Trailer Talk: "Guardians Of The Galaxy"

Welcome to a new segment of my blog, entitled "Trailer Talk." This segment will be relatively shorter than most of my other segments, but the jist of this will be that I will look at the newest trailer of an upcoming movie and give my thoughts and impression on what I see. I'll try to understand what the trailer is saying about the film. At the end, I will say whether I want to see the movie when it comes to theaters.

Up first is the last trailer to Marvel's latest superhero adventure, as they expand their universe beyond just Earth, but throughout the galaxy. Starring Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Vin Diesel and Bradley Cooper, this is "Guardians Of The Galaxy."

What catches my interest even further in this trailer is the abundance of comedy and the tone that is so different from other Marvel films, like "Captain America: The Winter Soldier," "The Incredible Hulk" and "Thor." While Marvel movies have been great at finding that balance between comedy and action in previous installments, like the "Iron Man" films and "The Avengers," this one leans much more on it than ever before.

I think this is due, in large part, to the fact that these are superheroes that most people have not heard of. This is Marvel's first attempt at making a movie about heroes that are not huge in pop culture, like Spider-Man or Wolverine.

This is a film about a talking raccoon who likes to use lots of guns and profanity, and whose best friend is a giant talking tree.



Marvel is taking a huge chance with this film, and for that reason alone, I really want to see this. I have little to no knowledge of the Guardians of the Galaxy, but from this trailer alone, it makes me want to see more of them.

Whether it is Chris Pratt's attempt to get the other Guardians on his side by talking about what they've lost or the banter between Pratt and Rocket Raccoon, this trailer still manages to hit all the right notes of a good Marvel movie. There is humanity in there and a reason to fight evil, but also a light-hearted side that will take a break to joke about percentages.

My only complaint is that it seems like the comedy is only within two characters, Chris Pratt's character and Rocket. Zoe Saldana and Dave Bautista's characters look like they might just be there to spout action one-liners and kick large amounts of buttocks, and not get involved in the hilarity.

And Groot is, well, just Groot. I think he makes that perfectly clear.

In any case, I'm excited to see where "Guardians Of The Galaxy" goes. It is new ground for Marvel, and considering the amount of comedy in some of their earlier entires, this one should have more than a fair share of it.

Excitement Level: Seeing this on opening weekend

Welcome to the new Seeing Is Believing!

Welcome to the new and improved Seeing Is Believing. If you take a look around the blog, you will find many changes and updates that make this more accessible and user-friendly. Not to mention a different design and layout.

So, to help users out, let's go through what has changed about Seeing Is Believing and what can be expected in the future.

Design

This is entirely the work of Seeing Is Believing's new contributor, Jaime Williams. With experience in web design and being an online editor for a college newspaper, Jaime has worked hard to make this site more than just a place for me to give out my opinions.

At this point in time, Jaime is still working on the design of the blog, so things might change over the course of the next few weeks. Please be patient with us as we work things out.

Banners

As you can see, the site now has its own logo and banner, designed by Jaime. It is a combination of the many stills I've used over the course of my reviews and I feel it captures what I like about cinema in just a few images.

Now on Wordpress

Blogger is not the only way to see my reviews now. I have now adopted another domain over on Wordpress, by the same name, and have set up base there as well. Everything I've done on this site is also up there, so if you prefer to use Wordpress over Blogger, feel free to head on over there and check the blog out.

The link can be found here:

http://paulselluloid.wordpress.com/

Also, I don't believe I've mentioned this before, but I also post the majority of my articles and editorials on another website called "World Of Entertainment," a fun little site where we talk about anything movie or television related, or anything nerdy. It is helmed by fellow Eastern Washington University graduates, so give it a look:

http://worldofentertainment.info/

Facebook and Twitter are go!

I have now set up a Facebook page dedicated solely to my website. All new articles, reviews and editorials will be posted there, as well as any more news about the blog, daily insights into my thought process, film knowledge and community questions. So head on over there and give that a like and let me know what you think.

I also have (reluctantly) set up a Twitter page for myself. Links to my articles will be posted there as well, and any news to keep you up to date on the blog. So if you'd like to discuss anything film related or just say hello, you can follow me on Twitter.

Both of these will be linked on both the Wordpress and Blogger sites. Trust me, liking the Facebook page or following me on Twitter really does help me out. It lets me know what I'm doing right and lets me get in better contact with my readers. So if you have even the slightest interest in my articles, I'd be eternally grateful for a Facebook like.

