|
Post by scoobypediapossible on Jan 27, 2016 17:14:02 GMT -5
If they had never stopped What's New or the style in general that films continued after the series had ended, I don't think I could've watched it, because I wouldn't have liked Mattew Lillard's voice coming from that style. I thought it was strange Scott Menville's voice coming from his re-dubbing of Casey Kasem's lines when "Mystery of the Mystery Solvers" had a couple of scenes from two of the DTVs, or when the original style was used for Shaggy in the app game, My Friend, Scooby-Doo. Matthew's voice coming from that style instead of Casey's is just wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Grumpydrawer on Jan 27, 2016 17:45:09 GMT -5
I do respect your opinion and I think they both are good shows, but, I think be cool tried to hard to be a comedy, when it really should be about mysteries. If I want to laugh at a cartoon, I'll watch the simpsons or family guy. I feel like be cool has moved scooby doo from a more serious mystery show to a funny show, SDMI, however kept scooby doo as a mystery show and yes it was dark at times, but it also had its funny moments. Again I do think there is some merit to your opinion I just don't agree with it. Fair enough. If we all agreed on everything and had the same opinions we'd be nothing but drones of a Communist utopia, and that'd be boring and create no debates! Though I feel I didn't fully describe how I feel about Be Cool to well. I agree with you on it trying to hard to be a comedy, for every joke it has which I laugh at (or find amusement in) there's around three to five I don't find funny at all or cringe at. I also agree with you on the mysteries front as they did make it a little bit too easy to guess who the culpret is each time. Unlike WNSD and SDMI where it was hard too at times which made you more involved in the episodes as you thought about who it could be. What's happened more or less is that Scooby's gone from one extreme (per say), being dark, to another extreme (again per say, as neither is too extreme), comedy, between the two series. Personally I wouldn't mind the next Scooby series, which is down down down the line and not really worth talking about right now, to use WNSD as a base. Use the good parts from that and then improve on the things that series did not so good (though it did everything pretty well) and add things to make the series unique, eg more dark themes and more recurring chracters for instance. I wouldn't mind seeing the series tackle more dark themes again though I'd personally prefer it in a Zombie Island or Witch's Ghost style to SDMI style...if that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by scoobypediapossible on Jan 27, 2016 18:04:24 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind if they revived WNSD after BCSD.
|
|
|
Post by somebody-doo on Jan 27, 2016 18:26:08 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind if they revived WNSD after BCSD. That would be awesome!
|
|
|
Post by scooby1 on Jan 27, 2016 18:26:27 GMT -5
I do respect your opinion and I think they both are good shows, but, I think be cool tried to hard to be a comedy, when it really should be about mysteries. If I want to laugh at a cartoon, I'll watch the simpsons or family guy. I feel like be cool has moved scooby doo from a more serious mystery show to a funny show, SDMI, however kept scooby doo as a mystery show and yes it was dark at times, but it also had its funny moments. Again I do think there is some merit to your opinion I just don't agree with it. Fair enough. If we all agreed on everything and had the same opinions we'd be nothing but drones of a Communist utopia, and that'd be boring and create no debates! Though I feel I didn't fully describe how I feel about Be Cool to well. I agree with you on it trying to hard to be a comedy, for every joke it has which I laugh at (or find amusement in) there's around three to five I don't find funny at all or cringe at. I also agree with you on the mysteries front as they did make it a little bit too easy to guess who the culpret is each time. Unlike WNSD and SDMI where it was hard too at times which made you more involved in the episodes as you thought about who it could be. What's happened more or less is that Scooby's gone from one extreme (per say), being dark, to another extreme (again per say, as neither is too extreme), comedy, between the two series. Personally I wouldn't mind the next Scooby series, which is down down down the line and not really worth talking about right now, to use WNSD as a base. Use the good parts from that and then improve on the things that series did not so good (though it did everything pretty well) and add things to make the series unique, eg more dark themes and more recurring chracters for instance. I wouldn't mind seeing the series tackle more dark themes again though I'd personally prefer it in a Zombie Island or Witch's Ghost style to SDMI style...if that makes sense. Amen to your first statement! And I would like a recreation of WNSD as well, I think that could be successful in the future.
|
|
|
Post by scooby1 on Jan 27, 2016 18:27:25 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind if they revived WNSD after BCSD. That would be awesome! Maybe a little further down the road than right after BCSD but I agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by somebody-doo on Jan 27, 2016 18:28:10 GMT -5
Somebody should write Warner Brothers and ask them to reboot What's New Scooby-Doo after Be Cool.
