|
|
Post by scoobydooforever on Nov 14, 2017 17:49:32 GMT -5
Wow! I loved this episode so much! The arcade, the monster and the scooby & shaggy moment in the end! <3 Shaggy was awesome in this episode. This episode is one of my favorites! Bad its only 11 minutes, but I'm happy for the ones I got.  |
|
|
|
Post by scoobylover on Nov 16, 2017 13:00:49 GMT -5
Great friggin episodes... I wish we had more like these. They were fun and blend in so well with the campy writing of the show
|
|
|
|
Post by somebody-doo on Nov 17, 2017 14:49:46 GMT -5
The second one was pretty good, but the first one felt unoriginal and way too fast. Also out of the character. The second one should have gotten a full episode, I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcb on Nov 17, 2017 19:01:26 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but I've seen a lot of people celebrating the "Pizza O Possum" ep here and elsewhere and it's getting increasingly difficult for me to be quiet on the subject. As I might have told you, I had NOTHING to do with this episode, apart from suggesting (and being mostly ignored) that it be kept character-driven. That we make the prize for winning the game a stuffed dog that was the same look, shape and size of Scooby to create conflict between Shaggy and Scooby with Scooby suddenly feeling like this whole time Shaggy REALLY wanted this stuffed animal he's been obsessed with and Scooby is just a consolation prize. I felt this could be serviced in 11 minutes and pay off big when Shaggy realizes that its just the opposite - that this whole time he's been obsessed with winning this stuffed animal from his childhood, when he had the REAL THING all along, which is the far more valuable prize. That storyline is perfectly in keeping with the character-driven storytelling of BCSD and was sorta of hinted at but not really explored or developed in the episode. Another big problem for me is that the characters in this episode simply don't speak, behave or act like we established in the series. The comedy tone is back to the 70's corny humor and all nuance and carefully constructed points of view are simply tossed out the window as each character does whatever the creative team behind it wanted the character to do in each scene, as opposed to what THAT character, as established WOULD have done in each scene. Nowhere is this more horrifically blatant than in the Velma/Daphne storyline. We had already established Velma's dislike/indifference to video games in the, admittedly, lackluster (in execution) "Protein Titans" episode. Velma doesn't think video games are worth wasting time on. This goes back to her views all the way in "Party like its 1889" when she dismisses the costume mystery party as a waste of time because they should be using their problem solving skills to really do good in the world and help people. It's consistent with her character. But they makers of this episode just thought it would be HILARIOUS to suddenly give Velma a "video game addiction" that destroyed her childhood (out of nowhere) and literally left permanent physical deformities on her body. I, personally, found this sick and distasteful. Video game addiction is actually a very real, serious condition and nothing to make light of. It's a VERY serious problem in many parts of the world, especially in places like South Korea. Here's a entry for it from a medical website. Look it up. It's real and ruins people's lives. www.addictionrecov.org/Addictions/?AID=45To casually give Velma this problem makes no sense for the Velma we carefully developed over two seasons. It's just NOT built into her character. But even worse, perhaps the worst thing I've ever seen someone jam into BCSD, is the moment when Daphne, OUR big-hearted, empathetic, loving, creative, funny, kind Daphne, wickedly TAUNTS Velma to give into her dangerous, damaging addiction just to win a video game. She has a malicious look on her face, smirking as she waves tokens in front of Velma, who practically begs her to stop. This is EXCTLY the same as if Daphne waved a bag of heroin in front of a junkie and coaxed them into giving in, giving up and just taking it (and possibly destroying their life again) - so they could beat a damn video game and unmask a rodent. It's sick. It's disgusting. It's inhumane - and it's NOT the character AT ALL that we established. I wouldn't show this episodes to children. It's cruel and evil and manipulative. The others don't even step in and protect Velma. I am ashamed of this scene and this episode because of this moment (even though I fought against it as hard as possible). Either way, its supposed to be Shaggy's story and the solution to beating the game should have come from him or Scooby, resolving the conflict that I thought should have been driving the story from the beginning. Scooby really believing that once Shaggy gets the stuffed animal, he will no longer need Scooby, but since Scooby loves Shaggy so much he will use all his skills and four legs and tails to beat the video game, solve the mystery and win Shaggy the toy. Then, Shaggy realizes that he already won the the best prize of all: Scooby Doo. Maybe Scooby reminded him of that childhood prize, but he's come to mean so much more and is his best friend. He no longer needs the stuffed animal and he gives it to the little girl. That would have been a nice clean arc for the story and NOT made Daphne become this evil, psychotic sadist taunting an addict to throw away their hard earned sobriety for no reason. I'm sorry, I simply cannot get around the horrible moral implications of this episode and the completely off-model and off-tone execution of the story and characters. I wrote a very angry email when I first heard about all of this and was, as usual, ignored. I can't believe WB allowed this to make it to the screen. I know there are so many who HATE a lot of BCSD and lots of MY work on it, as well. I think I'm entitled to be critical of the show once in a while too and "Pizza o Possum" is just a wrong, sad ending to what could have, should have - been a great series. People are always entitled to their opinions and I'm glad whoever liked this one enjoyed it. I am just not one of them for the reasons stated above. Best, JCB |
|
|
|
Post by scoobydooforever on Nov 18, 2017 14:16:37 GMT -5
JCB, now I see clear what you mean! I still love the arcade, the monster and scooby & shaggy in this one.
