Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
[SPOILER] HTTYD 3 Ending Speculations?
Topic Started: 12 Sep 2014, 08:42 (12834 Views)
dragons_ind
User avatar
My avatar just got 20% Cooler

DarthBacon
12 Sep 2014, 09:24
Sure, a happy ending would be awesome, but this ending is much more powerful...I can't really imagine Hiccup living away from Toothless, or Toothless away from Hiccup, but if they are sacrificing them being together for the well being of their respective species, that would be really, really special too.
Someone is got the point.
At the first, i wanna httyd4, because i only want their friendship last longer. But when it's finally confirmed that there only httyd3 and they will get separated, i only want them to end it with tears.

They really made a good example of how strong the friendship was.
#1 = Lost leg, #2 = Lost father, #3 = Lost dragons
Maybe with BerserkDragon's ending will make all the audience cries.

Ninety-nine buckets of fireworms on the wall, ninety-nine buckets of worms! Take one down, pass it around, you got ninety-eight buckets of fireworms on the wall....................... Forty-one buckets of fireworms on the wall, forty-one buckets of worms! Take one down, pass it around, you got forty buckets of fireworms on the wall..........- one bucket of worms! Take one down, pass it around, you got zero buckets of fireworms on the waaaaaaaaaallllllllllllll.
  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
Cartoon Freak
User avatar
Deadly Nadder

Quote:
 
How is sending the dragons away satisfying in any respect? That's the part I hated most about Lord of the Rings, when everybody sailed off into the West.
Others have already defended LotR (and I'm sure you can find plenty of in-depth defences of that ending, from fan blogs to scholarly journals, if you're so inclined), but I would like to defend the basic concept with a much simpler example, one that only requires you to have seen a rather noteworthy movie:

Toy Story 3. Yes, many people on here may have an (understandable) bias against this movie, and I'm sure there are also perfectly legitimate criticisms that can be made against it. With that said, I have yet to see anyone who didn't like its ending, and with good reason. Indeed, I for one can't think of any other way it could have ended.

And when you get right to the heart of things, HTTYD is closer to Toy Story than it is to LotR or Star Wars in terms of thematic content. Both are about a friendship, and thus the only way they can really end is to end that friendship, in one way or another.

Now, to be fair, there are plenty of ways that can be made to work, and plenty of ways it can be botched, but the basic idea is sound.

But if you don't believe me, I'll put the question to you: how would you end HTTYD 3, and in what way would it be a more definitive ending than the one to the first film?
Number of times I've watched the trailer: 18.

My pet peeve: people who refer to complete strangers by their first name. The correct ways to refer to a "John Smith" whom you have never met are Smith, Mr Smith, or John Smith. Not "John". He's not your buddy.
  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
Night Fury
Member Avatar
Terrible Terror

Cartoon Freak
12 Sep 2014, 14:17
And when you get right to the heart of things, HTTYD is closer to Toy Story than it is to LotR or Star Wars in terms of thematic content. Both are about a friendship, and thus the only way they can really end is to end that friendship, in one way or another.
The relationship between Andy and Woody is much different than the relationship between Hiccup and Toothless. Andy didn't know that Woody was "alive", and like most kids he stopped playing with toys when he became a teenager. By the end of Toy Story 3 he hadn't played with Woody in several years. The only attachment Andy had to Woody at the end of Toy Story 3 was one of nostalgia. If Andy hadn't given him away, he'd still be in a box in the attic collecting dust. That's why the ending works so well -- because toys are meant to be played with, not kept in boxes.

It makes sense to give away your toys when you grow up, but it doesn't make sense to sacrifice your friendship with your best friend. Besides, I'm not sure that I like the idea of HTTYD being compared so closely to Toy Story. That would be awkward for DreamWorks.