|
|
|
Post by scoobypediapossible on Jan 27, 2016 18:59:38 GMT -5
Well, it was called "What's *New*", so you could do anything with that.
|
|
|
Post by Grumpydrawer on Jan 28, 2016 12:53:59 GMT -5
Well, it was called "What's *New*", so you could do anything with that. The irony of that title was that WNSD was (as many promotion pieces on the DVDs say) Warner Bros bring "Scooby Doo into the 21st Century." Which it was...the early, early, 21th century. Since of course now everyone is using smartphones, well except me since I suck with touchscreens, and digital cameras. I swear in one episode Velma makes a remark about her camera having X amount of film left haha. Still it was the new Scooby thing at the time so the title does make sense, it's just amusing in some regards now. But yes a revival so to speak could and most likely would work. However I wouldn't want it to be literally just WNSD again. I'd want it to build off it, make it even better than WNSD was! What I don't understand is why Warner Bros keeps "reinventing the wheel" when it comes to the art style of Scooby Doo. It already had a much beloved art style which worked fine and allowed for minor edits to update it every now and then (eg how SDWAY, the 1998-2001 movies, WNSD and the current movie style all share that art style, just with minor differences so to speak). Yet then they go ahead with the Get a Clue, SDMI and Be Cool art styles which I've seen a ton of hate for (though me and many other people will admit SDMI's style worked very well for the theme and tone of that show). That's what confuses me. Surely it'd be cheaper to not keep reinventing new styles?
|
|
|
Post by 24994j on Jan 28, 2016 15:26:53 GMT -5
Well, it was called "What's *New*", so you could do anything with that. The irony of that title was that WNSD was (as many promotion pieces on the DVDs say) Warner Bros bring "Scooby Doo into the 21st Century." Which it was...the early, early, 21th century. Since of course now everyone is using smartphones, well except me since I suck with touchscreens, and digital cameras. I swear in one episode Velma makes a remark about her camera having X amount of film left haha. Still it was the new Scooby thing at the time so the title does make sense, it's just amusing in some regards now. There are two major aspects of WNSD that leave me with very little interest a decade later. First, the writing. While the characters were more developed than in previous series, much of the behaviors and dialogue felt very unnatural. It was all a little too corny for me and didn't befit the more "realistic" setting that APNSD, SDMI and BCSD weren't/aren't limited to. My other beef is one you addressed. In the effort to modernize the setting in 2002, it has become incredibly dated now, namely the technology. Sometimes it was inserted when it wasn't even necessary, just as a gimmick to say "hey kids, look how current we are". The original series, to which WNSD is most compared has some outdated elements, but there was never so much that the series absolutely screamed 1969. I will give it some benefit of the doubt, though, as perhaps more time passes, those outdated elements will become so out that they're in, and it won't be as much of a distraction to me. As for artistic changes, I think that's easier (and not as expensive as we might) to execute now than way back when. I also think it's less of a risk to change the look rather than changing the format, like HB liked to do during the original run's latter half. As for why WNSD was so traditional compared to its predecessor and 3 successors, it was designed as an introductory series for a new generation, and playing off of SDWAY's formula was the best way to do it.