I plan to get Google+ and Tumblr set up some time in the future, so stay tuned for that.

Google Ads have been activated

The last big change to the website is that I have turned on Google Ads. Meaning that every once in a while, an advertisement for Wal-Mart or Home Depot might pop up. It will never be anything that will give your computer a virus, I promise.

The reason I turned the ads on is because, with them on, I get paid a certain amount of money from Google, based on how many page views I get. The more people look at my articles, the more money I get.

I apologize if this seems greedy or like I'm selling out. Look at this way, if I get paid to write now, I'll be even more inclined to do it. That means you'll get even more content. It's a win-win situation. Also know that I am not doing this solely for the money. I do this so that I can share my love and passion for cinema with you guys and hopefully give you a bit more clarity on the matter.

To me, the money is just a nice after thought. It's not my main focus, and it never will be, but I won't complain about getting it.

However, if my readers complain about the ads getting in the way or something to that extent, I'll be more than happy to turn them off.

I am waiting for approval from Google to allow ads on the site, so you might not see ads around the site for a few more weeks.

That is about it for the new changes. Thanks for sticking with me through all of this and I hope that I can continue to keep you guys entertained. If you guys have something you'd like to tell me, suggest or criticize, please leave a comment below or like that Facebook page and send me a message there.

In the mean time, enjoy the many new reviews and articles that I just put out on the site. We have a few new reviews, including ones for "How To Train Your Dragon 2," "Edge Of Tomorrow," "Jason And The Argonauts" and "22 Jump Street," a new mission statement about what I want to do with the blog and my top five films of 2014 thus far.

Catch you later guys, and remember to stay awesome.

Mission Statement For Seeing Is Believing

With the relaunch of this website, and the expansion of my reviews, I feel it is necessary to point out exactly what this blog is supposed to do. What I want to do and how I plan to do it.

The mission of "Seeing Is Believing" has always remained the same: Providing the reader with some insight or film knowledge that they may had not considered. To give a unique and fresh perspective on the world of cinema.

My goal is not to give the end all-be all of reviews or the definitive way to view any movie, because there is no such thing. There is no one right way to watch a film, therefore it is impossible to have a correct opinion or wrong opinion. The only thing I can do is offer up my opinion in the best way I know how and hope that it improves your way of thinking about cinema.

Because watching a film is one thing, but reading a review on the same film and hearing a different perspective is something else entirely. To see what is bad about a film you loved or hearing about the silver lining in a terrible film can change so much about your outlook that gets you thinking.



And that's what I want my articles to do: Make you think. I've had plenty of people tell me that, even though they often disagree with me liking or disliking a certain film, they at least appreciated what I had to say and respect my opinion. That's all I can ask for.

I do not expect people to agree with everything I say. If you like "22 Jump Street" or hate "Stand By Me," that's fine. The last thing I want to do is force my readers to only like what I like. In fact, I encourage everyone to embrace their feelings on cinema and not care what others have to say about it.

You should be able to like what you want to like.

But at the same time, respect and kindness is the key. To treat other people as equals, as well as their opinions and feelings. Just because someone thinks differently than you does not mean they should be treated badly. Try to understand where they are coming from, so that you will not only get a new perspective but it might also reshape your own opinions.

Film reviews are nothing more than elaborate and well-explained opinions on any given film. Opinions, by their very nature, are subjective and will vary from person to person. That is what makes talking about film so much fun. To hear all the different opinions and know that yours is just as valid as any other opinion out there.

So embrace that, and you will have as much fun with film criticism as I do.

Top Five Films of 2014 (so far)

It is weird to think that we are already half way through 2014. It only feels like yesterday I was talking about the best of 2013 and the Oscars, yet now the Summer Blockbusters are halfway done and most of my most anticipated films of the year have already been released.

So far, I have mixed feelings about the films released in 2014. It is kind of like a multiplying effect; when the films were good, they were really good, but when they sucked, they were almost painful to watch, like "22 Jump Street."

However, seeing how most of the best films released this year have been summer blockbusters, it really is not fair to judge it too much. So instead, lets look at the five best films released in 2014 thus far.

These are the five films that have stuck with me long after I left the theater and reminded me how much fun going to the movies can be. Whether they made me think, laugh, cry, terrified or somewhere between, these movies made an impact on me.



Five: "The Grand Budapest Hotel"

This is a typical Wes Andersen film, with standard of dry humor, characters talking directly to the camera, while moving and behaving more like dolls than human beings.