But the rest...not so much, because, now I see things with other eyes. I also never liked the playing and mean part anyways.
I understand how you think and I also want to say that I liked your idea better.
I liked the possum more than curse of because, the curse of was not finished. + The villain cutler got away. That sucked!
One more thing I want to say is that I hate it when Scooby gets dressed up (in other episodes. For starters, animals should not wear / be forced to wear clothes! Especially not female clothes if the animal is a male. I hate it when scooby almost always is a woman! Its very wrong!
I also really dont like it when kids are villains, as in possums and other episodes in other shows. It sucks!
Thank you for your comment JCB!
|
|
|
|
Post by jcb on Nov 19, 2017 12:58:39 GMT -5
JCB, now I see clear what you mean! I still love the arcade, the monster and scooby & shaggy in this one. But the rest...not so much, because, now I see things with other eyes. I also never liked the playing and mean part anyways. I understand how you think and I also want to say that I liked your idea better. I liked the possum more than curse of because, the curse of was not finished. + The villain cutler got away. That sucked! One more thing I want to say is that I hate it when Scooby gets dressed up (in other episodes. For starters, animals should not wear / be forced to wear clothes! Especially not female clothes if the animal is a male. I hate it when scooby almost always is a woman! Its very wrong! I also really dont like it when kids are villains, as in possums and other episodes in other shows. It sucks! Thank you for your comment JCB! Well, I'm glad you can see my perspective on this episode. I was completely outraged that WB backed it and it shows how clearly they never understood or cared about the series, characters or integrity of the show. As for Scooby dressing up, they all have to dress up sometimes to go undercover and the Shaggy/Scooby scenes where they dress up to fool the monster is a delightful trope from the old show that I thought we breathed some fresh life into. I'm not sure what's behind your concern regarding Scooby dressing as a woman, but it's an ancient concept nd trope going all the way back to ancient Greece and even Shakespeare, where men would take female roles (as women were not allowed to perform on stage). It also goes back to Vaudeville and continues to be a staple of modern comedy to this day. I enjoy mashing up the ancient, old comedic tropes with brand, new next-level comedy and finding something new. Scooby dressing as a female is just absurd and silly and an element that has been present in the SD series since 1969. BCSD is an homage to that history as much as it is an extension of it, so, for me, it fits right in. That said, to each his own. |
|
|
|
Post by wileyk209 on Nov 30, 2017 19:50:02 GMT -5
I LOVE parodies of Chuck E. Cheese's, so naturally I enjoyed this episode. (There's a great TV Tropes page about Chuck E. Cheese parodies, " Suck E. Cheese's!") It also gave me these "Five Nights at Freddy's" vibes; I wouldn't be surprised if that was intentional? Unfortunately, the REAL Chuck E. Cheese's restaurants are going to phase out the animatronics, as the episode has explained, kids are growing less interested in them. Not to mention that "Five Nights at Freddy's" has been giving them a bad image. |
|
|
|
Post by Doo on Dec 8, 2017 14:11:11 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but I've seen a lot of people celebrating the "Pizza O Possum" ep here and elsewhere and it's getting increasingly difficult for me to be quiet on the subject. As I might have told you, I had NOTHING to do with this episode, apart from suggesting (and being mostly ignored) that it be kept character-driven. That we make the prize for winning the game a stuffed dog that was the same look, shape and size of Scooby to create conflict between Shaggy and Scooby with Scooby suddenly feeling like this whole time Shaggy REALLY wanted this stuffed animal he's been obsessed with and Scooby is just a consolation prize. I felt this could be serviced in 11 minutes and pay off big when Shaggy realizes that its just the opposite - that this whole time he's been obsessed with winning this stuffed animal from his childhood, when he had the REAL THING all along, which is the far more valuable prize. That storyline is perfectly in keeping with the character-driven storytelling of BCSD and was sorta of hinted at but not really explored or developed in the episode. Another big problem for me is that the characters in this episode simply don't speak, behave or act like we established in the series. The comedy tone is back to the 70's corny humor and all nuance and carefully constructed points of view are simply tossed out the window as each character does whatever the creative