User blog comment:Dual Energon/What I think makes HTTYD 2 the supremely better movie./@comment-24018437-20151113155518/@comment-24865409-20151218125930

@ Megadracosaurus

"If the Berkians were war-hungry barbarians that declared war for the sake of declaring war, they would have been at war with the Outcasts and god’s knows who else for a long time."

Yeah, well actual vikings were like that.

"Each culture has its own opinion of what honor is."

And I'm sure cheating and gloating ain't part of one's honour code at all.

"There are plenty of historians who agree that Japan had to be bombed, but there are also plenty who confirm what I said."

From what I've seen in my history studies, 99% of historians agreed that the bombing of Japan was right.

"So just because someone else did something worse, means you can do horrible stuff and get away with it?"

When I say do horrible stuff, I meant doing it at the same person/people.

Take for example serial killers. If I ever manage to intercept a serial killer, I will kill them without hesitation. Because it's righteous.

"Once the UN and several other organisations found out about the unfair process and the use of torture, the base was closed."

Well that's good.

"Like I said, an alliance would have meant more soldiers, more resources, more money, more weapons, more influence, more territory and much more. How is that a bad thing?"

How would you know that those Iraqi bastards wouldn't double-cross us?

"In the end, the terrorists won."

The news says otherwise.

Besides, good and bad will always co-exist in this mortal world. It's the responsiblity of the good people to be heroes and kill the bad guys.

"And in the mean time, you’re ending lives and ripping apart families, leaving behind orphans and widows wherever you go. You’re killing people who had nothing to do with it for your own selfish desires. It makes you just as worse as what you’re hunting."

I'd say it's 50/50.

Those lives lost are just collateral damage done because we're on the hunt for the effing terrorists.

"Sometimes, taking revenge makes things worse then they were before."

Again, it's a 50/50 chance.

If that’s the case, maybe you should take the option that leads to the least amount of deaths."

If everyone is willing to agree on that.

Key Word = everyone

If the opponents don't agree, fine then. We'll crush them.

"The terrorists did. And they won in the end. Because the US was too busy killing innocents, instead of focusing on the real threat."

You're such a cynical man, you know that?

Terrorists aren't winning. We've got them on the run.

And to be honest, I don't mind what the US soldiers did. It was necessary and it is more glorious than what you'll ever do in your life.

"Except those countries that they fought against during the war, like Germany, weren’t allowed to joint he League. Even the US itself didn’t join."

America wasn't in charge of the League.

The British bastards and the arrogant French were.

America saw the League would fail with this kind of leadership and just gave up on it.

"You claim vengeance is the right way, and you’d happily kill innocent people for your own ends."

Here is a hint that you're not picking up.

I'd go to extremes if I'm pushed to do so. I will try to be nice, but once you get me over the edge, I'm over the edge until I decide to get back.

So, lesson for everyone, don't push people past their limits.

"Snape and Batman committed questionable acts for a greater goal that ended up saving people."

I have seen heroes that can save people without resorting to questionable acts.

And there are a lot of people who dislike Batman (he's so overrated) - he can cause collateral damage, but he will refuse to kill the villain (but he will get brutal with the villain if the ones that he loves are in danger - selfish prick).

And a lot of people believe Snape was unnecessary and were happy to see him bite the dust. I'm one of those people.

"They didn’t slaughter thousands of innocent people for their own selfish desires of revenge."

Oh, sure Batman didn't slaughter innocents. But the villains that escape from him (because he chooses not to kill them) does. If Batman had even 1% of a brain then he'd be finishing off the criminals on the spot.

And Snape was a Death Eater before reforming to the good side. A Death Eater is basically the equivalent of a Nazi in the Wizarding World. Not to mention that Snape only turned good because Voldemort killed the woman he loved. If Voldemort hadn't done so, Snape would still be on his side.

"Like I said, if Japan was ready to surrender any moment, it was an unnecessary slaughter."

That's just it.

Japan was not surrendering.

"We know he’s insane and evil. But he never thought of himself as that. He saw himself as a great hero and leader. Nobody thinks of themselves as evil or insane."

Maybe, but if there's proof of one being evil, then they're F**KING EVIL.

Doesn't matter what they think or say. If they've been proved to be evil and cruel, then they're damn evil and cruel.

"They’re not dumbasses. They’re just humans."

There is a difference between those two words, you know that?

Evil are dumbasses. Enough said.

"And I’m not cynical. I’m realistic."

I'm pretty sure at least 25% of what you've said on this comment thread proves you're more cynical than realistic.

"Bring up 9/11, and he’ll be downright pissed."

Then that Iraqi bastard should be approving of what the US did.

I know I do.

"Yet Book!Hiccup was treated worse then his film counterpart and forgave them anyways, even Snotlout who had attempted to kill land backstab him multiple times."

Hiccup didn't forgive Snotlout until the 11th Book.

And from what I've read so far, Hiccup hasn't said anything along the lines of "it's okay" or "all is forgiven".

Not to mention that Book Hiccup knows how much the vikings are a pain in the ass at times. That's something Movie Hiccup could learn.

In several of Book Hiccup's monologues, he mentions how stupid, dumb or idiotic the vikings are.

Never seen Movie Hiccup do that at all.

"Both the Hooligan tribes don’t apologize to Hiccup. Sure, they accept him as their savior and hero (And king in the novels) but they never apologise. Even Valhallarama says she can’t regret or apologise for neglecting her family so much. Both Stoicks are very stubborn and often don’t listen to their sons, and tend to decide what’s best for them without their say in the matter."

Yeah, but the Books don't paint the Hooligans as heroes or people to sympathize with, unlike the Movies do.