But really, is that a bad thing?

I'd say the only thing "The Grand Budapest Hotel" does differently is by expanding its cast even further than usual, while also having a more grand sense of scope and size. While Wes Andersen films typically have a large cast, this one in particular felt much larger, with each new character being played by a well-known and respected actor. This film also takes place over a vast landscape, as well as a war.

This gives the dry humor of a Wes Andersen film even more heft and irony. So while this feels like every other Wes Andersen film, it also does a few things to diversify itself from that same group of cinema.



Four: "The Raid 2"

I did not think it was possible, but a movie actually managed to be more brutal and graphic than "The Raid: Redemption."

It is interesting to compare the first Raid film to its sequel, as they both have many similarities of themes and atmosphere, but also drastically different stories and wider range of characters. But one thing that remained consistent between both films were the fight sequences still being fresh and exciting to watch.

Let's face it, to have a good martial arts sequence these days is incredibly difficult. We've seen it all before and nothing really surprises us. But the creators of the Raid films still find a way to make each fight memorable and intense. By introducing fighters who each have a unique look and fighting style, each one feels different from the last while still remaining fast-paced and brutal.

That is what makes "The Raid 2" so much fun to watch. It is different enough from "The Raid: Redemption" but still keeping its core of solid fight sequences and a basic human drive that makes us care about the brawls.



Three: "Godzilla"

I couldn't help myself. This one had to be on the list.

The more I thought about this film, the more I really started to enjoy it. At times, it is reminiscent of films like "Jaws" and "Alien," in how it builds up to the eventual reveal of Godzilla, but knowing when to hold back and not give us too much Godzilla, or else the audience would grow tired of him.

Not since "Godzilla, Mothra, King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All Out Attack" have I felt a giant monster walk around with so much weight, power and strength. Without even showing us his face, you get the impression of how imposing and earth-shattering Godzilla is. And he looms over every scene in the film, waiting to strike like a shark on the prowl.

While I still believe the acting is the weakest part of the film, it is never so bad that it becomes grating or annoying. It's just so average that it does nothing for me. If we had one more actor who was on the same level of intensity as Bryan Cranston or unflinching and intelligent as Ken Watanabe, then this would have been a wonderful film.

But, for what it was, I thoroughly enjoyed "Godzilla." It had just the right amount of monster sequences, while still having a balanced human story and some great moments of tragedy and heartbreak. It honored the character of Godzilla and knew exactly what he stands for.



Two: "Captain America: The Winter Soldier"

This is a much more sophisticated movie than I thought it would be. I expected some degree of intelligence, like I do with most Marvel movies these days, but what we got was an argument about the blurred lines between good and evil and whether we can truly fight for one side when both are so messed up.

Captain America is one of the most basic superheroes imaginable: He fights for what he believes is right and just. Which makes the argument of "right vs. wrong" so powerful in this film. Even more so when put in a world that is constantly evolving, with new global threats appearing every day and trust is thrown right out the door.

This was a nice divergent from the typical superhero film of the villain being one-dimensional and predictable, and instead being a corrupt version of ourselves. In a world where demigods can smite us at any moment or another alien invasion could take out a major city, protection and justice are needed even more for the people. But when we focus so much on protection, we end up putting fear and terror in everyone.

So really, is that the right thing to do? I'm not sure, and I don't think Cap is sure either.



One: "The Lego Movie"

This gets number one on my list because I have never seen any film quite like "The Lego Movie." Not just stop-motion animation with legos throughout the entire film, but the world of legos. How the different lands of legos interact, how the master builders can take apart the landscape and rerrange it at will, how each piece of brick can used as a tool and how it all comes together with its twist in the end.

"The Lego Movie" is what I love about cinema. It is fun, imaginative, exciting, thought-provoking, intelligent, witty and is something that can be enjoyed by people of all ages. No matter what your film preferences are, there is something to be enjoyed in this movie.

The goal of this film is to make you feel like a child again. Coming up with your own grand adventure with your toys and legos, even using household items as some sort of foreign and ancient treasure. Yet, in the end, the film is also about growing up and moving on from your toys to have an even bigger adventure, while still remembering the good times you had.

"The Lego Movie" nails that aspect every step of the way, while still keeping up its pleasant and friendly environment where everything is awesome.

