March 25, 2010, 8:42 a.m. CST
March 25, 2010, 8:43 a.m. CST
by Aphex Twin
I'm fuckin' with ya big wyrm.
March 25, 2010, 8:52 a.m. CST
by dr sauch
Bro. But even wyrm would get it. Dude.
March 25, 2010, 8:54 a.m. CST
that i decided to read it again
March 25, 2010, 8:54 a.m. CST
or has frontal lobe issues. Having to refer to a trailer of a film days after seeing the film to dredge up any memories of said film is probably more a personal biology issue than any fault of the filmmakers. <P> Massa, see a doctor.
March 25, 2010, 8:55 a.m. CST
by Bouncy X
..with Hiccup saying the dragon's name and going "..i choose you!!" ?
March 25, 2010, 8:56 a.m. CST
For the children.<P> For the antelopes.<P> For delicious pastries left unattended on windowsills.<P>
March 25, 2010, 9:06 a.m. CST
by Ronald Raygun
you should have made one review really positive and the other overly negative to confuse everybody. Again.
March 25, 2010, 9:21 a.m. CST
which one of these is going to get deleted?
March 25, 2010, 9:24 a.m. CST
did anyone really expect this movie to be anything other than crap?
March 25, 2010, 9:27 a.m. CST
by Bouncy X
you'd think after seeing multiple people comments on the double post mistake, they'd realize its been covered and let it go but nooooo...there's a few more after. is everyone just as bored as me or something? :P
March 25, 2010, 9:33 a.m. CST
yea just bored.
March 25, 2010, 9:35 a.m. CST
Referring to it as just "Dragons"? Anybody else notice this?
March 25, 2010, 9:43 a.m. CST
by spud mcspud
TRAINING YOUR DRAGON is TOTALLY a euphemism ;D
March 25, 2010, 9:46 a.m. CST
Pixar is no doubt the best at what they do but let's not pretend they're not guilty of a lot of the same things you accuse Dreamworks of. To date Picar has only had a couple of films that made the PG rating. By contrast Dreamworks films are never afraid to use profanity and violence when called for. To judge a movie just on it's ability to draw tears is ridiculous.
March 25, 2010, 10:15 a.m. CST
I havent seen this, but let me take a guess. It's probably 100 minutes long, so the first act lasts about 25 minutes (being Dreamworks Animation, maybe longer, they hate this thing called "pacing"). It introduces the characters and the dragons. The main character is wimpy but likeable, so audiences relate to him. So he finds a dragon who is different, befriends him and humorous situations between the two of them take place so we start to like the dragon and wish it to remain with the kid. Second act is the kid hiding his dragon pet and through tense situations and a villain who opposes any attempt to admit dragons might be good, his secret is found. No one understands him, so the dragon is hurt or locked. The villain is actually planning something against the main characters, and his plan is revealed at the end of act two. On act three the kid and the dragon overcome the problems imposed by the other characters and save the day, beating the villain. Since the villain was a greater threat then the dragons, all characters now come to realize the kid was right, and befriend the dragons. The end. Let me know later if I got it right.
March 25, 2010, 10:16 a.m. CST
Yep, that'll be Scotland then. On a good year.
March 25, 2010, 10:47 a.m. CST
Name me one Pixar film that doesn't end with some variation on WACKY CHASE SCENE, VILLAIN COMEUPPANCE, LEARNING SOMETHING, BEING HAPPY. Pixar does have heart in a way that few other animation studios ever have, but there has never been an ambiguous ending in any of their films. They aren't tough.
March 25, 2010, 10:57 a.m. CST
You are reviewing a movie for kids, why does everyone think that every movie has to re-invent the wheel. Do you really think a 4 or 5 year old cares that it's doesn't end like "Old Yeller"? My son hasn't even seen "Old Yeller" yet. And why the hate for "Monsters vs. Aliens". I have watched that at least 3 times with my son and we love it. "Dragon" looks like it's going to be a nice way to spend the afternoon with my son, then we can grab a chocolate shake afterwards. Who doesn't love dragons??
March 25, 2010, 11:02 a.m. CST
im glad to see some thoughtful comments on thier films
March 25, 2010, 11:06 a.m. CST
Disney may bust their ass to put together a better product, but it does not pay off for them. Dreamworks formula sells popcorn, DVDs, Happy Meals, and lends itself to half produced sequels. Why would they screw that up and make a movie that kids do not want to watch 4-5 times a week?
March 25, 2010, 11:30 a.m. CST
Up was a borefest and totally by the numbers...Cars was unremarkable and that movie about the rats was unwatchable.
