Over the past decade, the Walt Disney studio has taken a lot of flak to return to the well and Discovering or re -examining a dozen of their classic animated films in live action (or the photorealistic computer generated images in the case of the "lion king") - and has a good reason for it. With the exception of "Cinderella", "The Little Mermaid" and "Kruella", most of Disney renewal do not approach their predecessors, with the element of live action taking a large part of the personality and imagination of those loved ones. Remeans are often too close to the original without much innovation, or reinforced and updated elements, which often include new original songs, do not add much to the magic that preceded it.

Therefore a lot (including yours really) leaned on a live remake with action the animation of DreamWorks "How to train your dragon" (despite her solid prospects for box office)Probably their favorite franchise outside Shrek (although "httyd" was aging far better and there are superior sequels). While marketing materials were packing a blow, thanks to composer Johnon Powell that returned to ensure a triumphant result, not much about the film looked like a bit more than a remake with little or no indications of significant changes or improvements made to the original. Well, there is not much to improve, because that original film is still a wonderful animated adventure.

So I am pleased to have reported that The remake “How to Train Your Dragon” is not worse from the original film. However, at the same time, I am also sad that I can say that director Dean Deanis's live transformation on his own animated film (the first time to appear such a script) remains so loyal to the original that there are several redemption qualities that make this film even.

If you have seen the original "how to train your dragon," you already know the story. If not, the film, again written by Dean Unbloyis, (this time without co-writer of the animated film William Davis, though his almost identical script basically makes him a co-writer) follows a teenager Viking, named Hikap (Mason Thames). While all his colleagues Vikings are heavy warriors ready to fight the dragons they often plague, steal livestock and burn their homes, the hack is unpleasant, launched and more prone to using his ingenuity in the face of danger. It's not good with the village chief, squeeze the huge (Ardarard Butler, replaying its previous voice role in live action), which also seems to be the father of Hikap.

But the life of Hikap will change in a great way when the mechanical weapon he invented ends up catching the night anger, one of the most unusual and deadliest dragons, known to the Viking species. However, no one believes in his success, and when Hikap realizes that he cannot bring himself to kill the black fire-graph, he begins to understand the true nature of the dragons. They are not evil beings who relentlessly attack by choice and they are completely misunderstood by the Vikings people.

Unfortunately, hiccap cannot allow anyone to know about his secret new dragon, so he learns to drive and fly the dragon, he comes to call him without teeth (because he initially appeared without teeth that can be withdrawn), and not to understand the peaceful and awkward ways of submitting the dragon, without the dragons of the dragon, without the dragon of them, without the dragon of them, without the dragon of the dragon, turning it from the village outside the village.

His Village Crush and Fellow Traine Astrid (Nico Parker of "The Last of Us" Training, but their peers snotlout (Gabriel Howell), Fishlegs (Julian Dennison), and siblings tuffnut and ruffnut (Harry Trevaldwyn and Bronwyn James accordingly) are looking forward to their skills. Things are becoming more complicated when Astrid teaches the secret of Hikap and reveal that there is an even worse threat awaiting the dragons nest, which has vowed to destroy their home once and for all.

Guess what? It is also played in the remake. Of course, it should be expected when you tell the same story, but the script raises every memorable moment and every funny line to the exact expression, and sometimes even the same footage as Jayei Barushel's beautiful Misfit, from the original animated film. Unfortunately, this is where another problem begins to play.

Mason Thames is undoubtedly charming and strange in its takeover, but he succeeds both the positive and negative of the similarly processed performance: Tom Holland as Peter Parker/Spiderman in Marvel's Chinese universe. Don't get me wrong, the Netherlands gives a top -notch appearance in MCC, but he is almost too beautiful and charismatic to be nervous and awkward as Peter Parker should be. The Thames has the same question, almost as if the Netherlands Peter Parker was given the same hairstyle as Jimim Halpert in the "Office". Although he has a lot of charm and certainly gives praise, there is something for him that simply does not feel natural as to climb.

On the other hand, Gererrard Butler shines in the processed role as Stoic (something we knew from the beginning). Butler plays the role more and more intense, but not so much for comedy. In fact, if there is one thing that the remake "how to train your dragon" succeeds in the same regard, it adds more cruel emotions to the actions. While the animation has the opportunity to pull on your heart and play with the feelings of the audience, there is something about live action that still hits a little harder, even in fantasy. Seeing a human face shows fear, anger, sadness, or any emotion often associated at a deeper level because we feel it more like another real life. Seeing the pain and disappointment that fills the eyes of both the Thames and Butler, because their story actually exceeds the emotion of the original.

Matching their emotional force is Nico Parker like Astrid. She has the courage and conviction of her performance, and you can often see her in her big, expressive eyes. But those eyes also have softness behind them, and when her keeper finally descends to accept hiccap, you see that she has a gentle side to compensate for her fierceness.

It also helps the composer Johnon Powell return to secure the result for the remake. Yes, the famous theme of the original is back, but the result feels much bigger and more large, maybe to match the scale of the film, another area where Dean Unbloys slightly improved the original "How to train your dragon" a bit. Since we deal with human characters, the adventure must feel greater than life, so there are moments that feel much more grounded, exciting and frightening in live action. In particular, when the dragons attack the Vikings in search of their nest in the middle of the film, the action sequence shows us what is happening to the warriors, rather than leaving it to our imaginations. It has been taken to a new new level in the film final, where the monstrous, Kiaiyu -sized dragon feels much worse and massively than his animated colleague.

Along with that, the flying sequences in the remake "How to Train Your Dragon" increase literally and figuratively (That's why they won some people in the trailer). Too often, scenes like this may feel false, but the visual effects on the film bring flying on the back of the dragons to life with the same excitement and magic as when Harry Potter drove at the back of Buckbeck in "Askaban Prisoner". But there is one element of "how to train your dragon" that visual effects cannot exceed.

While without teeth as a character is still undisputed cute, the photorealistic version of him still borrows too much from his animated colleague. It is a kind of sword with two blades and maybe impossible work to pull. If you make him look more realistic, his expressions and behavior may feel strange, Similar to the characters in the "Lion King" remake. But if you get closer to the original design of an animated character, it does not feel as if it existed harmoniously in real life. While the texture of the skin without teeth and its various animal features are revived with flawless details, the animated characters' design still looks strange in live action, especially when the rest of the dragons are tailored to look significantly less cartoon in their appearance. It may be the biggest obstacle that the film never exceeds. It and the continuous wrong steps to make a live -to -live remake without vibrant colors that made his predecessor so visually pleasing.

The remake "How to Train Your Dragon" has fun by default, simply because it tells almost the same story that proved to be successful in 2010. Unfortunately, with the exception of a few stylish changes and the emotional human element, it does not feel as if it is enough to justify the story of the story in a way that feels almost like a carbon copy of the original. It does not elevate the original film to new heights, but it adapts the effectiveness of certain elements, essentially breaking even, but eventually falls because it is too well -known territory.

Of course, maybe those who got rid of animated films could be inclined to check this, or children who have not yet experienced the animated version can watch the story for the first time, but the animated film was already well enough, and should not be diverted to what is essentially expensive.

Obviously, "how to train your dragon" is not as scary as some of Disney's remuneration there, and it is better than almost all, but not significant enough to guarantee its existence. We have "how to train your dragon" at home. It is the equivalent of the image of moving Tacos into Nakos, although Nachos can be tasty, they are not so good heated.

/Movie rating: 6 out of 10

"How to Train Your Dragon" opens in theaters on June 13, 2025.