I liked the first Scooby Doo movie for the most part, up until it became clear the writers were more interested in flashing their Scrappy hater credentials(I don't see how anybody could stand the sheer Character DerailmentIn Name Only).
On the other hand, both George of the Jungle was great all the way through(though I admit never having seen anything of the original series).
Yeah, unwritten rule number one: follow all the unwritten procedures. - CamacanActually, making Scrappy the villain is a good idea. What if the fictional characters were real and the character that everyone hated became jealous of the fame from the other stars of the show, leading that character to set the others up and make them feel his pain? Despite the studio interfering with much of the script, at least they were nice to keep this element in the film.
More Buscemi at http://forum.reelsociety.com/As I said, think about "what if Scrappy were real". The movie depicts Mystery Inc. in the real world and Scrappy was the most hated character in the cartoons. Imagine if the hate got to Scrappy and he became extremely bitter as he got older. It makes complete sense.
More Buscemi at http://forum.reelsociety.com/They kind of ruined that interpretation by retconning him as being a delusional adult with a bladder disorder who thought he was a puppy even back when he was first with the gang.
I agree that the first Scooby Doo movie was great except for all the Scrappy bits. There's making a Take That!, and then there's going way out of the movie's way for spite's sake. It messed up the flow and sucked the entertainment out of the film, big time.
Otherwise, good movie.
edited 30th Nov '11 4:13:04 PM by KnownUnknown
I haven't seen the series, but I thought it was a good movie. Granted, it clearly took some liberties with the source material, but from the sound of things they were mostly for the better.
Yeah, unwritten rule number one: follow all the unwritten procedures. - Camacan

edited 25th Jul '11 10:38:05 AM by kyun