User blog comment:Dual Energon/What I think makes HTTYD 2 the supremely better movie./@comment-24018437-20151113155518/@comment-24018437-20151116150012

They indeed want to fight Dragons. But ask yourself: why? Is it for pleasure or sport, to just kill? Or do they fight and kill Dragons because they believe they are defending their Tribe, home, family and friends in doing so? If you grew up with an enemy that attacked your family on a daily basis, it would be surprising if you didn't want to kill that enemy. Especially if you lost a loved one to that enemy, like Stoick had with Valka. You want to fight that enemy out of vengeance, but also because you want to prevent something like that from happening again. And most of all: to survive. If their survival is at stake, most people will want to fight. The Vikings didn't start the war, but they did want to finish it once and for all to ensure their survival.

So, yes. They were, actually. The Dragons raided them, the Vikings fought back and eventually started to Search for their nest, thinking that would end the fight once and for all. Seems pretty clear to me they didn't suddendly started volunteering to be attacked. And actually, yes. Valka did. But in that time, everyone thought Dragons were extremely dangerous creatures that couldn't be reasoned with. Would you willingly walk up to a lion without any defense whatsoever and without any garantee its not gonna attack? Most people would think you're mad. And if that lion was instead a swarm of firebreathing, large, flying reptiles that attacked your home on a daily basis, the madness level goes up.

That's also because he and Stoick have a history together, and Gobber is one of the most exsperienced veterans in the Tribe, to the point Stoick trusts him to lead Dragon training. Of course he is therefore one of the most respected members of the Tribe.

Who said he did indeed? He never said anything about making weapons for the Tribe. He also never offered someone else to try it. So...Yeah, why would we assume he was making them for everyone?

Being a 'good warrior with honour' is actually a matter of opinion and culture. To Nordic cultures, such as Vikings, fighting with honour meant to be brave and ruthless in battle, and dying in battle was the only honoreble way to die. They even believed that dying in battle or by a weapon was the only way to get into Valhalla. Yet some Asian cultures thought it was honoreble to commit suicide when they failed at something or dishonored their family, something the Vikings did not have. The concepts of being 'good' and 'honorable' vary from culture to culture. Some cultures think showing mercy is honoreble and that being ruthless in battle is bad. Yet there are also cultures who believe showing mercy is weak and that being ruthless to your opponent is good. So its difficult to pin-point what a good, honoreble warrior is because it varies from culture to culture and individuel to individuel.

It was shown in the series, actually. He visited several isles to discuss things, and he invited the Berserkers over to Berk to sign a peace treaty. But if you don't consider that as canon, then another example might be the fact it was shown the Chieftains of the various Tribes gathered on Berk to listen to Drago. Why Berk and the island of another person or just a neutral, random island? I think that means something. But that could be just me.

Weeeeell...First, you need to capture the animal you want to domesticate. Which is harder then you might think. You need to capture it and if you succeed, then that animal has to have the traits you wish. If you caught an animal that is generally docile, that's good if you want a beast of burden. But if you want to breed a, let's say attack dog, you want an aggresive specimen. Let's take wolves for example. They would need creatures peacefull enough to tame, yet not to docile to be useless. And once you have the perfect animal to start domesticating, you need two of them.

After that, the full domestication come's. Which is done through years and years of breeding. You want an animal that is kind? Then breed two animals that are exactly that. Want an aggresive one? Breed two aggresive animals with one another. But it also goes on looks. And that's tricky, because you don't know the result. You only know if the animal is the right result when its fully mature. And if it isn't...Well, you just wasted your time and have to start from scratch. But getting the animal you want is not just breeding one time. It usually take several generations! And even then things can go wrong. The legs are to short, the face is to flat etc. It can take years and years, and it usually does, before the domesticating is complete. Usually a couple of centuries or at least a few decades.

In the current, modern era, this has become easier. We know what to do from exsperience and research, have knowlegde on genetics and just know more in general how to do things. And if we don't know something, we can always look it up on the internet or buy a book or contact an expert. Not to mention we can easily obtain animals we wish to use for breeding. With new knowlegde, technology and resources, we can domesticate a species in only a couple of years. For example, Russian sciencetists managed to breed a tamed species of fox after a mere ten years!