Ending the trilogy doesn't necessitate ending the friendship. Actually, I think the ending of HTTYD 2 would have been the perfect ending for the trilogy... if only they had followed the original plan and made Valka more of an antagonist in HTTYD 2 and not introduced Drago until the final film.
  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
Cartoon Freak
User avatar
Deadly Nadder

Quote:
 
The relationship between Andy and Woody is much different than the relationship between Hiccup and Toothless. Andy didn't know that Woody was "alive", and like most kids he stopped playing with toys when he became a teenager. By the end of Toy Story 3 he hadn't played with Woody in several years. The only attachment Andy had to Woody at the end of Toy Story 3 was one of nostalgia. If Andy hadn't given him away, he'd still be in a box in the attic collecting dust. That's why the ending works so well -- because toys are meant to be played with, not kept in boxes.
Obviously, the relationships are different, as any two relationships are different, as any two people are different. That's not the point. The point is that HTTYD is about a friendship, and if you want to give a series* about a friendship a definitive ending (and, as far as I can tell, DeBlois at least wants to do this), then you have to give some sort of definitive end to the friendship. Otherwise, one question is always going to remain: "Why are you stopping there?" Because honestly, if they don't give some sort of definitive ending, then the sequels are basically pointless (well, outside of money, but even I have enough lingering idealism to believe that studios at least attempt to disguise that).

*The distinction between a single film and a series is important to note here. It is perfectly acceptable for a single film to simply resolve the issues raised by that film. Once you try to turn something into a series, however, the audience has an entirely justified expectation that you will attempt to provide something a little more conclusive than simply, "Random bad guy #27 was defeated, and peace was restored to the land." This is a large part of what keeps film series like Star Wars on a higher level of prestige than franchises like James Bond. The conclusions in series like the former lends a purpose to everything that is lacking from the latter.
Number of times I've watched the trailer: 18.

My pet peeve: people who refer to complete strangers by their first name. The correct ways to refer to a "John Smith" whom you have never met are Smith, Mr Smith, or John Smith. Not "John". He's not your buddy.
  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
Night Fury
Member Avatar
Terrible Terror

I know that fans like to think the franchise is primarily about Hiccup and Toothless' friendship, but it was actually more about Stoick and Hiccup until the former met his untimely end. I guess Toothless is just next in line... but where does it stop?

Maybe Hiccup should have to sacrifice all of his relationships in order of importance. We've crossed Stoick off the list, but we still need to dispose of Toothless, Valka, and Astrid (I'm not not sure about the correct order of the last two). In fact, I think Berk should be wiped off the map, along with all of the dragons.... but not before Drago and his army are completely slaughtered... I don't want any loose ends.

  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
Cartoon Freak
User avatar
Deadly Nadder

Um, I don't what movie you were watching back in 2010, but HTTYD was and is a textbook case of "A boy and his x". Now don't get me wrong, Hiccup's relationship with Stoick is important, but it's definitely not the focus of the first film. The second is admittedly a little harder to pin down, but the Hiccup/Toothless relationship is definitely the most important one (much to my pleasant surprise).
Number of times I've watched the trailer: 18.

My pet peeve: people who refer to complete strangers by their first name. The correct ways to refer to a "John Smith" whom you have never met are Smith, Mr Smith, or John Smith. Not "John". He's not your buddy.
  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
Pikey
User avatar
Wow!

Night Fury
12 Sep 2014, 17:13
I know that fans like to think the franchise is primarily about Hiccup and Toothless' friendship, but it was actually more about Stoick and Hiccup until the former met his untimely end. I guess Toothless is just next in line... but where does it stop?

Maybe Hiccup should have to sacrifice all of his relationships in order of importance. We've crossed Stoick off the list, but we still need to dispose of Toothless, Valka, and Astrid (I'm not not sure about the correct order of the last two). In fact, I think Berk should be wiped off the map, along with all of the dragons.... but not before Drago and his army are completely slaughtered... I don't want any loose ends.
So about that "ball of fire" ending...
  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
Night Fury
Member Avatar
Terrible Terror

Cartoon Freak
12 Sep 2014, 17:36
Um, I don't what movie you were watching back in 2010, but HTTYD was and is a textbook case of "A boy and his x". Now don't get me wrong, Hiccup's relationship with Stoick is important, but it's definitely not the focus of the first film. The second is admittedly a little harder to pin down, but the Hiccup/Toothless relationship is definitely the most important one (much to my pleasant surprise).
If you've watched or read any interviews with Dean DeBlois, he has always framed both HTTYD 1 and 2 as a father-son story.

Hiccup and Toothless friendship is more intresting to me, but Dean has always been clear that it's about Hiccup and Stoick at its core. Not to say that Toothless isn't important, but thematically he's a close second to Stoick.



