#Imdb

[thisrandomstuff]

I can't believe that unnecessary rehash of a "live-action" movie is getting tens on IMDB. I could get sixes — they did steal most of the basic plot beats of the original, after all and some people are dying for any kind of content involving their favourite movies/shows —, but tens? The audience must've been blind and deaf for this.

How does it get a ten, when some of their original movies barely get a seven? I hope that with time that rating will take a plunge, because it does not deserve a ten. It fails as an adaptation, it fails as its own movie and it fails because it doesn't understand the basic, technical aspects of film-making. This movie is fails on a technical level.

So those ten star reviews? Are completely inaccurate.

It currently sits at an 8.2 rating (overall). Admittedly early days, but it shouldn't start off at over 8 on the scale, a movie should work to get there. Otherwise temporary hype is going to keep the ratings off for the long time.

And some of the 10 star reviews include lines like "better than I thought" which alone doesn't explain why the hell you'd rate it ten. Isn't the agreement that generally 10 stars means masterpiece? That the flaws are so minimal that it doesn't matter? That the thing basically changed your life? I don't see how a remake is going to do that considering the vast majority of us have probably seen the original, animated version... unless, of course, you're the kind of person who looks down upon animation (you do realise the dragons in the la are animated, though, right? Just worse... right?), but this should not be rated 10 stars. Or even nine, I mean, it didn't bother changing the plot, but then changed everything around it that made it really, truly work... and they changed it for the worse.

Also, tell my why is this live-action rehash higher rated than any of DreamWorks animated movies? Why is Bluesky not even allowed to have a single movie (not even the first Ice Age movie) sit at an 8.0, but this soulless thing sit at an 8.2?

Let me show you how this compares to the other DreamWorks movies, btw (I'll do you a solid and only include the firsts in a franchise):

Abominable - 7.0

How to Train Your Dragon (animated) - 8.1

Kung Fu Panda - 7.6

Megamind - 7.3

Over the Hedge - 6.7

Penguins of Madagascar - 6.8

Puss in Boots - 6.6

Rise of the Guardians - 7.2

Shrek - 7.9

Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron - 7.2 (this one was 2D, which is rare)

The Bad Guys - 6.8 (what the hell is wrong with people???)

The Croods - 7.1

The Prince of Egypt - 7.2 (Again, 2D movie, underrated.)

And yeah, okay, Bee Movie gets like a 6.1, which is fair enough, however, even that is more creative and more interesting than the live-action How to Train Your Dragon.

The Wild Robot is the only one who makes it to an 8.2 rating... which infuriatingly places it at the same level as that live-action movie. You know people look at these ratings when they wanna decide what to watch, right? I mean, not always, but often, especially if they're undecided. You know how unhelpful it is to have a rehash rated the exact same as a visually stunning, stand out movie which actually tries and understands the medium and does something different? Also, the fact that just based on that rating alone, someone could very likely choose la httyd over Spirit, TPoE, The Bad Guys, Megamind, RotG and PoM is just saddening. On the bright side, I suppose once they've watched that insult of movie and they come across the original — supposing they haven't watched it yet — they'll be mind-blown and maybe, just maybe, they'll raise their standards a little higher and stop listening to IMDB.

The fact that most of these don't even get to sit at 8.0, but somehow audiences have already decided this thing was worth an 8.2. That's an entire star more than The Prince of Egypt, which is THE Dreamworks 2D animated movie everyone talks about. It has powerful music, gorgeous light and shadow, stunning art and animation... but somehow, the worse knock off another movie is rated more? For what reason exactly? Originality? It's not remotely original. And as far as the "remake" part of it goes, it doesn't even remake the thing it was supposed to well, nor does it truly try to do something different. It's this lukewarm middling thing that never needed to exist, which at best should put it at a 6.0, since even the Bee Movie at least did something different. (Yes, the bar is that low.)

Really, it deserves more of 4.0-5.0 rating, because it's a slap in the face of everything that came before (kinda' like the live-action Snow White)... and because it wasn't needed or even really asked for? People certainly would've loved more HTTYD content, but, really, are we so desperate we'll settle for a remake?

C'mon, just re-watch the original.

Also, if you even just visually compare any of these movies — even the ones that aged less well — to the live-action you will see a downgrade, not an upgrade.

And yes, even the bloody bee movie:

(Ngl, some of these might've come from the wrong movies, but they're still DreamWorks animates, so...)

And, again, are you guys seriously going to sit there and try to tell me the live action How to Train Your Dragon deserves a much higher rating than any and all of the ice age movies?

On the bright side, I kinda had fun looking for those gifs. Reminds me how much fun DreamWorks USED to be back when they did what they could to spite Disney, not just copy it. (Though they admittedly did do some of that too, but usually with more effort and a much more creative spin on things.)

Small edit to clarify things: This is not me shitting on Disney's movies. DreamWorks very much started out as the company that made movies basically to spite Disney and it worked for them. I enjoyed a lot of what Disney had to offer before they basically defaulted to live-actions and the occasionally poorly thought out and rushed non-remake. I grew up on and even in adulthood watched a lot of Disney, from animated to live-action. Even the earlier "reboots/remakes" weren't all that bad. Some of them actually did something with the whole idea, like Maleficent. But this re-make trend Disney started, which only seems to get worse with each movie, and now DreamWorks is following? It's a disappointment and humorlessly ironic coming from the studio who acted like it wanted to be the furthest thing to Disney.

[one-time-i-dreamt]

WHY IS THIS ALEXANDAR SKARSGARD'S IMDB PROFILE PHOTO

[anotherscrappile]

My favorite actor

[linusbenjamin]

Person of Interest + Top Rated IMDb Episodes

[sydneysweeneysource]

SYDNEY SWEENEY. photographed by Gareth Cattermole for IMDB.

[lovescaryhorror]

"Hell House LLC" (2015).

[earthquakebi]

PSA the review bombing is happening again. A bunch of reviews pretending to be upset about Bobby but quickly derailing into being mad about Eddie not being there.

Episode link if you want to rate it / mark certain reviews as unhelpful

[galactic-dragoness]

Angela if you see this I apologize in advance

[lioncourtz]

INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE | IMDB top 5 episodes

[flootzavut]

Joey please

[georgiapeach30513]

Chris and Dakota sit down with IMDb

[apodemus-sylvaticus]

Who decides what photo of an actor to use on IMDB? Most actors will have nice, profesionally looking, flattering photos like:

And then there's this guy:

Not only is he not wearing trousers, but he seems to be channeling full-on Murderbot awkwardness. Like someone who decided not to put on pants for a Zoom meeting, forgot about it and stood up, and just realized what he's done. I just can't xD xD

[oldshowbiz]

Known For

[fuckyeahgoodomens]

IMDB picks 2023 🥳❤

Look what IMDB picked as Staff Pick Favourites and Poster :) ❤

[chaoticdesertdweller]

Val Edward Kilmer

31 January 1959- 1 April 2025