. Example: The protagonist is trapped in a desperate encirclement, unable to break free from the enemy, and is really going to hang up. At this time, a group of cavalrymen suddenly came to solve the enemy. The arrival of this cavalryman is called cheating, which means I can’t write how the protagonist can solve it. If you have a problem, let the outsiders come to help. The climax of the film gives me this feeling. Hiccup and Toothless are helpless in front of powerful enemies, and are sealed by ice, and then it is this ice that allows Toothless to resuscitate (please brainstorm the evolution in Digimon or Pokémon), and the ability to fight monsters instantly increases. Successfully solve the enemy. Are you kidding me? ? ? This is totally cheating! ! ! This "evolution" is the naked "cavalry"! ! ! It's not a problem that the protagonist solves by himself! ! ! Although there was a foreshadowing, the hiccup mother also said, "You still have a lot of things you don't know about dragons." The new things that grew out of Yazi's back proved this, but it still made me feel uncomfortable. You look at the climax of the first part. Hiccups are because of your understanding of dragons, knowing that the dragon's belly is not fireproof, coupled with your ingenuity and cooperation with the toothless boy to defeat the big boss, which highlights your own characteristics. It's also good to take the initiative to solve the problem. And the inexplicable evolution in this part has nothing to do with the growth of the characters. Later, because the hiccup won the war and the father died, so he became the patriarch naturally. I think this tribe’s respect for hiccups is also because of this. Cheating greatly weakens the rationality. Looking back at the first climax, the people's respect for him was completely hiccupped through his ingenuity and understanding of dragons. This movie was won by the inexplicable "evolution" of Toothless Boy. Is this a grade?
But don't be too angry. We also return to the trilogy pattern. I think the display of the special skills of the toothless boy must be just the tip of the iceberg. It is a very young dragon, and it can beat an Alpha away by awakening. Who knows what it will be like when you go crazy one day. In addition, in this film, it has been emphasized that the toothless boy is the last night evil dragon, and the hiccup line "We can find another night evil dragon if we get it wrong." Found); Eret's first line to see No Tooth is also intriguing. The English original of his line: "I thought they are gone for good." This "gone for good" Chinese is difficult to translate that subtle feeling. The implication is that there are so many kinds of dragons that everyone kills, but why the night evil is so special that it must be killed with the first priority. I think there must be some secret in it. The special blue light of the toothless boy at climax is just that it is super super. A small corner of ability. (Will the dragon skin worn by the villain be the skin of the night evil????) I have not read the original, but I boldly predict that the third part will explain the life experience of the toothless boy and the reason for their extinction, and this Probably the biggest challenge that hiccup has ever encountered. In "How to Train Your Dragon 2", Toothless's short "betrayal" hiccups, I think it will definitely appear in "How to Train Your Dragon 3". I guess it will be a bit like the tangled relationship between Fu Lanlan and Caesar in "Rise of the Apes" (Of course, I don't think dragons and humans will fight this kind of thing will happen, everyone understands what I mean). I hope this is all my wishful thinking and over-sensitivity, but I am looking forward to what Dean will make for the third part, but I am very worried for him. "How to Train Your Dragon 2" has always been regarded as the most anticipated work of DreamWorks in recent years. The bad North American box office has caused DreamWorks stock to fall a lot. The implication is that "How to Train Your Dragon 3" will be very stressful. I don't know if DreamWorks executives will still be so good-natured to Dean after watching the performance of "How to Train Your Dragon 2". I don't know if it will affect the creative process.
To put it bluntly, the reason for the discomfort is that this most important orgasm was consumed in advance by the false orgasm of the black and white Alpha battle, leading to the feeling of premature ejaculation in the really important orgasm...
-----------------------------------------------End spoiler And blind hypocrisy-----------------------------------------------
This film is too explicit about the lines such as peace. Hiccup kept saying ah, I went to persuade others that we can live in peace, and then his mother said that I also advocate peace between people and dragons. Two such tall characters kept saying "peace" as the main theme. It really made me panic, and instantly lowered the age of the audience. We are not children and do not need this kind of preaching. Well, you are a cartoon, so let's talk about it if you want to preach, but why can't it be less explicit than the main theme like the first one. You don't need to use a bunch of words to embody the main idea at all. You can clearly say the importance of peace in the plot itself. You see, there is no line in "Princess Mononoke" that is straightforward, "Man must live in harmony with nature", but after you read it, you don't need to be told to you. You will understand this sentence yourself. This is also the realm. When watching the segment of the theory of hiccups and villains, my friend said: "Isn't this a dialogue between the United States and North Korea?" The
first important theory of XD screenwriters is "show instead of tell". Instead of telling me, it's better to show it to me. Example: The male lead tells the female lead that he loves her, this is tell; the male lead uses various practical actions, such as raising breakfast in the morning, holding her warmly, etc. This is a show. The same is to convey the message of the three words "I love you", which way would be better? It must be the latter. Movies are visual art, which means that action defines characters. Language is not powerful for action, and it is actually like this in life.
