The Mystery Inc. gang have gone their separate ways and have been apart for two years, until they each receive an invitation to Spooky Island. Not knowing that the others have also been invited, they show up and discover an amusement park that affects young visitors in very strange ways. Fred, Daphne, Velma, Shaggy and Scooby soon realize that they cannot solve this mystery without help from each other.
|Scooby-Doo Movie(DVD)||Resolution: 720x480 px||Total Size: 713 Mb|
|Scooby-Doo Movie(HD 720)||Resolution: 1280x716 px||Total Size: 4451 Mb|
|Scooby-Doo Movie(iPod)||Resolution: 480x320 px||Total Size: 345 Mb||
|Scooby-Doo Movie(HD)||Resolution: 852x480 px||Total Size: 895 Mb||
I never really watched Scooby Doo the Cartoon, so I went to see themoviewith no prior knowledge. I knew who Scooby Doo was, but that was it.Anywayafter seeing Lilo and Stitch I really didn't find Scooby Doo veryentertaining in comparison. The person next to me fell asleep, then wokeupand then fell asleep again. The only interesting parts were whenScooby'smaster Shag (I think that's his name) fell in love and Scooby laughed athim, and when Buffy beat someone up. The movie kind of dragged on andinevitably ended, thankfully. Overall I gave it 3/10.
I loved the cartoon when I was a child of 80's. My brother and I REALLYhated Scrappy. We watched a lot of Scooby-Doo cartoons. We got excitedwhenthe movie came. "In the Land of a Million Drums" was the coolest song inthemovie. Matthew Lilard as Shaggy walks like the cartoon version. Scoobylookslife-like. I cheered when Scrappy was the villain. Because he was annoyingas hell. My friends were 80's children, so they hated Scrappy. Other HannaBarbera cartoons were referenced. Like HONG KONG PHOOEY, THE SMURFS, andthose loveable superheroines THE POWERPUFF GIRLS. Best line: "Hey. I'mevencute as a Powerpuff Girl!" That quote made me laugh so hard. On April2001,was shooting day, so I know that the story will take place on SpringBreak.It has everything it needs in a Scooby-Doo episode. My spirits were flyinghigh when there was a rock version of Scooby-Doo (unlike the rock versionofSPIDER-MAN by Aerosmith). Shaggy wrote a song called "Shaggy Where areyou?"This is what I called the best movie of the summer. But PEOPLE MAGAZINEsaid, "Scooby-Don't" One friend of mine said, "It will flop. Because it isbased on a cartoon." True. That's what others say. But I say itrocks!
First of all, my apologies, as this review is based entirely on my personal hopes of what this movie was going to deliver. Other viewers may have found lots of their expectations realised on the screen, but sadly, mine weren't. The makers of the Scooby Doo movie didn't really have to get a lot of things right to make this film a real laugh, yet they managed to do everything wrong. I was really looking forward to seeing my favourite cartoon come to life, but they messed up on all the basic rules of this classic show. First off, the main characters all only have one set of clothes, but the costume designers for the film couldn't even stick to the simple designs of the cartoon, instead they went for hopeless approximations that just look ill-fitting and careless. Worst offender is Daphne, done up in all sorts of lurid fashions and hairdos, looking nothing like the animated original. Same goes for poor Velma with that odd long lanky brown wig and shapeless sweater. Even Fred had several changes of costume and the wrong hairdo. Only Shaggy came across as the real deal, which is probably more of a tribute to Matthew Lillard's dedication rather than the designers.Next rule: There must always be a chase down a never-ending hallway with the same scenery going past over and over again. I think there were some chases in the movie, but nothing that brought this much loved (and much lampooned in the past) feature to the forefront where it should have been (Unless it was during a sequence when I dozed off).Next rule: The monsters must be dumb and easily fooled. Most monsters in the cartoon just went "Graaagghh!" and swiped their arms in thin air as Scooby and co. slipped away from them just in time. The movie monsters are actually quite frightening demons that fly through the air, taking possession of innocent holidaymakers. Frightening is good, but