March 25, 2010, 1:11 p.m. CST
here we are with the latest installment of hollywood attempting to teach our kids that there isnt anything to worry about in the world and we should all just get along great and then they grow up and get smashed in the face with some horrible life-problem and realize that they have been getting smoke blown up their asses their entire lives. wonderful stuff, keep it coming!!
March 25, 2010, 3:32 p.m. CST
by Nasty In The Pasty
I found it stale and generic. Monsters vs. Aliens at least had that awesome action sequence on the Golden Gate Bridge.
March 25, 2010, 3:39 p.m. CST
you know a movie that looks cool anyway
March 25, 2010, 5:17 p.m. CST
March 25, 2010, 5:25 p.m. CST
You're not the only one. It's like the thinking is 'Ow! Too many words! Hurt my...thinking ball!' <br><br> If the film was called DRAGONS, maybe I could understand, but they don't want to say the whole title? Tough titty toenails for them! <br><br> Regardless, I'm looking forward to the movie.
March 25, 2010, 6:52 p.m. CST
When did it become a crime against humanity to make a movie for kids?
March 25, 2010, 7:18 p.m. CST
Tell me what the fuck is predictable on Ratatouille and Up? I give you WALL-E, but that was fucking masterpiece storytelling, and it was original, regardless if the message or the setting was not. Pixar still has that magical artistic touch on everything they do, maaaaybe not on Bugs Life or Cars, but that's me. Dreamworks produces animated features. Period. Shrek 1 and 2 are funny, and that's it. The rest? Crap.
March 25, 2010, 7:45 p.m. CST
...that I end up going with my brother and his kids to see when I visit for the holidays. Generic, kid-friendly, safe, by-the-numbers, boring pablum containing nothing offensive or even vaguely edgy. Wimpy but ambitous lead, disapproving father, catches but then admires dragon, kid & dragon become pals, kid helps hide dragon with perky tomboy (but not too butchy) female friend, kid and tomboy have to save dragon, kid convinces everyone that dragons aren't bad after all, everyone sings a song. Didn't see it, didn't have to see it to guess the plot, it's the same damn plot as always! Glad there's no holiday in effect right now.
March 25, 2010, 9:01 p.m. CST
Massawyrm, that's all we want. Why does every movie of this type have to be a classic? I will see it and enjoy the heck out of it. Fandude7 out.
March 26, 2010, 4:17 a.m. CST
by Holy Hell
That was Dreamworks, right? Way better that A Bug's Life. Best boy-and-his-dog animated feature that isn't really about a dog? The Iron Giant.
March 26, 2010, 8:01 p.m. CST
Best feel good fun movie I have seen in quite a while. Why is that bad?
I know this is old news, but I wholly disagree with your critique. I think you've underestimated the basic premise of the movie; it wasn't simply a boy and his dog story. The whole point of it is that dragons are much more intelligent than the Vikings had previously gave them credit for- not simple-minded beasts that need to be exterminated. Hiccup's relationship with Toothless is so much more than that of one with a dog. They /depend/ on each other. It didn't have the perfect ending you described either, unless you saw a different movie than me. Hiccup lost his leg; not many movies intended for children go so far as that. There were repreccusions to the battle at the end, the true effects of violence. The characters weren't all perfect and shiny after the battle, which I believe is highly respectable, especially for a children's film. It was also highly symbolic, which ties back into the 'more than a boy and his dog story'.
April 5, 2012, 4:28 p.m. CST
Finally got around to seeing this. Though I often agree with Massawyrm on any variety of films, I couldn't disagree more on this one. Some of the movies he's comparing it to do require a death/separation at the end of the film, but the requirement isn't determined by the loosely defined scenario the film falls into (boy and his dog), but rather a characteristic more specific to an individual film, and that's the requirement posed by the solution to the film's main problem. The film's primary problem is the conflict set up between Hiccup and his father, and to resolve it does not require the death of the beloved pet, but simply expressing in the strongest way possible, what he was trying to convince him of, at pain, clear risk of life and (loss) of limb. That was the focus and goal as I read it, and since it fulfilled that, and in fairly spectacular fashion, while wearing it's emotions proudly without rubbing our face in them, is more praise worthy than I believe it's been given here. The film didn't waste time with anything unnecessary, and it didn't rush itself getting where it had to go. While Pixar is usually fantastic in the way that subtle but complex dishes are prepared at four-star dining establishments, "Dragon" is simple, homemade macaroni and cheese, with a dash of hot sauce. It's fantastic and completely satisfying in the way only homemade comfort food can fulfill. Simple things done well, that warm the soul like that are worthy of remembrance.