In the first part, it was obvious that the screenwriter knew this rule. In "Forbidden Friendship", "Test Drive", "See You Tomorrow", "Romantic Flight", there is almost no dialogue at all. It is just music and effective, but it is so moving, which shows the screenwriter and director's ability to control. The clip of "Forbidden Friendship" is absolutely perfect, and the meticulous process of step by step of how the hiccups start to trust the other party is expressed incisively and vividly. "Robot Story" is so successful because there are so many "silent films" with no dialogue and only action. As Wall-E never said a word on the earth in the first half, his tendency to obsess over the behavior of human objects, the pollution and desolation of the earth, and the atmosphere of loneliness all manifested everything. Screenwriters know that talking too much is sometimes not a good thing. What about this film? Bad fire time.
Another big rule of screenwriters is "repetition", in which contrast is achieved in repetition, forming patterns, and advancing the story. There are many examples of this in the first part, such as:
-"You just gestured all of me." by the hero Look at him; the second time is the end, Dad looks at him proudly.
-"We are Vikings. It's an occupational hazard." by Stoic and the male protagonist (We are Vikings, this is an occupational hazard.) The first time Stoic said, hiccups were still a shy teenager who hadn't been in the world. ; The second time it was hiccup. At that time, he had grown up and decided to fly into the sky and fight the big boss.
-The heroine's various fights, strong kisses, and "That's for..." sentence patterns. The first time was to beat the male lead in that secret den, at that time she still harbored resentment; the second time was flying back with hiccups, she had begun to be a little ambiguous about hiccups; the third time was at the end, she was already Completely fall into the charm of the hero.
Let the audience experience the changes and growth of the characters in the repetition, which is excellent. And have you found that these three repeated examples all have a little humor, so that the effect is better. This film is not without repetition, such as the line that is a bit tall (vulgar), "A Chief protects his own." Star wars lightsaber function display activities, etc. But compared with the three examples in the first part above, it is not one level.
The great thing about composer John Powell is that he did not stick to the first melody that had been created, but re-created on the basis of strengthening the original melody. The three main new melodies that I can hear are one for the second one, one for Hiccup Volka, and one for Volka Stoic's love dance. The last two melodies appear back and forth in the two fighting climaxes. echo. In a sense, only the first main melody is used at the beginning and the end of the film, and the trumpet is used to replay it slowly in the middle, which is very emotional. The composer used many of the first unused instruments such as the Scottish bagpipe and a flute sound that I don't know well to bring new life to the old melody, as well as the literary harp. Old fans like me are very grateful. The use of a large number of vocal melodies makes the film full of epic.
I feel that many narrative deficiencies in the film have been greatly compensated by music. I sometimes dislike the combination of Spielberg + John Williams, because it is easy to be overly sensational. For example, "War Horse", I think it is a very ordinary film, but the melodious and moving orchestral music greatly compensates for the lack of emotion. . Because your plot does not reach the effect of tearing, you can only use music to make you cry. In a sense, the soundtrack of the film enhances the grandeur of many scenes, and better expresses the emotions in the sentimental scenes, but it is still suspected of covering up the lack of narrative ability.
Because there are too many new characters, in a sense, no one has shaped too well. A "dragon saved me and I'm so touched" stalk made Eret change his mind. It was a bit vulgar, but it didn't matter that he was not the protagonist. Hiccup Volka's character creation is basically based on the information in her own monologue (the naked "tell instead of show", the other way around), this can't be helped, the space is limited.
I may be too harsh, because I have always been a character orientated person, and I always care about characters when I read stories. In fact, the dragon is also the protagonist in this movie, so the creators have done so much effort to expand the world. From the vigorous and powerful ending, we can see the great ambition of DreamWorks for this series, and it opens a new chapter, but it is reduced to a stepping stone for the third part. I hope Dean knows what he is doing.
As the so-called black to the depths of natural powder, powder to the depths of natural black, my deep feelings for the first part may make me too harsh on this part.
But please don't use the logic of "animation, just be happy, don't be harsh" to condemn my harshness. The argument I hate the most is that cartoons are for children, don’t take it too seriously. I strongly disagree. Animation shouldn't just be for children, that's why "Pleasant Goat" and other categories keep popping up in China. If you lower your own threshold by yourself, then I can't help it.
I still want to thank "How to Train Your Dragon 2". In a sense, watching a movie is the same as being an actor. You must live in the moment. If that moment touches you and touches you, I think it is a success. The girl next to me was quietly wiping tears in the scene where my parents got together, which made me feel the charm of the movie. But it is not an easy task to still be moved many years after the end of the movie, which is very demanding for the movie.
One more word at the end. My point of view may be extreme + hypocritical, not suitable for everyone. This is how I see it. Before the emperor was about to die, the concubines outside the bedroom were crying. The emperor asked: "I am not dead yet, what are they crying for?" Someone next to him answered: "They are crying for you, they are crying for themselves."
We are not watching movies, we are watching ourselves. So please forgive me if there are any differences.
PS I wouldn’t say that I didn’t even see that the director was alluding Gobber to gay... His original English line: "This is why I never got married. This, and one other reason." This is a cryptic " one other reason" Ah...
*Director Dean’s response to the third part: "I just started writing the third script. For me, this is the final chapter of the story. I am not sure if this script will be split into two more films. But this one will be the climax of the entire trilogy. We will see Hiccup complete his growth, and we will also explain where the dragons go and why they disappeared from the world. "
Okay I The
copyright has been spoiled : cn.hansonhe.com/howtotrainyourdragon2-review/
View more about How to Train Your Dragon 2 reviews