it doesn't belong in this context.Another thing that spoils the mood is surrounding the characters with hundreds of extras and other actors. It just shows up the implausibility of the whole gang ever passing for real people. This could have worked hilariously as a parody (a device that worked beautifully for the Brady Bunch Movie), but here it just makes the characters look thoroughly underdeveloped. They can't possibly interact with naturalistic "real-life" characters, only with similarly 2-dimensional ciphers like cackling crones, disgruntled sherrifs or sinister butlers.Next up, the characterisation. Again, Matthew Lillard steals the show as Shaggy, and truly breathes life into the part. Fred and Velma are boring and under developed, but that kind of reflects the cartoon, so no big deal there, although Velma could have been given more to get her teeth into. Worst of all, again, is Daphne, demonstrated by the insertion of the blatantly inappropriate "Daphne does martial arts" sequence. If Sarah Michelle Gellar can't stay away from playing Buffy, she shouldn't be considered for other movies. She certainly shouldn't bring the character with her. A huge mistake. Finally, Scooby Doo himself. Considering the possible options for bringing a talking dog to life, the movie version is actually quite successful. I thought the interplay between Scooby and the human mambers of the gang worked pretty well, and his character really came through. Shame that the animators decided to give him those bizarre big, bright, human style eyes which the cartoon version never sported. Weird and a bit creepy.As the the plot, its just far too busy. Anything and everything is thrown in making it clear that the makers could not decide what angle they were going for. They dabble in playing it true to the cartoon (very, very briefly), playing it for modern (Animal House-type) laughs, playing it as a parody, and playing it as a "what if the characters went in this direction?" kind of update. Too many styles, no substance and no chance for the audience to engage with any one mood. A real mess.As I said at the start, this is only my personal disappointment. I can't tell if other moviegoers had a similar experience, and lots of people seem to have found the film to be a riot. But as far as I'm concerned, it's a serious letdown and a huge wasted opportunity. I'm now waiting to see the second one to see if any of this gets put right...I really hope it does.
I don't understand why all the critics were so hard on this movie. I thought it was one of the best movies I saw all year. The movie is cartoonishly fun and doesn't take itself seriously unlike Spider-man.(Which was also excellent.)The movie was made to be a nostalgic good time. As a long time fan of the cartoon, I loved how they were able to recreate the cartoon characters without trying to change them. Oh sure, there's a bit of potty humor in it, but geez, this is the age we live in. Frankly, it wasn't nearly as bad as some other movies employing the same technique. It was quite mild. The cast was incredible. Sarah Michelle Gellar can play virtually any role she wants and make believable. She's great as Daphne. I couldn't believe how dead on Matthew Lilliard was as Shaggy, he even got the voice right! As for the all the people who dissed this movie for whatever reason, why don't you enjoy something for what it is, a light-hearted adventure.
I went to go see this movie a the camp that I work at and I found it to bevery bad and soulless. I found it not very faithful to the cartoon in someareas but the CGI Scooby was okay to me. The only thing I felt wasunnecessary was the rest of the CGI. Those demon things looked like crapandthey made some really big mistakes in the first couple minutes that theyteach you in film school. In the airport when they are all about to go toSpooky Island, you can see the microphone dangling overhead. If you getthechance to see the movie in the theater again look for that. I don't knowifit was just that the projection guy moved it down too far but I sawdanglingmicrophones and I sank lower in my seat. The drug refrences kept me awakebecause we all know Shaggy is a pothead. Anyway, thought it was a very badmovie and I hope that they do not make a sequel.
