|
Post by shaggyfan86 on Sept 29, 2016 20:24:20 GMT -5
...Everyone seems to just think, "Oh, well everyone just really loves Scooby and Shaggy, so let's focus on THEM."... Which has been a problem with some of the recent offerings where the dynamic duo have been used as easy filler rather than putting the work in and writing some material - having the pair do some active clue finding even. What makes that approach worse is when much of the screen time is already given over to the likes of WWE. Hopefully your words will bear fruit over time. Be Cool and Scooby Apocalypse have shown that you can have character development and interaction in SCooby Doo without distracting from the essence of the show. Can I just say I hate how you call them filler, isn't that what they've been all these years? What would you call Daph / Fred / Velma that they've been absent for three or four Scooby shows?
|
|
|
Post by jcb on Sept 29, 2016 21:56:55 GMT -5
Which has been a problem with some of the recent offerings where the dynamic duo have been used as easy filler rather than putting the work in and writing some material - having the pair do some active clue finding even. What makes that approach worse is when much of the screen time is already given over to the likes of WWE. Hopefully your words will bear fruit over time. Be Cool and Scooby Apocalypse have shown that you can have character development and interaction in SCooby Doo without distracting from the essence of the show. Can I just say I hate how you call them filler, isn't that what they've been all these years? What would you call Daph / Fred / Velma that they've been absent for three or four Scooby shows? Not sure what russm meant by "filler," but I've just seen what, in my opinion, is a fairly lazy, easy approach to Shaggy and Scooby, instead of exploring them as characters. And I was just baffled by the choices to remove Fred, Velma and Daphne from some of the series. It goes back to my first point, which is the "assumption" that nobody really cares about Fred, Velma and Daphne, so they just ignore them or try to lessen their roles instead of taking the issue head on and asking "WHY don't people (or, more importantly, why don't those WRITERS) care about Fred, Velma and Daphne?" and actually DOING something productive about it by working on their characters and expanding them, dimensionilizing them and MAKING them interesting - instead of removing them or adding additional characters to distract everyone from the fact that nobody ever bothered to FINISH creating the characters from the beginning. BCSD seems like the first real attempt to address this issue and flesh out the entire Scooby gang. It's up to subjective personal taste whether or not we succeeded in making the whole gang interesting as individuals, but I've heard enough people tell me Fred and/or Daphne are their favorite characters on the show, which are the two we did the most work on, to feel satisfied. My point, as always, is that I really hope, in the future, people attempting to create new Scooby Doo-related shows or movies or whatever, would try and make SOME attempt to focus on making the whole gang interesting instead of just finding ways of avoiding them.
|
|
|
Post by scoobnick on Sept 29, 2016 23:50:37 GMT -5
padding, is more accurate. its also another name for filler.
|
|
|
Post by Soupperson on Sept 30, 2016 13:48:07 GMT -5
Can I just say I hate how you call them filler, isn't that what they've been all these years? What would you call Daph / Fred / Velma that they've been absent for three or four Scooby shows? My point, as always, is that I really hope, in the future, people attempting to create new Scooby Doo-related shows or movies or whatever, would try and make SOME attempt to focus on making the whole gang interesting instead of just finding ways of avoiding them. ^ this better apply to future series's, M.I. nearly ignored the title character all together. As for the Be Cool movie suggestions, Haunted Hollywood was pretty similar bit with a different animated style. It even has the Frelma hints and weird Daphne obsession!
|
|
|
Post by russm on Sept 30, 2016 17:54:09 GMT -5
Which has been a problem with some of the recent offerings where the dynamic duo have been used as easy filler rather than putting the work in and writing some material - having the pair do some active clue finding even. What makes that approach worse is when much of the screen time is already given over to the likes of WWE. Hopefully your words will bear fruit over time. Be Cool and Scooby Apocalypse have shown that you can have character development and interaction in SCooby Doo without distracting from the essence of the show. Can I just say I hate how you call them filler, isn't that what they've been all these years? What would you call Daph / Fred / Velma that they've been absent for three or four Scooby shows? I'm not saying that Shaggy and Scooby are fillers rather that their 'running away and screaming' is being used as filler or padding or whatever you want to call it. Time is precious on a cartoon so everything should happen for a reason, not just because you need to pad the episode out
|
|
|
Post by scoobnick on Oct 1, 2016 0:41:55 GMT -5
its the actions that are padding or filler. the running through doors gag. the dressing up in disguises, etc. thasts filler. not the characters themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Ark on Oct 1, 2016 19:39:55 GMT -5
The Scooby portion of "Scooby Doo / Richie Rich hour" was all filler.