The Hopper #9

"Edge Of Tomorrow" (2014)



Sometimes a film works out better when you go in with zero expectations. When I saw the trailer for "Edge Of Tomorrow," I had no interest in seeing it. To me, it looked like a sci-fi/action version of Harold Ramis' "Groundhog Day" while replacing the hilarious deadpan of Bill Murray with the aging and out-of-place Tom Cruise.

But, much to my surprise, I began to hear people saying it was a fun and enjoyable film and worth a viewing. So, since I hadn't been to the movies in a while, I decided to go see a couple of films, and "Edge Of Tomorrow" was the first on my list.

I went in expecting to be put to sleep or be insulted by how it portrayed our militaries, but came out having a good time. Part of this was because, like myself, the film did not take itself seriously at all. It recognized the ridiculous situation of Tom Cruise reliving the same battle again and again and decides to have as much fun with it.

For the last few years, Europe has been slowly overtaken by a race of aliens, known as the Mimics, with military forces trying their best to combat them, with no success. Now these aliens threaten to overtake the rest of the world, which leads the armies of Earth to launch an all-out strike against the Mimics before they can fight back. The United States even brings in a new military weapon that makes even the most untrained rookies become expert soldiers.

Major William Cage (Tom Cruise) gets sucked into this attack, even though he faints at the sight of blood. After being branded a deserter and reduced to the rank of Private, Cage is enlisted and set into combat, only to be killed like every other soldier sent in. So it surprises Cage when he finds himself at back at the base, living the day again.

The enjoyment of the film comes out of logical path Cage takes as he relives the battle countless times. We are never given an exact number of how many times he has done this, but it is enough to try to save everyone in his company from being squashed, burned alive or shot, as well as learning where each of his platoon members comes from, how they got their nicknames and why they enlisted.

The snarky comments that Cruise develops over repeated outcomes is what brings a smile to my face and show that he is having fun with this. That Cruise is not treating this like another action role, but as a distinct character who has lived this moment far too many times.

Rather than focusing on the philosophical implications of this, "Edge Of Tomorrow" instead decides to joke around with the scenario. Cage never complains about wanting out of this, but embraces this opportunity as a way to help the human race.

This is what I mean by the film not taking itself seriously. This could have been a dark and gritty tale about a cursed man who is being tortured to live this nightmare for all eternity. Yet, this is about a man's struggle to save the world with his unique gift. For that reason, this film is fun to watch.

Final Grade: B-


"22 Jump Street" (2014)

Oh boy. I can tell this is going to be another bad year for comedies.

My biggest complaint with 2013 was the lack of good comedies, with the two films that made me laugh the most being "The Wolf Of Wall Street" and "Iron Man 3." If "22 Jump Street" and the trailers before it are any indication, I get the feeling 2014 is going to go the same way.

Here's the thing about comedy in films: While these types of movies are created to make us laugh, they are still like any other work of cinema. If they fail at storytelling and filmmaking, then no amount of comedy is going to save it.

For whatever reason, most comedies over the last few years have simply become excuses to have a few gags or stand-up comedians try their routine on a grander scale. This is why movies like "Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues" and "This Is The End" fail as movies. They might make you laugh, but that doesn't make them good films, just good joke-fodder.

"22 Jump Street" falls into the same class as many other comedies of the last few years, by having some jokes that work, some that don't, and all wrapped up in a plot that is nonsensical, convoluted and does not amount too much.

After the success of their last undercover operation, Schimdt (Jonah Hill) and Jenko (Channing Tatum) try to do some bigger police work, only for it to fail spectacularly. This leads them to be reassigned to do the same operation they had done, by being sent in as college students to investigate a new type of drug that has led to the death of a student.

As I mentioned, there are jokes that do get a good laugh, and those are mostly when the film is being as meta as possible. For example, Jenko wants to do something more with his career, like becoming a member of the secret service and protect the president, an oh-so subtle nod to Channing Tatum doing just that in Roland Emmerichs' "White House Down." Or that the boss of Jump Street (played by Ice Cube) gets a brand new office...that looks like a giant ice-cube.

But the funniest moments come during the closing credits, when the filmmakers clearly state that they are not going to make anymore "Jump Street" movies, and instead decide to throw out every ridiculous idea for possible sequels, with names like "25 Jump Street" or "2121 Jump Street." This includes the role of Schimdt, at one point, being replaced by Seth Rogan and back to Jonah Hill.