team behind it wanted the character to do in each scene, as opposed to what THAT character, as established WOULD have done in each scene. Nowhere is this more horrifically blatant than in the Velma/Daphne storyline. We had already established Velma's dislike/indifference to video games in the, admittedly, lackluster (in execution) "Protein Titans" episode. Velma doesn't think video games are worth wasting time on. This goes back to her views all the way in "Party like its 1889" when she dismisses the costume mystery party as a waste of time because they should be using their problem solving skills to really do good in the world and help people. It's consistent with her character. But they makers of this episode just thought it would be HILARIOUS to suddenly give Velma a "video game addiction" that destroyed her childhood (out of nowhere) and literally left permanent physical deformities on her body. I, personally, found this sick and distasteful. Video game addiction is actually a very real, serious condition and nothing to make light of. It's a VERY serious problem in many parts of the world, especially in places like South Korea. Here's a entry for it from a medical website. Look it up. It's real and ruins people's lives. www.addictionrecov.org/Addictions/?AID=45To casually give Velma this problem makes no sense for the Velma we carefully developed over two seasons. It's just NOT built into her character. But even worse, perhaps the worst thing I've ever seen someone jam into BCSD, is the moment when Daphne, OUR big-hearted, empathetic, loving, creative, funny, kind Daphne, wickedly TAUNTS Velma to give into her dangerous, damaging addiction just to win a video game. She has a malicious look on her face, smirking as she waves tokens in front of Velma, who practically begs her to stop. This is EXCTLY the same as if Daphne waved a bag of heroin in front of a junkie and coaxed them into giving in, giving up and just taking it (and possibly destroying their life again) - so they could beat a damn video game and unmask a rodent. It's sick. It's disgusting. It's inhumane - and it's NOT the character AT ALL that we established. I wouldn't show this episodes to children. It's cruel and evil and manipulative. The others don't even step in and protect Velma. I am ashamed of this scene and this episode because of this moment (even though I fought against it as hard as possible). Either way, its supposed to be Shaggy's story and the solution to beating the game should have come from him or Scooby, resolving the conflict that I thought should have been driving the story from the beginning. Scooby really believing that once Shaggy gets the stuffed animal, he will no longer need Scooby, but since Scooby loves Shaggy so much he will use all his skills and four legs and tails to beat the video game, solve the mystery and win Shaggy the toy. Then, Shaggy realizes that he already won the the best prize of all: Scooby Doo. Maybe Scooby reminded him of that childhood prize, but he's come to mean so much more and is his best friend. He no longer needs the stuffed animal and he gives it to the little girl. That would have been a nice clean arc for the story and NOT made Daphne become this evil, psychotic sadist taunting an addict to throw away their hard earned sobriety for no reason. I'm sorry, I simply cannot get around the horrible moral implications of this episode and the completely off-model and off-tone execution of the story and characters. I wrote a very angry email when I first heard about all of this and was, as usual, ignored. I can't believe WB allowed this to make it to the screen. I know there are so many who HATE a lot of BCSD and lots of MY work on it, as well. I think I'm entitled to be critical of the show once in a while too and "Pizza o Possum" is just a wrong, sad ending to what could have, should have - been a great series. People are always entitled to their opinions and I'm glad whoever liked this one enjoyed it. I am just not one of them for the reasons stated above. Best, JCB I can't say I really liked the episode either, and I totally agree with most of the critiques presented here. One of the biggest issues I had with the episode is that the gang just seemed completely out of character, to the point where it felt like all the characters felt shallow and uninteresting, at least in my opinion. The only ones who seemed even remotely in character were Scooby and Fred, and even they both seemed quite off from their respective characters that had been established in the previous 49 episodes. Hearing JCB's perspective and ideas for the Shaggy/Scooby plot would have made the episode a ton better than it was. The whole Pizza Pup plot seemed nonsensical, as surely Shaggy would notice that the stuffed dog which he had been wanting since he was a kid looked exactly like Scooby. The