Review: How To Train Your Dragon *Spoiler*

What I heard going into “How to train Your Dragon” was that it was technically superb and yet had surprising dramatic depth. It’s interesting what passes for “surprising dramatic depth” in some movies. I can’t see a whole lot of dramatic difference between Dragon and, say, Kung Fu Panda, to be honest, but I suppose the secret is fewer jokes. How to Train Your Dragon is certainly surprisingly baron of those.

It tells a story that you feel as though you might have seen 512 times already: a misfit from one world discovers purpose in another, and ends up reconciling their differences in one way or another. Hiccup, our misfit lead is the only Viking in the village who does not appear as an utter Viking caricature; he knows engineering, not blunt force, but of course no one sees any value in this what so ever. And of course it will actually play a big part in the film’s resolution. Are kids familiar as familiar with this formula as I feel? Perhaps some premises are just timeless.

Looks kind of like my cat, Lucy...

But even then, the narrative execution is lacking. There aren’t any good characters. Hiccup is basically linguini from “Ratouille” (note the similar kinds of names, the similar secretive companionship with a hated creature) but he’s neither as funny nor as genuinely emotive. I don’t really know what the kid wants, even when he does get into befriending Toothless, and the process of the two getting to know one another didn’t do much for me. There are, again, no real jokes, and nothing notable about the process otherwise. They simply begin to trust one another. Toothless, the titular dragon is a very neat little creation, but he has no real personality, and his face seems stuck in that classic DreamWorks raised eyebrow expression. I thought that was just a coincidence; perhaps it really is a trademark.

Hiccup’s father is voiced by Gerard Butler and, as the Viking King, and is everything you’d expect. Hiccup’s love interest is a bore. There is no looming villain but the possibility of un-necessary conflict. At any rate, we don’t want Toothless to be killed. He’s too cute and loyal. 

Oh boys and their dragons.

That’s the movies only real appeal, I thought. Toothless, however ill-defined his motivation and character, loves Hiccup, and Hiccup loves Toothless, and the scene in which they discover combined equilibrium in flight is thrilling – it’s one of the more exhilarating moments I’ve seen on screen in years and I’d love to see it again. The action sequences really are very cool to experience, and the CGI employed to create them is a definite stride forward. I saw it in 2D, but I’m willing to bet that this is one of the best examples of 3D cinema, if not the best. Let me know if I’m right.

But the story – they can simply do better than what they did (can’t they?). For instance, and this will contain a pair of mild spoilers (as there are no big ones): Hiccup engineers a replacement tail-fin for the one that Toothless lost which enables him to fly again when Hiccup controls it. In the end of the film, Hiccup loses his left foot, but the prosthetic he wears combines easily with his saddle/steering device for toothless. Why not have their mutual handicaps combine this way at the off set? It would have done wonders for their connection. It’s the kind of heart that will always keep DreamWorks behind Pixar, as long as DreamWorks believes it’s still second to the graphics. 

By Dave Beauchene