HOW TO TRAIN YOUR TRILOGY

The first one was a really pleasant surprise. And definitely the best CGI movie that Dreamworks has ever done. Shame about splitting up the team, though.

The world building in the first movie gives me hope that they can pull something interesting off in the sequels. Introduce more fantasy beasties, maybe? This could definitely blossom into a cool fantasy series.

Like I was saying about Kung Fu Panda 2, though, I have some concerns that these two movies squeaked through because the Dreamworks money men might have been seeing animation as less of a winning concern, and therefore have been doing less micromanaging. Now that these two movies are big hits and spawning franchises, I'm worried about the usual raft of redundant producers piling on with the same old ideas--pop culture references, a scene where a character dances around like a jackass, etc. Megamind definitely showed alarming signs of sliding back into this mode of thinking.

It bugs me when filmmakers try to big up the next movie by calling a fantastic and self-contained first movie the "first act in a larger story."  Everyone wants to be Empire.  Just make another good movie!  It's one thing to try to avoid doing "another adventure with the same characters," but too many sequels these days (the ones with the most potential) are going too far to the other extreme. 

Hopefully, they take Toy Story 2's approach to the sequel.  But it sounds like they're going more for The Matrx and Pirates sequels (highly presumptuous, I know).

I actually think going more epic with the sequels makes sense in this case. I know you can smack-talk Pirates and the Matrix...though I still think the Matrix sequels are good, and DMC is decent enough...but there's nothing wrong with the structure. Pirates muffed it because they tried to layer on a needlessly complex plot that started eating itself. The Matrix expanding made perfect sense, since they'd set up a number of elements that were waiting to be expanded in the sequels.

If HTTYD2 ends up taking the kids and their dragons out into a larger fantasy world, that could be cool. It's all in the execution, of course. But I don't see what else can be done with just the basic "dragons" concept.

More epic is fine.  I expect that.  As you said, it's the execution I'm talking about.  I really liked DMC as well (I even like the Matrix sequels and how ambitious they were), but in trying so hard to be like Empire, it ended up suffering when put back to back with AWE.  They became so fixated on trying to expand the world, the storytelling suffered.  And that's all I'm really talking about.  Referring to the first movie as just some 'first act' in a larger story just feels like the wrong attitude to approach the sequel with.

Maybe it's just because it's sounding a bit too much like Lucas.

I'm skeptical because the character work in HTTYD was quite well done, and that's the first thing that gets shafted in any prequels. Rarely do they offer a compelling character arc for 3 films. LOTR did it but it had the benefit of introducing tons of great new characters within each film. Matrix did it for 2/3 of the trilogy. The Bourne series did it too, but wisely spread the character arc touchstones to one per film.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pop Zeus 

I'm skeptical because the character work in HTTYD was quite well done, and that's the first thing that gets shafted in any prequels. Rarely do they offer a compelling character arc for 3 films.

That's the problem I've had with these world expanding sequels.  Oh, they'll try to add some character arc to it, but it'll be half-assed in relation to the effort to become bigger and bigger with the world-building.  It usually feels tacked on, especially because the first self-contained and unassuming movie really ties up the character work nicely.  Hiccup's relationship with Toothless and his relationship with his father were brought to a very satisfying close.  Anything from there usually feels like complicating things just to complicate them.

Where do you take these characters emotionally now while keeping it feeling natural?  Will Hiccup have a big head now?  Some buried character flaw that we've yet to see?  Everything's just so hunky-dory at the end of the movie.

Now, you could say that was the case for Star Wars as well, but Luke's impatience in Empire was a natural extension of his youthful character in Star Wars, but it was given an added jolt by having him be in a rush to save his friends.  Marty's unwillingness to decline a challenge was definitely added in the sequels, but I'm pretty sure it was already there in the first movie (just not called out in dialog).