I was warned this film was disappointing, but nothing could really prepareme for how bad it was. Simply put this just could have been a lot better(and I am a fan of the cartoon too).Firstly it seems to be designed from a very narrow standpoint. People thatloved the normal crew but hated Scrappy Doo may be just about catered for.However I can't help but feel the only characters accurate to the TVserieswas Scooby and Shaggy. I personally would have much rather seen the filmsimply about those two but they decided to include all the others,includingScrappy who is made a humiliating joke of on several occasions rather thenbeing included in the crew. If the makers really hated the Scrappycartoons(I seem to remember them being pretty successful at the time so obviouslynot everyone agrees with them) they should have just forgotten about him.IfI had done this I would have happily forgotten about all but Shaggy andScooby.While Scrappy is made to look pathetic, the other characters comical flawsare somewhat ironed out. Daphne has learnt to do martial arts (no surprisewith her being played by Sarah "Buffy" Michelle Gellar), Velma is far lessplain then she should be (putting stupid glasses on a really attractivewoman is a very poor movie clichÃ© that never worked). Fred actually comesout even more cardboard then in the cartoons. However he does suddenlybecome an adept combatant with a chain near the end, which seems somewhatout of character.The film seems undecided about how much is realism and how much is cartoonstyle. Switching from parody of cartoon events to attempts at originalityand back like you're watching two different movies and switching channels.The soundtrack is also similarly confused, sounding like an awkwardcartoonparody at some points and virtually empty at others. The plot ispredictable, as are the jokes (and they are pretty slow to come too). Eventhe special effects are poor and unimaginative.The plot...well the less said about that the better. You can see whatthey've tried to do with it, and frankly that was a bad idea to startwith.It's a bad idea done badly. The plot holes would be forgivable in thiskindof movie were it not for all the other flaws. The attempts to inflictHollywood morality (The "perfect" people are totally perfect and the"freaks" should be ridiculed and laughed at) ruins most of what could havebeen good. All that is left are the two elements that were central andsafefrom being messed with: Scooby and Shaggy.Of the cast the only one I could say did a good performance is MatthewLillard as Shaggy. Sarah Michelle Gellar did pretty well too, but hercharacter was ruined by the scripts and she was given way too much screentime for the character (obviously she was going to be a big draw, so youcansee why they did that, the same with the kick boxing).If you want to see this kind of film, but done well I'd recommend the newAustin Powers movie. True it's less of a family movie, but its prettyclosein style to Scooby Doo, the only difference being that you will probablyenjoy Austin Powers even if you find it somewhat disposable. If you wanttosee a modern parody of Scooby Doo (with no Scrappy at all btw) I'd suggestdownloading the special the cartoon network did called "The Scooby Dooproject".Unfortunately this is the kind of film most people will see regardless ofwhat others say simply for curiosity (that's why I'm here). Sounfortunatelya sequel is highly likely. But you never know, if they just keep it withScooby and Shaggy it could be very good. The odd brief moment of the twoofthem in this film showed an amount of promise.
I am ashamed to say I live in the same country where this crap was filmed!It was too long, tedius, boring with so much adult 'humour' injected intoit, that kids would find it impossible to have a good time!It resorts to cheap laughs that made me cringe with horror and the plot isnothing like a scooby cartoon! Scooby Doo was a low point of the movie, asthe very sight of him made me cringe! He prances around with that annoyingvoice, supposedly trying to be funny, but I can't see how any idiot wouldfind humour in his antics!Daphne and Fred was another low point! I can't stand either of the actorswho portrayed them, and the fact that they insulted my country made mefurious! Nothing gives them the right to insult my country, and their verypresence in the film brings it down! Gellar, who plays the mostunconvincingDaphne ever, looks bored throughout, and mutters her lines flat andemotionless! She was a real low point to this film!This film ignored key points of the cartoon, and twisted around others forits own sick pleasure! The films portrayal of scrappy would have thecreators of this cartoon turning in their graves! If they are not dead yet,scrappys portrayal would have certainly taken 5 years off theirlives!The plot revolving around body snatchers is hardly suitable for children!What ever happened to the gool old 'I would have gotten away with it if notfor you meddling kids!'?Scooby Doo fails on all levels! It is a perfect example of how not to turnacartoon into live action! Watch the old cartoons with pleasure, and try toforget this awful movie ever existed!
The novelty of seeing these characters on the big screen is occasionally fun, but this Scooby-Doo is no Great Dane.
Scooby Doo is OK. That's it. It's not as bad as the critics say and isnotas good as some other summer movies I've seen this year. The cast, withtheexception of Freddie Prinze Jr., seems up to the task of having theircharacters come to life. However the mystery itself is weak and therevelation may offend Scooby Doo fans, including myself.
Not that the TV show was so riveting, but most of the half-hour plots were more compelling than this lackluster warmover.
