Quick Links
Summary
For any studio — let alone a big name likeUniversal Pictures— remaking an animated hit in live action is dangerous territory. A successful trilogy from DreamWorks is now set to receive this treatment, but it runs the risk of pushing its makers into the so-called Disney trap.
There’s always a lot of skeptical buzz around any announcement of a live-action remake, especially from longtime fans of whatever IP is being adapted. Despite this, Disney has managed to deliver staggering box-office results with new versions ofclassics likeThe Lion KingandThe Jungle Book. Other studios began to follow suit, adapting their older animated hits into a more realistic medium. However,Universal’supcoming remake might do more harm than good — not just to its original, but to DreamWorks and other animation studios in general.
DoesHow To Train Your DragonReally Need a Live-Action Remake?
The live-actionHow To Train Your Dragonis gearing up for release on July 06, 2025. Empire’s 2025 Preview gave the world its first glimpse of the upcoming film, while its official trailer has been attached to theatrical screenings ofWicked. From online reports and word of mouth, the movie looks promising. Many of the visual snippets suggest that it is a shot-by-shot remake of the first animated film from 2010. This version is also directed by Dean DeBlois, who helmed theentireHTTYDtrilogy (co-directing alongside Chris Sanders on the first film).
Based On
How to Train Your Dragonchildren’s books by Cressida Cowell
So far, so good, but the problem lies in whether the Viking fantasy adventure needs theDisney-style live-action treatmentto begin with. There’s no question about the strength of the source material — the series of children’s books written by Cressida Cowell. However, theHow To Train Your Dragontrilogy is relatively “new” compared to older animated films that often get remade, considering the most recent film came out in 2019.
The intention of a live-action remake is usually to reintroduce a classic to newer, younger generations of audiences and, of course, to renew the IP and maximize its potential. Nevertheless, the film’s director sounds optimistic and justifies the upcoming adventure movie inan interview withEmpire:
It’s so dialed-up in terms of stakes — having a fully credible, photo-real dragon stomping around trying to kill him.
Universal’s Risk And Reward Of RemakingHow To Train Your Dragon
How To Train Your DragonisnoShrekorKung Fu Panda, but it does have a fan following. Beyond the trilogy, the franchise includes theDreamWorks DragonsTV series, as well as numerous short films and video game adaptations, most of which have enjoyed decent success. However, it may not have enough crowd-pulling power to generate the massive box-office numbers typically expected from live-action remakes, considering their production scale. Notably, the three animated films were each made on an average budget of $150 million, with earnings in the $500-600 million range.
But perhaps this not-so-hardcore success of theHTTYDfranchise makes it a good candidate for Universal to remake. Live-action adaptations earn well, but the criticism they attract, especially online, cannot be ignored. Most otherDreamWorks animated movieshave little to no scope for this treatment, particularly since their primary characters are animals or mythical beasts. Imagine the outrage and confusion that would result from an announcement of a live-action remake ofMadagascarorShark Tale. So, despite the questions weighing downHow To Train Your Dragon, it remains the safest and most viable choice in their filmography to adapt to live-action.
CGI Repetition Might Bring Down DreamWorks Live-Action
Another pressing issue with this remake is repetition. The dragons in both the animated and live-action films would be computer-generated, even if the style differs. In fact, pictures of Toothless from the theatrical trailer suggest that the CGI dragon is nearly identical to its 3D-animated counterpart, albeit with more texturing and depth. On the other hand, consider the visual difference between the 2D Simba from 1994 and the photorealistic lion from 2019 inThe Lion King. The comparison may be unfair due to the difference in years and the resulting evolution in technology, but such a distinction is part of what justifies a live-action remake in the first place.
The bottom line is,what worked for Disneymay not necessarily work for DreamWorks and Universal. And even if it does with the upcomingHow To Train Your Dragon, it might lead executives to greenlight more live-action remakes, assuming they will succeed. Who knows — showbiz can make some of the weirdest ideas click. But honestly, is the world ready to embrace apotential live-actionShrek 5? Nope.
