Board Thread:Movie discussions/@comment-252417-20181020114448/@comment-11461452-20200203140151

I remember seeing this movie twice while I was in public school, really. 2nd and 4th grade if I recall correctly. I also remember getting awfully scared of the monsters back then because they were real in this film, and confused by it being a live-action film instead of the usual cartoons I loved watching. But, anyway, I became interested for some time in giving a review on this film, and I also figured to myself "What the heck? Maybe now that I'm older I'd like it more." To be honest, though, even as an adult, the film was more of a 'meh' fest for me at the most. Even as a Scooby-Doo film, I didn't think it delivered.

It has its positives, though, which is what I'd like to start with. Similar to a great many others, I absolutely enjoyed Matthew Lillard's performance as Shaggy. And not just him, but Neil Fanning's portrayal of Scooby-Doo too. I love how the two of them were able to catch the spirit of their characters, and a lot of the best moments in the film definitely came from them. As a whole, Shaggy and Scooby were still as fun and lovable as ever in this film. The music score done by David Newman was likewise enjoyable. I mean, yeah, it isn't what I'd classify as something Oscar-worthy, but it was great in its own way. Newman made his music enjoyable to listen to at any given moment, and to me, that's all that matters. The film's use of classical songs, such as "Brick House" and "Man with the Hex", was quite entertaining too. Despite these positives, though, the film mostly had the feeling of a student presenting a finished test to a teacher and flunking it. With the exception of Lillard and Fanning, the performances of the cast didn't exactly...click, really. It seemed like they were having a hard time taking their roles and characters seriously. And they looked so desperate to make something fun out of their time working on the film, they weren't able to make their performances engagingly natural. Fred, Daphne, and Velma in particular were the least tolerable of the characters in this movie, and the efforts of the performers playing them certainly didn't help any. The character development in articulation, while good, wasn't what I found to be powerful. The CGI that was used in the film, while passable, looked to be rather cheesy. It was easy to tell the monsters and Scooby were done by computer, which didn't give much realism. At least with Scooby, though, there was a sense of life inside of him. Finally, it all comes down to the story, direction, and humor aspect of the film. Which, quite honestly, was mostly worthy of a D+. With the exception of some of the jokes revolving around Shaggy and Scooby, which were mostly chuckle-worthy, most of the film's humor wasn't really all that funny. As a matter of fact, the comedy either felt forced or was obnoxious to the point of getting an eye roll. The most annoying of jokes came from the farting contest that Shaggy and Scooby had, and the sexual innuendoes. The story by James Gunn and Craig Titley, the screenplay by Gunn, and the direction by Raja Gosnell, was lackluster at the most. Among the many things about this movie was that it seemed rather quick-paced. It basically felt like an extended Scooby-Doo episode, and not in the best way either. It even tries to have its emotion and heart, but the results make it more soulless than an actual Scooby-Doo episode. The decision to make Scrappy-Doo the film's antagonist was a choice that I found to be rather bizarre. I get that nobody liked the character, but it felt much more strange than anything else. The fact that they also decided to make the monsters in this movie real instead of people wearing costumes was also disheartening, because to me...when you make the monsters real, it takes away what makes Scooby-Doo fun. The franchise was made by the creators to provide audiences friendly entertainment, with infinite possibilities regarding the mystery behind who the monster is and the crime being perpetrated. My final noting in terms of the story was that there was a boy in the film that seemed to have an interest in Velma. I don't know the name of the character or the person who played him, but despite the interactions he and Velma shared, he didn't seem to play much of an important part. In the end, while David Newman’s musical score was definitely top-notch, and Lillard and Fanning's performances as Shaggy and Scooby were amazing, the film as a whole isn't exactly what I'd like to call something that's worth a look or two. So, I rate "Scooby-Doo (2002)" two out of five stars. It's not terrible, but it's not what I'd like to call a cup of tea either.