Yet, there lies the problem. The funniest part of the film comes during the end credits. I don't know about you, but I think that's sad and says a lot about how unfunny the rest of the movie is. Even more so since these credits have nothing to do with the rest of the film.

The plot is a jumbled-up mess. It wanders around aimlessly, trying to find a point and reason for all the comedy to exist, but spends no time developing these characters that it becomes pointless. When "22 Jump Street" tries any sort of drama, it fails miserably because there is no resolution to any of it.

It all becomes an excuse just to lead to more unfunny comedy, like Jenko trying to join a Frat house or both trying to discuss their feelings as "partners" with the school psychiatrist.

So while there are certainly funny moments in "22 Jump Street," it is not worth sitting through the rest of the movie to get there. Just wait for those scenes to come out as clips on YouTube and you won't miss a thing.

Final Grade: D+

Movie Review: "Jason And The Argonauts" (1963)

It should be known that I've only before watched one other Ray Harryhausen film, "The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms." It did not go well.

While I do believe that Harryhausen's effects were the best part of that particular movie, it certainly was not enough to save it from being a bad movie. The story was forgettable, the characters were laughable and the pacing was all over the place. So while I do not blame Harryhausen for what made the film unbearable, it was still a painful monster movie to watch at times.

Yet, I could still understand the genius behind what Ray Harryhausen did in the film. While stop-motion animation existed long before he did, Harryhausen took it to an entirely different level by creating detailed and intricate creatures which moved with their own breath and heart beat.

This is why I believe "Jason And The Argonauts" is often called Harryhausen's best work. In earlier films, you get one or two creatures with this beautiful animation, but in "Jason" you get no fewer than four distinctly diverse monsters, each with their own movement and sequence.



During the time of the Greek Gods, the greedy Pelias attacks the city of Thessaly, kills King Aristo, and takes it for himself. This angers Zeus and his wife, Hera, because Pelias goes against the orders of the gods and kills an innocent woman in Hera's temple. Out of this, a prophecy is born, where the child of Aristo would be the one to rise up and kill Pelias.

Twenty years later, the only remaining child of Aristo, Jason (Todd Armstrong), has now reached manhood and intends to get his kingdom back from Pelias by obtaining the Golden Fleece from the far off land of Colchis, at the end of the world. After an meet with Zeus and Hera, Jason promises to get the Fleece his own way, but praises the gods for their generosity.

And so, Jason assembles the strongest and bravest men in Greece to join him on his journey to the end of the world, where they face many threats, including some from within his own crew.



Like with "The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms" the special effects work in this film is the real highlight. There are so many sequences that stick out in my mind, and each one has a difference in size and scope.

Some are compact and tight-fisted, like the battle with the Harpies or the sword-wielding skeletons. While others are massive and must quick thinking over brawn, like the copper statue of Talos or crossing the chasm of the Clashing Rocks, only to be saved by the sea-god, Triton.

The struggle against Talos sticks out to me more than most others, because of how Talos moves and his appearance. I say Talos is made of copper, because he appears brown and shiny on some surfaces, but is rusted and green on others, much like the Statue of Liberty. Talos is not some creature with an armor coating, but a statue given life and acts so. He is massive, impenetrable, dense and uncaring.



Each of these sequences gives the movie character and adds to this world of gods and monsters. The diversity is what makes the film worth watching over and over.

However, if "Jason And The Argonauts" falters on anything, it would be the lack of development for characters and story. We get some story in the beginning of the film, but only enough to set up the basics: Jason is pissed off at Pelias and wants to get his kingdom back, so he'll get the Fleece to do just that.

Everything else is an excuse to lead into the next action sequence, as Jason and his crew travel across the world and meet many dangerous obstacles along the way. After awhile, it becomes predictable and makes the non-action sequences forgettable and not worthy mentioning.

This gets even worse when few of the Argonauts have any sort of character. We hardly learn the names of any of these brave and fearless warriors, let alone what the offer to the group. The only ones we do learn about are quickly abandoned in the story, like Hercules and the young intelligent man that he befriends. While their bonding is nice to see, we only get a scene or two of that before the film focuses on other aspects.



Which is rather disappointing, since the scene where Jason holds a contest to see who gets to sail with him was an enjoyable sequence, with a wide ranger of characters showing of their unique talents and how cocky they were because of their skills. It shows there was a chance for good characterization in this film, but it was forgotten in favor of other aspects.