  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
MartianArchaeologist
Member Avatar
Gronckle

Cartoon Freak
12 Sep 2014, 14:17
Quote:
 
How is sending the dragons away satisfying in any respect? That's the part I hated most about Lord of the Rings, when everybody sailed off into the West.
Others have already defended LotR (and I'm sure you can find plenty of in-depth defences of that ending, from fan blogs to scholarly journals, if you're so inclined), but I would like to defend the basic concept with a much simpler example, one that only requires you to have seen a rather noteworthy movie:

Toy Story 3. Yes, many people on here may have an (understandable) bias against this movie, and I'm sure there are also perfectly legitimate criticisms that can be made against it. With that said, I have yet to see anyone who didn't like its ending, and with good reason. Indeed, I for one can't think of any other way it could have ended.

And when you get right to the heart of things, HTTYD is closer to Toy Story than it is to LotR or Star Wars in terms of thematic content. Both are about a friendship, and thus the only way they can really end is to end that friendship, in one way or another.

Now, to be fair, there are plenty of ways that can be made to work, and plenty of ways it can be botched, but the basic idea is sound.

But if you don't believe me, I'll put the question to you: how would you end HTTYD 3, and in what way would it be a more definitive ending than the one to the first film?

Thanks for the intelligent discussion on this subject. I'm going nuts with a project this week, and anything I post currently should be construed as Stressed-Out Autistic Person Letting Off Steam. I plan to write something more involved as soon as the project ends and I recover.

That being said, two thoughts come to mind:

1. The Tolkien ending was a metaphor for death. Tolkien didn't want to write "And the characters died" any more than the post-WWII audience wanted to read it. But you're right; that's how the shape of an epic of this sort usually ended. And that is indeed how HTTYD might end, but for different reasons. I'm trying to figure out where it would be a satisfying conclusion (and it might), and how that ending in LOTR might have been more satisfying.

2. In Toy Story, as was pointed out, the question of the story was "What will you do when Andy grows up?" The song was "You Have a Friend In Me" in the first movie, but cut off with an echo by the third. Mr. Potato Head was saying how Woody would end up in the attic. Stinky Pete was asking "What will you do when Andy grows up? Or gets married?" (Personally since the pixar campus has so many toys, and the Pixar movies often echo what's going on at Pixar itself, and Andy has a "Pixar University" pennant on his wall, it would have been satisfying if Andy became an animator and took Woody to work with him, but instead I think they're making movie 4 with the same toys but different kids.)

In HTTYD, in contrast, Hiccup and Toothless form two parts of a metaphorical person. In movie 1, Toothless was often the Id (look it up)--the source of Hiccup's emotional energy. Think He-Man's sword, if you want to be tacky about it. (Don't get me started on Freudian imagery in HTTYD--just don't go there. But that's another proof to me that they intend this very thing). In movie 2, Toothless is often Hiccup's superego--"schooling" him whenever Toothless thinks he's being an idiot. But still providing psychological energy to the equation.

True, the filmmakers might intend for the two to individuate, by giving Hiccup a squirrel suit and "leveling up" Toothless's maneuvering abilities. But as for the scenario where Hiccup stays on Berk and all the dragons disappear, why does Stoick keep saying "He could never stay in one place" and Valka say "You have the heart of a chief and the soul of a dragon"? And why is Hiccup still always at his best when he's with the dragon? Andy is actually peripheral to the story; almost a "mcguffin". Toothless is integral.

One thought is that Hiccup could leave with the dragons, but then why are the humans all standing looking up at an empty sky?

Ack, have to go back to evil project.


  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
MartianArchaeologist
Member Avatar
Gronckle

Night Fury
12 Sep 2014, 17:49
Cartoon Freak
12 Sep 2014, 17:36
Um, I don't what movie you were watching back in 2010, but HTTYD was and is a textbook case of "A boy and his x". Now don't get me wrong, Hiccup's relationship with Stoick is important, but it's definitely not the focus of the first film. The second is admittedly a little harder to pin down, but the Hiccup/Toothless relationship is definitely the most important one (much to my pleasant surprise).
If you've watched or read any interviews with Dean DeBlois, he has always framed both HTTYD 1 and 2 as a father-son story.

Hiccup and Toothless friendship is more intresting to me, but Dean has always been clear that it's about Hiccup and Stoick at its core. Not to say that Toothless isn't important, but thematically he's a close second to Stoick.
Actually if this is the case then movie 3 might be subtitled "How to Be a Parent". Oooo.
  PM (offline)     Profile     Quote  
 
Users browsing this forum:
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests
Print view
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · How to Train Your Dragon 3 · Next Topic »