The Scooby-Doo cartoon is what i grew up with and i was shocked and madthat they were turning it into a movie.I still went to the movietheater,though, to see if they had ruined the series ,and it definitelydid not. It is cheesy and corny, with overused jokes, but it was fun.Ifound myself laughing a lot and i was reminded constantly of thecartoon. It had the same comedy, same type of standard plot,and thething i would like to mention the most is the characters.All of themwere in character and looked pretty close to the cartoon.When i watchedi didn't think of Sarah Michelle Geller or Freddie Prince Jr. I simplyrelated to the characters; they were genuine. I don't get all the hatehere, it's just a fun, watch with family, movie. Scooby-Doo 2 i have tocomplain about. It's basically the same thing redone with very expectedsurprises and jokes;it's okay, but not as fun or even interesting.Idon't see how it got a higher rating than the first.My rating:*******
Most people are pretty harsh on this movie, but it's really not bad.Actually, I think it's quite funny. I loved the cartoon growing up, andthisdidn't disappoint me, because it's not supposed to be some great movie.It'snot really aimed at adults (although there are a few bits for parents,likethe cute 'pot smoking Shaggy' references), but at at children, and that'swho it will please the most. It's fun and marvelously cast - MatthewLillarddoes an impeccable Shaggy impersonation - see it just for that! Give it achance.
I think that they did a good job with this movie because all of the actors did a good job portraying the characters. I especially liked Matthew Lillard playing Shaggy because he did such a good job playing him, that he could have been him in real life. He was very funny and so where the other co-stars. They did a good job with the animation of scooby-doo. He was also very funny. I just couldn't believe that they made scrappy-doo to be the evil one. I always thought that he was just jealous of scooby's fame.I liked how freddie played fred. I liked how sarah played daphne. My favorite will always be Matthew Lillard. He did a VERY, VERY good job portraying shaggy. I have watched about 10 times and I never get tired of it. I laugh every time that I see it. Overall, it was a very good movie. They couldn't have found any one better to play these characters better than they did.
Let me start this review by saying that, even when I was younger, Inever really got into Scooby-Doo. I felt that it was a one-dimensionalcartoon, the plot and ending were recycled about a thousand times overand it felt so 60's-ish. Even taking this into account, 'Scooby-Doo'the movie is a piece of c***, created solely to bring in some cash, notbecause the studio concerned (Warner Brothers) wanted to at least tryto make a good movie. This is clearly shown by the choice of director,cast, etc. There are a few redeeming qualities, but they are swamped bythe wretchedness of the rest of the film.Anyway, on to the 'plot'. I put 'plot' in inverted commas because it isas flimsy as the plot for your average Scooby-Doo cartoon. You see,Fred takes all of the credit for the Scooby Gang's successes andDaphne's sick of being a 'damsel-in-distress' (more on this later), sothe gang split up, leaving Shaggy and Scooby to languish over themystery van. Two years later, they are reunited by Mondavrious, who isworried by teens attending his amusement park turning into zombies.Much derring-do occurs before the real villain is suddenly introducedand is (predictably) defeated. I don't feel at all guilty aboutspoiling the plot by the way, because there's precious little TO spoil.Now, as a point of interest, the setting and also, the CGI. I don'tusually mention the setting of movies, but the setting of Scooby-Doo isnotable for it's cheap, neon, garish tackiness. It is at it's worst inthe amusement park, where the garish colours, horrendous-looking CGIcreatures, bright lights and the tackiness of all and sundry will makeyou: a) fast forward b) become violently ill c) have an epilepticseizure. To sum up what the amusement park looks like, I'm just goingto utter Marilyn Manson several times. While I'm on the subject of CGI,Scooby-Doo himself is horribly conceived and looks worse than theScooby-Doo of lore.The acting is the best part of Scooby Doo, which is actually not sayingvery much. Linda Cardellini does a pretty good Velma, while MatthewLillard has Shaggy's voice, look, facial expressions and personalitydown perfectly - even more praiseworthy considering that all he has towork with is a nonexistent CGI character. On the flipside, FreddiePrinze Jr., our washed-up one-dimensional pretty boy wannabe actor ofthe moment, screws up the role of Fred. I mean, how the hell do youscrew up Fred?! He's MEANT to be bland and superficial! Trulyremarkable. As for Sarah Michelle Gellar, she looks hot as, that's forsure. Unfortunately, she misses Daphne's personality completely,instead preferring to act like Buffy. She even participates in alaughable catfight with several men, but that's more the fault of thescript. Her turn as a damsel-in-distress is truly unbelievable, evenmore so if you know about her martial arts skills. Also, what the hellis Rowan Atkinson doing in this movie? He is kind of amusing, but thenagain, he's amusing in just about everything he's in.I'm going to load my conclusion with a list of Scooby clichÃ©s, whichsuits the movie and indeed, the entire franchise, since it is all soclichÃ©d. So to sum up then, this is 'Scooby-Poo'. A note to the studiothat released this mess: "I would have been so much more content withlife if it weren't for you meddling studio hacks." I guess (or I hope)that you're thinking 'Scooby-Don't'. Zoinks! You know what? You'reright. To milk more money out of the movie-going public, they releasedanother one. Jinkies! Rhat Really Rucks! Like I said earlier, there area few good qualities here, just that they are buried underneath all ofthe other 'Doo'.1.5/5 stars
Uninitiated kids may adopt this new Scooby, but anyone who loved the show will find it frustrating.