In the end though, I got a similar feeling from "Jason And The Argonauts" as I did from a good Godzilla film: A film that takes itself rather seriously, but still has a good sense of adventure and fun. It is not afraid to pull any punches, but it knows that people are here to see some exciting action sequences and delivers on that.

For what "Jason And The Argonauts" does with its monster and sword sequences, the film excels, with wonderful work by Ray Harryhausen and a fitting score by Bernard Herrmann (composer of "Vertigo" and "Psycho") that amplifies the tension and direness to many fights. The problem comes with just about everything else being lackluster or forgotten. The film is fun to watch for its towering Talos statue or skeleton sword fight, but don't expect that level of excitement throughout the entire movie.

Final Grade: B

Movie Review: "How To Train Your Dragon 2" (2014)

Sometimes, a great film lies in the little details. The small, sometimes insignificant pieces, that when on their own don't add up to much. But when you put them all together, you suddenly realize all of the time and craft put into developing the world of the movie and making it fully fleshed out.

One such film is "How To Train Your Dragon." On the surface, it is a by-the-numbers animated film with some impressive 3D effects and a cliched story. But then you realize how each dragon moves and acts differently from any other creature. They all have their own strengths, weaknesses and personalities, and all without ever hearing these dragons speak a word of dialogue.

It also helps that the film never once relied on pop culture references, like so many other animated films restort to these days, especially other Dreamworks films. Nothing dates your film more than a Honey Bobo reference or trying so hard to be like the Genie from "Aladdin," the granddaddy of animated pop culture references.



Yet the strength of "How To Train Your Dragon" lied in how developed its world was. This mythological hole-in-the-wall where dragons have been attacking Vikings for generations, yet now they learn to tame and befriend these beasts to learn that everything they knew about them was wrong.

Its recent sequel, "How To Train Your Dragon 2," follows up on the story of its main characters, but seems to miss other aspects that leave the audience wanting more.

In the far off land of Berk, a land of Vikings, dragons have now been living there comfortably for five years, with each citizen now having their own dragon. Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) has now become the dragon rider master of Berk, alongside his own dragon, Toothless, and constantly goes out to explore the surrounding land to locate new types of dragons.

But when dragon raiders show up to capture Toothless, Hiccup finds out about the mysterious Drago Bludvist, who intends to enslave every dragon and conquer the world through fear and fire. Now it is up to Hiccup and his father, Stoick the Vast (Gerard Butler), to stop Drago before he gets to Berk, while also finding some help a cloaked figure who seems to understand all dragons.



The animation in this film was stunning, to say the least. It captured the breath-taking visuals of the flying sequences in the first film, but it seemed to work even harder on simple things, like facial emotions. I don't know what they did, but the emotions on so many characters faces were so distinct and poured out that I could tell exactly what they were thinking.

There's a scene where Hiccup discovers who the cloaked figure is, and the look of initial shock slowly turns to excitement and happiness and then back to sadness. All without saying a word, I can tell what Hiccup is going through. We connect with him through our emotions alone, something quite rare for animated films.

That being said, the film is so wrapped up in the story that it has no time to develop the world around it. In the last film, we had only a handful of different types of dragons, but we got a distinct flavor of how each one worked. In "How To Train Your Dragon 2," we are introduced to countless new dragons, yet we learn nothing about them.



The cloaked figure, for example, has a four-winged dragon that has multiple scars on it, but we get nothing more than that. There is clearly a story to her behemoth but they leave us empty-handed.

The only characters in "How To Train Your Dragon 2" who get any sort of development are Hiccup, Stoick, Drago, the cloaked figure and Hiccup's girlfriend, Astrid (America Ferrera), sort of. Everyone else is there to be comic relief or a weak romantic subplot that doesn't go anywhere.

It is "Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs 2" all over again.

Now don't get me wrong, the story in "How To Train Your Dragon 2" is just fine. It is handled nicely and serves as a great development for Hiccup, where he must be the bridge between the worlds of savage Vikings and animalistic dragons.

But like the first film, the story is not the main draw for "How To Train Your Dragon 2." The far more interesting aspects were the world, its varying cast of bumbling young vikings and the sprawling landscapes during the flying sequences.



The story may serve its purpose, but everything else seems lacking. While the flying scenes are still majestic, we only get glimpses of the world outside of Berk and the cast is forgotten in favor of story.

Then again, it is a give-and-take. We lose the world of dragons and vikings in favor of a story about combining the two worlds. In the end, that is not a bad tradeoff, yet it does leave me wanting more out of the film.

Final Grade: B-