|
|
|
Post by Grumpydrawer on Jan 28, 2016 22:20:16 GMT -5
There are two major aspects of WNSD that leave me with very little interest a decade later. First, the writing. While the characters were more developed than in previous series, much of the behaviors and dialogue felt very unnatural. It was all a little too corny for me and didn't befit the more "realistic" setting that APNSD, SDMI and BCSD weren't/aren't limited to. My other beef is one you addressed. In the effort to modernize the setting in 2002, it has become incredibly dated now, namely the technology. Sometimes it was inserted when it wasn't even necessary, just as a gimmick to say "hey kids, look how current we are". The original series, to which WNSD is most compared has some outdated elements, but there was never so much that the series absolutely screamed 1969. I will give it some benefit of the doubt, though, as perhaps more time passes, those outdated elements will become so out that they're in, and it won't be as much of a distraction to me. As for artistic changes, I think that's easier (and not as expensive as we might) to execute now than way back when. I also think it's less of a risk to change the look rather than changing the format, like HB liked to do during the original run's latter half. As for why WNSD was so traditional compared to its predecessor and 3 successors, it was designed as an introductory series for a new generation, and playing off of SDWAY's formula was the best way to do it. How did the characters behaviors and dialogue feel unatural exactly? And I feel calling BCSD "realistic" is a super stretch by an part of the imagination, Daphne's Daphneisms for instance feels more unatural than anything in WNSD in my opinion (and always feels out of place in regards to the rest of the gang). Though I won't deny the dialogue is a bit stale at points, but it is in every incarnation of Scooby Doo to some extent after a while. Well other than that one mention of a camera with film it's not really dated anywhere else (certinaly not as much as SDWAY is dated) bar the fact that everyone isn't walking around glued to a smartphone, which would make for a boring show if it did include that. Though that'd make it more "realistic." It isn't dated to the extent where it's bad by any extent. It's probably the least dated Scooby series other than SDMI and BCSD in terms of tech. Though I do see and agree with what you mean by using tech as a gimmick, one of the main flaws of the show in my opinion was how every other monster/villian was a robot or vehicle of some kind. It didn't ruin it but it was a bit repetitive. Judging by how many people have decided to not give BCSD a chance because of it's art style I'd have to refute the comment on it being less of a risk. Changing the formula however is dangerous a tweek though if done too much. Just look at Get a Clue to see the risk which comes with changing both the art style and formula can fail utterly. If you plan to change the art style and formula so much you may aswell just make a new IP and franchise. But anyway it's good we disagree (I'd be concerned if everyone loved a show) as it's causing us to have a good discussion about it. But I suppose we should just agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by somebody-doo on Jan 28, 2016 22:29:58 GMT -5
How did the characters behaviors and dialogue feel unatural exactly? Yeah, they felt fine to me.
|
|
|
Post by 24994j on Jan 29, 2016 0:21:52 GMT -5
How did the characters behaviors and dialogue feel unatural exactly? And I feel calling BCSD "realistic" is a super stretch by an part of the imagination, Daphne's Daphneisms for instance feels more unatural than anything in WNSD in my opinion (and always feels out of place in regards to the rest of the gang). Though I won't deny the dialogue is a bit stale at points, but it is in every incarnation of Scooby Doo to some extent after a while. Well other than that one mention of a camera with film it's not really dated anywhere else (certinaly not as much as SDWAY is dated) bar the fact that everyone isn't walking around glued to a smartphone, which would make for a boring show if it did include that. Though that'd make it more "realistic." It isn't dated to the extent where it's bad by any extent. It's probably the least dated Scooby series other than SDMI and BCSD in terms of tech. Though I do see and agree with what you mean by using tech as a gimmick, one of the main flaws of the show in my opinion was how every other monster/villian was a robot or vehicle of some kind. It didn't ruin it but it was a bit repetitive. Judging by how many people have decided to not give BCSD a chance because of it's art style I'd have to refute the comment on it being less of a risk. Changing the formula however is dangerous a tweek though if done too much. Just look at Get a Clue to see the risk which comes with changing both the art style and formula can fail utterly. If you plan to change the art style and formula so much you may aswell just make a new IP and franchise. But anyway it's good we disagree (I'd be concerned if everyone loved a show) as it's causing us to have a good discussion about it. But I suppose we should just agree to disagree. I probably didn't phrase it right, but I meant that WNSD's setting and environment is more realistic and less cartoonish/supernatural than the gravity-defying, eye-popping, world-imploding universes seen in the 3 other series I mentioned. As for my commentary on risk, I'm not accounting for those who'll never even give a show a chance, as they don't know what they're missing, good or bad. Different animation might make some/many hesitant, but a bad format can send people away, even after giving it a chance. I think, open-minded and, dare I say, more mature viewers can look beyond outward appearances if the writing, development, and content is good. In my view, that should hold more weight to the seasoned viewer than animation. A good storyteller can tell their story with stick figures or puppets. On the other hand, no amount of 3D CGI can help a bad story. But that's my taste. What's New Scooby-Doo was too one-note and one-dimensional in content, and safe animation helped to make it a bit of a disappointment, in my eyes. Is it a fun watch? Sure, if I'm in the right mood. It's not hardly the worst in the series, just incredibly bland, and a 4th season would've likely been running on fumes.
|
|
|
Post by barneynedward on May 26, 2017 20:09:47 GMT -5
I miss Gibby Norton. He makes an appearance in a few of the Scoboy-Doo You choose books, but never in any episodes. I'd like to see him appear in just one episode where he has NOTHING to do with the mystery.
|
|