FANDOM


  • Have you seen the theatrical film Scooby-Doo: The Movie?

    Share your thoughts below...

      Loading editor
    • Question: Why would William Hanna and Joseph Barbera destroy Scrappy, or at least be on board with this? Strange...

        Loading editor
    • I despise this film more than the other 3, and the reason why is because they made Scrappy the villain. I'd probably like it if this wasn't so. I never want to see it again or any articles about this.

        Loading editor
    • yeah, but i kinda just dodge watching the live - actions now just in case

        Loading editor
    • Penguino! wrote:
      yeah, but i kinda just dodge watching the live - actions now just in case

      Oh believe me, I'am.

        Loading editor
    • Yellowlightning1996
      Yellowlightning1996 removed this reply because:
      Copy.
      17:34, February 17, 2019
      This reply has been removed
    • Me when they make cartoon into live action movies

      NO :O WHY!?

      at least the Garfield movie was good-ish

        Loading editor
    • I did watch it/them long time ago, but they're awful simply on the basis that SD shouldn't be done in live-action. Frankly, there are some things that should stay animated like DBZ, Pokemon( yes DP looks awful) and Scooby Doo.LA movies take away charm that animated movies and shows present. Imagine Tom and Jerry Live action movie. It doesn't stick.

        Loading editor
    • oh no tom and jerry live action if they did that CGI tom would like die or something

        Loading editor
    • It was on TV the other week and I watched it. I hadn't seen it in a while and forgot the bad guys, so Scrappy being a bad guy was a shock! (But then I remembered.) It's weird, since Scrappy was always fighting monsters in the 20th Century, but in this film, he was almost a monster. Weird.

        Loading editor
    • yeah... he also almost/sorta swore... WHAT HAVE THEY DONE TO YOU SCRAPPY

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, I did a long time ago, but I'll stick with What's New Scooby Doo!

        Loading editor
    • TheOne1000 wrote:
      Yeah, I did a long time ago, but I'll stick with What's New Scooby Doo!

      I like the originals, but out of the "new" ones, i like What's New

        Loading editor
    • Penguino! wrote:
      TheOne1000 wrote:
      Yeah, I did a long time ago, but I'll stick with What's New Scooby Doo!
      I like the originals, but out of the "new" ones, i like What's New

      Very nice! 

      I miss it, and I feel personlly there hasn't been a "new" series like it since.

        Loading editor
    • yeah, mystery inc was ok, but it was a little too dark, and just different overall

        Loading editor
    • Agreed.

      Maybe they can revive and bring back What's New, because that would be really great.

        Loading editor
    • yeah, or at least the art style, since Joe Hanna and William Barbera are no longer around to make the plot

        Loading editor
    • I'm still holding some hope for Scooby Doo and Guess Who

        Loading editor
    • Same here. 

      Hopefully it will be pretty awesome.

        Loading editor
    • Penguino! wrote: I'm still holding some hope for Scooby Doo and Guess Who

      I don't know whether I'll prefer it to The New Scooby-Doo Movies, or classic-plot episodes with no guest stars (Where Are You, Scooby-Doo Show, Scrappy Era, What's New, Mystery Incorporated and Be Cool.)

        Loading editor
    • Penguino! wrote: Me when they make cartoon into live action movies

      NO :O WHY!?

      at least the Garfield movie was good-ish

      I've never seen the Garfield live-action movies, and I never will.

        Loading editor
    • Penguino! wrote: yeah, or at least the art style, since Joe Hanna and William Barbera are no longer around to make the plot

      They didn't really make "the plot", although Barbera was an influence to a certain degree, as our interview with Jordana Arkin reveals.

        Loading editor
    • This thread is lame! LOL. Let's bring it back to the discussion of the film, but no one here seems to like it, so I think that pretty much brings it to a close for the time being.

        Loading editor
    • cool, ok!

        Loading editor
    • Ok. That's fine.

        Loading editor
    • As you wish!

        Loading editor
    • 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.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.