Post by scoobyreviewertnsdm on Dec 3, 2016 6:03:06 GMT -5
While "Curse of the Lake Monster" is the first live-action, or "non-animated" Scooby-Doo movie I've seen in full, I think, based on my aspiring TV and film critic abilities, I am in the position to not hold back on my opinion of this film.
This movie was so bad and the acting so cringeworthy that it was almost good. I said almost. But this particular movie doesn't have the "Freddy Got Fingered" aspect. It's not "that bad" or radical.
I get that Shaggy is supposed to be much different in "real life" than on the animated cartoons, particularly due to nostalgia reasons and general acceptance of a younger Casey Kasem's voice-over abilities. However, I also get bad acting.
I'm willing to give this and the previous movie a pass as they were property of Cartoon Network and put together with kids in mind, not film critics.
What did I think of the story/plot itself? Meh. Nothing about this movie really stood out to me. The actual villain outfit(s) wasn't too imaginative, the claim of the location of "Coolsville" as being on the Great Lakes was a laugh. I mean, anyone with common sense could look at the cliffs and beach and/or waves and realize this was West Coast.
I won't do a full review of the movie right now as it is about 5 AM and I actually saw the movie several days ago. It was so bad and boring, I don't remember much from it.
My favorite part of the movie (or any part I actually remembered) might actually be the not-very-realistic music video thing afterward. It wasn't too sensationalized. Whenever I get a working camera again, I might do a proper YouTube review of this film. I'll try to catch a few of the other live action films in the upcoming months and see if they're any better. I'll say the first live action Scooby-Doo film was probably the best of the 4, albeit certainly nowhere near good.
This movie was so bad and the acting so cringeworthy that it was almost good. I said almost. But this particular movie doesn't have the "Freddy Got Fingered" aspect. It's not "that bad" or radical.
I get that Shaggy is supposed to be much different in "real life" than on the animated cartoons, particularly due to nostalgia reasons and general acceptance of a younger Casey Kasem's voice-over abilities. However, I also get bad acting.
I'm willing to give this and the previous movie a pass as they were property of Cartoon Network and put together with kids in mind, not film critics.
What did I think of the story/plot itself? Meh. Nothing about this movie really stood out to me. The actual villain outfit(s) wasn't too imaginative, the claim of the location of "Coolsville" as being on the Great Lakes was a laugh. I mean, anyone with common sense could look at the cliffs and beach and/or waves and realize this was West Coast.
I won't do a full review of the movie right now as it is about 5 AM and I actually saw the movie several days ago. It was so bad and boring, I don't remember much from it.
My favorite part of the movie (or any part I actually remembered) might actually be the not-very-realistic music video thing afterward. It wasn't too sensationalized. Whenever I get a working camera again, I might do a proper YouTube review of this film. I'll try to catch a few of the other live action films in the upcoming months and see if they're any better. I'll say the first live action Scooby-Doo film was probably the best of the 4, albeit certainly nowhere near good.