maybe its just me, but i loved this film. i still love the original ScoobyDoo cartoons but i went to the cinema with (very) low expectations afterreading the reviews here! however i ended up chuckling all the way throughthe film ... i cant think of another flick ive enjoyed so much!!! ok, ifyoudont like the cartoons then just dont bother but if you do then whats nottolike!!!
Yikes, what did they do to this classic children's cartoon? Freddie was the worst, followed by Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar). Shaggy and Scooby were great, and the computer generation of a 3D Scooby was pretty good. But the entire story of soul-sucking aliens was really stupid. And the worse scene of this movie (among many) was the one where Freddie transmigrated his soul into Daphne's body and got lustful thinking he could look at "herself" naked. So grotesque. And what did they do to Scrappy? I always loved Scrappy and how he would boss Unca Scooby around. They made Scrappy into a ... creep. Definitely no good. Bring me the Saturday morning cartoons any day. The movie was disappointing and not entirely suitable to young children, but more for frat guys.
The endless miscalculations on the filmmakers' parts have turned Scooby-Doo into even more of a disaster than anyone could have imagined.
I went into this movie with the proper perspective. I imagined myself atage10 on a Saturday morning watching the cartoon.But, unfortunately the adult references (Shag and Scoob a stoner, the gangbeing jealous of each other, occasional swearing and sexual references,andsome very low cut clothes on the girls) kind of ruined that returning tochildhood idea.The should have stuck more closely to the cartoon and I think more peoplewould have enjoyed it.But overall, I give it a thumbs up and will probably buy it when it comesout on DVD.
Some Spoilers (albeit obvious ones)This film is clearly written by/for fans of the ORIGINAL cartoon and isfullof nostalgia and nostalgic jokes, but this isn't to say it's bad. Irememberthe original cartoons and i love them dearly as brilliant entertainment, itoo hate scrappy doo and anything which came later and i assume the writersof this film take the same view. Now, I enjoyed this film, whilst at thesame time it annoyed me. I can't ever remember daphne being a femaleversionof shaggy, but in this film this is exactly what she is. Fred is as boringas he was in the cartoon and Velma is spot on so congratulations to themakers for those two. Where this film really works is in the brilliant (idomean brilliant) performance of Matthew Lillard as Shaggy, I've disliked himsince i saw him in Hackers but I've got to admit he gets shaggy spot on andhis stuff with Scooby Doo is very funny.This film isn't a updated version for todays kids, it's for anyone over theage of 16 who watched scooby doo as a kid and likes reminiscing of the goodold days when childrens tv didn't involve pokemon and rugrats, this is onereason why this film could be criticised. They got the balance all wrong,this film really should have been aimed for kids but include a few jokeswhat would draw a laugh from the older crowd. They wrote the film for the16-26 bracket, same bracket of audience who like teen movies but this teenmovie replaces sex with a great dane. This i believe is amistake.In general i liked the film, some things annoyed me, like when Fred andDaphne kiss at the end, there was no need for it! What fan of the originalwould like to see Shaggy get a girl friend, even if it is Isla Fisher! Thiswhole film just has too much college feel and it's all wrong because itshould be for kids and at times i cringed during it.I'd suggest people watch it because shaggy and scooby are just class,daphneis a joke but it is not Gellar's fault, the character has been wrote wrongand she's like a dizzy version of Buffy. If the producers could have gotDaphne right and addressed the balance between entertainment for new scoobydoo fans and old scooby doo fans then this film would have been brilliant,sadly they have put most of their eggs in the old boys basket and it mightcome back and haunt them.Rating 7/10 - I'm forgiving and to credit this film any less with theperformance that Shaggy and Scooby put on would be criminal.