|
|
|
Post by shaggyfan86 on Oct 2, 2016 18:38:49 GMT -5
Can I just say I hate how you call them filler, isn't that what they've been all these years? What would you call Daph / Fred / Velma that they've been absent for three or four Scooby shows? I'm not saying that Shaggy and Scooby are fillers rather that their 'running away and screaming' is being used as filler or padding or whatever you want to call it. Time is precious on a cartoon so everything should happen for a reason, not just because you need to pad the episode out Yet ironically enough the series focuses more on them.
|
|
|
Post by russm on Oct 3, 2016 1:21:59 GMT -5
I'm not saying that Shaggy and Scooby are fillers rather that their 'running away and screaming' is being used as filler or padding or whatever you want to call it. Time is precious on a cartoon so everything should happen for a reason, not just because you need to pad the episode out Yet ironically enough the series focuses more on them. Which doesn't conflict with what I said, I was the use of the characters that is the issue, not the characters themselves. Whether it should focus more on them is a different question.
|
|
|
Post by scoobnick on Oct 3, 2016 2:14:37 GMT -5
Russm is right. it is the focvus on Scooby and shaggy doing silly stuff that limits how much you can use Daphne or Velma Or Freddy. Making Daphne have quirks, allows you to use her, because she has more to do, and more to say.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 8:47:59 GMT -5
It does all come down to Fred,Velma and Daphne's treatment when you have the whole gang present. In the 80's was the first time they actually did something useful with those three by giving them jobs and having Daphne's job later being a reason for her return and made her less uh..dense? I think Daphne in Be Cool is pretty much 80's daphne but with a side of insanity. I wouldn't mind them keeping her be cool persona.
|
|
|
Post by scoobnick on Oct 3, 2016 13:21:31 GMT -5
I agree with you Shaphne. Daphne's quirkness has been endearing_ Although her growing a beard in one episode was sorta weird. I like her Be cool persona.
|
|
|
Post by shaggyfan86 on Oct 3, 2016 17:09:07 GMT -5
Couldn't delete post so I edited it instead sorry about that.
|
|
|
Post by shaggyfan86 on Oct 3, 2016 17:16:10 GMT -5
Which doesn't conflict with what I said, I was the use of the characters that is the issue, not the characters themselves. Whether it should focus more on them is a different question. But it's been like that with them forever. What I don't get what your saying regarding this, is in the past 80s shows it was about them acting that way too. Every once in a while we'd have them solving a mystery by themselves shaggy , Scooby and scrappy but it was mostly against monsters. What I'm trying to say is why complain about that with there characters when it's always been that way? Have you always felt this way about them? Mystery solving was always the back burner for them without the gang.
|
|
|
Post by jcb on Oct 3, 2016 18:02:57 GMT -5
It does all come down to Fred,Velma and Daphne's treatment when you have the whole gang present. In the 80's was the first time they actually did something useful with those three by giving them jobs and having Daphne's job later being a reason for her return and made her less uh..dense? I think Daphne in Be Cool is pretty much 80's daphne but with a side of insanity. I wouldn't mind them keeping her be cool persona. While I would obviously be the first person to agree with you that BCSD handles giving focus to the gang, as a whole, pretty well, I'd be concerned about Daphne's personality from BCSD being put exactly the same way into a more traditional-looking art style. I think that's where our much hated art design really serves us well - we can do more silly absurd things and it works with the animation. If Daphne did the exact same things she does in BCSD with a very realistic, traditional look, I think it would come off as WAY too broad and she'd just seem like a truly insane person. The whole heightened, broadened comic tone and style of the show, along with the tweaked character personalities, are made possible by the more cartoony look of the show. Daphne is obviously the most altered character, but that's taken a lot of attention off how much we've actually pushed, heightened and sharpened all of the gang's personalities. That said, I think leaning a more traditional-looking Daphne in the direction we took her and then dimensionalizing her from there in even more real, human, dramatic (and less comedic) ways could work really well and be very effective.
|
|