I mean, are we really supposed to root for the Hooligans at the climax in the 1st Movie? I sure as hell didn't root for them.

Then they're described as peace-loving and pacifistic in the 2nd Movie. What the fudge were the writers thinking?

In the Books, the Hooligans are portrayed as unpleasant obstacles standing in Hiccup's way to becoming a hero.

Also, just let me finish reading the series and see if you're claim that they don't apologize holds up.

"Even Hiccup himself points out ridiculous the tradition is."

While Movie Hiccup would try and sugarcoat his opnion, even though he would be right.

At least Book Hiccup is more honest.

"Movie!Hiccup was verbally humiliated."

Another stupid change from the screenwriters which they think would make everyone root for the Berkians. It didn't exactly work.

"In the movie universe, the weakest of the litter is called Hiccup. This happens in the novels too."

Wrong! Book Fishlegs was smaller than Hiccup, while Camicazi (or as I like to say, Book Astrid) was even smaller.

In HTTYD 1 the filmmakers completely scrapped Fishlegs of one of his greatest traits - being a relatable and loyal friend to Hiccup.

Regarding Fishlegs being a relatable friend, that's because he's small like Hiccup in the Books. But the stupid filmmakers ruined that.

Not to mention that if they wanted to base Astrid off of Camicazi - they failed miserably!

"In the novels, Hiccup saves them from two Seadragons, a Roman invasion, an Exterminator attack and much more. Yet it takes them eight books to realize that maybe Hiccup isn’t so useless after all."

Gee, I thought you were a realist.

Because that scenario is infinitely more realistic than what happens in the movie.

"Once Hiccup proved himself as a hero, the people of Berk started to respect him as their hero and savior in the film."

All too easy.

Being an actual hero is much harder than that - as the Books have rightly shown.

Also, some sensible mild fans (like me) on the site FanFiction have called out the conveniences of HTTYD 1.

Here's one quote:

"One minute everyone hates him and sees him as useless, and then after the fight with the Red Death suddenly everything has changed and everyone likes him. They seemed to all change overnight, including his own father. I know it was a big battle and everything, but he took years of abuse and bullying from the village and his 'friends', and was ignored by his father for years, and then suddenly everything is ace. So a lot of things are kind of forced and skipped over, but it is a kid's movie."

Here's another quote: "The second concern is that everyone seems to act as if things are now just hunky-dory where Hiccup and the people of Berk are concerned. Sure, Hiccup slew the Red Death, and he’s the hero of the hour, but people have all-too-short memories about that sort of thing. How long before the people of Berk fall back into their habits of thinking that brawn and skill with a blade are the “true” measure of a person’s worth? If Hiccup has *any* intelligence at all (and he does), he has *got* to be asking himself that very question. In short, as the best fanfic writers have understood, the problem was *never* that the people of Berk had misjudged Hiccup and the Dragons. The problem was that they had the entirely wrong attitude. Almost to a person, they were a bunch of close-minded bigots whose entire attitude could be summed up as: “Never think – always act; anything you don’t understand is to be hated and/or feared.”  Until and unless the people of Berk came to understand that the problem wasn’t that they had misjudged Hiccup and the Dragons, but that they had a simply *terrible* attitude to begin with, there could be no realistic hope that they would *truly* accept either Hiccup or the Dragons. And Hiccup is more than smart enough to realize this."  ''"I already answered everything you said about him being abusive. The reason he scolded Hiccup, why kept him away from the fights, why he eventually allowed him to join Dragon Training, why did and said certain things etc." Yeah, but despite that, it was WRONG for Stoick to be abusive.Can't you get that simple fact?  "Hiccup was the first person to figure out dragons could be befriended." Uh, wrong. Valka was the first to see that dragons could be befriended. And it wasn't through luck that she made her discovery. I also feel the need to mention that Hiccup was showing everyone that dragons could be befriended - without the need for any fighting - in the arena, before they stupidly butted in.  Oh, and by the way, when did I insult your spelling? Give a quote of me insulting your spelling.Oh that's right. You can't because I didn't.  "Hiccup had put lives in danger, let the dragons escape and endangered the food supply by ignoring orders."'' I disagree about endangering the food supply. "He had put the village in danger. He still got off lucky." He did not get off lucky. That was overkill and sane people would know that. "Stoick was simply telling the truth and he was right: Hiccup wasn’t a dragon killer." In other words, Stoick is basically telling his son that he's useless. (ABUSIVE.) Also, if we go by that, then Stoick should not have been surprised when Hiccup found a much better way of ending the war. "I don’t care about excuses of collateral damage." Yeah?! And those who want revenge don't care about those who get in the way. Revenge is righteous. You get in the way, you'll get killed. Too effing bad. We don't give a damn about you pussies. "And you consider yourself to be justified and moralistic, when you wouldn’t lift a finger when people get slaughtered for no reason at all and you know that?" I would actually do something abou that. I don't know where you got that crap from, you blasted liar. You're not defending CGI vikings. You're defending representations of abusive bastards. I don't care if heroes cross the line. They are still heroes - more so than you'll ever be in your sorry life. "That’s different from unintentionally killing people for a higher goal." You're bloody fickle, you know that?! Kill people who get in the way = bad in your book. Accidentally kill people who get in the way = bad in your book. You can't have it both ways. And maybe you should sympathize with those who were pushed way past their limits and are simply returning the favour. "Those territories were currently under rule of other countries. Hitler invaded those countries to get it back." First of all, those territories belonged to Germany. Second, out of all the history books I've read, none of them state that Hitler killed to get back what was Germany's territory. "It has flaws. I’m merely explaining the reason behind those flaws." Yeah, well you should know that there are people who expect improvement as movies and tv shows go along. Improvement is a sign of a good movie / tv show.