But when you look at the era Berk is in...Yeah, they didn't have what we have. And predators are generally hard to domesticate. I admire Hiccup was confident enough to throw away his weapon in order to befriend Hookfang, but if one would do that in real life with an actual predator, he or she would be dead. So...Yeah. That's how hard it is. And even then, domesticating and training aren't the same thing. A dog that keeps biting people and is mean may not be trained, but it is domesticaded.

And yes, this is how real domestication works. Its not laying your hand on the head of the animal you want to befriend or take it out on a ride. Its an extremely long, difficult process. Sure, you hear the heartwarming story of how a human and a wild animal befriend one another every once in a while, but most of those are purely fictional. And the one's that aren't are usually because the animal was raised by them, which is still no guarantee its never going to turn against them. And if you exclude those cases where the animal is raised...Well, let's just say that forming a bond with a wild animal that never had any positive or no human contact at all is so extremely difficult, that you might as well forget about it. Both for you and the animal's sake.

Actually, they did gave him good advice to listen too. Astrid was the only one who didn't take part in bullying Hiccup (Along with Fishlegs, though neither did anything to prevent Snotlout and the Twins from doing so) and actually gave him good advice: He never was where he should be. Which he indeed doesn't. If Hiccup actually would have used common sense and strategy instead of blindy rushing in or doing nothing, he could be a valueble asset in battle. The right timing is extremely important in battle, and can mean the difference between dying or living. And it just so happened to be Hiccup didn't posses that skill. So really, the critic and advice that he should work ln that is good advice.

Gobber's advice of not trying to be someone your not is also good. Again, imagine if Hiccup has focused on making life for the Tribe better with his skills and intellect instead of trying to be a Dragon Slayer (In which he sucked.) then his life most likely would have been very differant. Gothi was never a good warrior either, but she served the Tribe with what she could do and the people grew to respect her because of that. Hiccup, while trying to prove himself, usually made things even worse and that was the reason people started to dislike him. Gobber's advice was harsh but true. And in the end, Hiccup indeed stopped trying to be something he wasn't. And guess what? It was for the better.

And let's not forget 'Men who kill for no reason can't be reasoned with'. And this is also where Hiccup's stubborniss is shown very well. Both he and Stoick will refuse to listen to reason if they truly believe in something, even if its obvious they are in the wrong. For Stoick, this was when he attacked the Red Death. For Hiccup, this was when he tried to reason with Drago. Both ignored the advice of someone who knew better then them (Hiccup knew more about the Red Death and Stoick knew more about Drago) and both paid the price for the other one's mistake. Stoick's refusal to listen led to Hiccuo losing his leg. And Hiccup ignoring Stoick's orders of not going after Drago eventually killed his father. In a way, they actually kind of switched roles.

I agree. But the Red Death and the Green Death (Aka Merciless) aren't the same Dragon. Merciless was also aggresive and ferocious, but it was also intelligent, and Hiccup could talk with him. The Red Death was just aggresive, ferocious and we don't how intelligent it was. Plus, Hiccup just figured out how to train Dragons. I think the Red Death would have been too much. Maybe if he had come to the level he is now or abive he could have befriended it, but I'm highly skeptical about that.

I fail to see the logic behind that. I'm not excusing the way the Vikings treated Hiccup. I'm explaining WHY they treated him that way. Hiccup made a mess, and was therefore treated badly. Not the other way around. There was a reason behind the Tribe's behavior. They didn't just suddendly decide to all start hating Hiccup, he had to give them a reason first. And if something like in the opening happened more then once...Yeah, I can see where they're coming from. Hiccup made a mess, and they had to fix that.

And speaking of apologizing, Hiccup never said sorry either for anything he did wrong either. Destroying half of the village right when winter is around the corner and we'll all starve to death? Almost get your classmates killed? He gets away with a lot of stuff if you think about it. I can imagine Spitelout or any other Viking father (Both real and fictional) would have done FAR more then scolding Hiccup in front of everyone and grounding him, like Stoick did. And most of those punishments would probably include actual, psychial abuse.