episode could have worked without JCB's plot idea, but IMO leaving Pizza Pup's design identical to how Scooby looked without exploring or developing the plot at all was a big mistake. The ending with Shaggy aggressively grabbing the stuffed animal out of the owner's hands was also not at all funny, and actually a bit cruel. As JCB mentioned as well, it also makes no sense to deviate from what was already explored in "Protein Titans 2" regarding Velma and video games. Regarding Velma's video game addiction, I was aware of the fact that it is a serious mental illness and also found it quite distasteful that Velma's addiction was made into a joke. That being said though, I also wouldn't necessarily be offended by people still enjoying the episode. I think the main issue here is more that our society looks at digital addiction as somehow "amusing" and doesn't recognize it as a real illness. For those who aren't aware there are many other types of digital addictions besides just video game addiction, such as phone addiction, social media addiction, etc. If television and other media choose to frame that sort of addiction in a comedic light, then that's the way the audience will view at as well, without thinking anything about the implications it actually has on people which are experiencing the intense struggle of the addiction every day. Like JCB mentioned, digital addiction can ruin lives and cause people to be (metaphorically) stuck in a digital fantasy world. It can cause the inability to simply do everyday tasks and can completely separate you from reality. Specifically in terms of this episode, I definitely agree that Velma's addiction is pretty horribly portrayed here, and Daphne is turned into this sadistic character which completely goes against who she is. In one particular scene which JCB referenced, you can literally see the evil in her eyes when taunting Velma to give in to her addiction. When I was watching the episode and had not read any of your comments here, I was really hoping that WB was maybe just ignorant to what they were actually doing. But hearing that you sent them a letter actually highlighting the portrayal here and how it was wrong, that's horrible that they just ignored you, and even more so that they left it in the episode. Hopefully someday the people responsible for this episode get the chance to meet someone affected by video game addiction, and cower in shame when they see what their representation of the illness here actually communicated to the viewers around the world. As I mentioned, while the audience isn't necessarily always informed about the implications of what they are watching, as the content creator (WB), it is their responsibility to make sure the messages they are sending out to the audience (and most prominently the kids who are viewing this) are sending a good message rather than a hurtful or offensive message. Though this reminds me a bit of a similar issue which actually made it to national news a few years ago. There was a Disney show (which I don't remember the name of) which completely dehumanized a young teenage model and ended up being taken off the air after complaints from one of the main cast members. I've never watched the episode and thus don't remember the exact quote, but it was something along the lines of the model saying, "Aww, you guys are so adorable I could just eat you up...well, if I actually ate!" The episode was left on the air somehow for two years before a Disney celebrity who had a severe eating disorder (I *think* it was Demi Lovato) came out and bashed the episode, discussing the immense pressure on her to eat virtually nothing and arguing that it taught young girls it was okay to not eat as long as you stay "pretty." The point being, there have been issues like this before and hopefully someone someday (even if it's not necessarily for this BCSD episode) will point out how inhumane it is to make fun of illnesses, especially one which ruins lives and even kills people (which both digital addiction and starving yourself does, and happens to people around the world every day). So, no offense to anyone who liked the episode, but this is personally my least favorite episode of both Be Cool, Scooby-Doo! and actually the entirety of the Scooby franchise for the reasons highlighted above. Regarding JCB's comment "Pizza o Possum" is just a wrong, sad ending to what could have, should have - been a great series - I personally don't view this episode as the end of the series even though it seems most countries are airing it as the finale episode. Frankly it makes no sense to air the episodes this way (as this episode wraps nothing up), and at least for me, I'd prefer to stay true to what JCB intended for the series development rather than whatever ridiculous way WB has decided the episodes "should" air. And btw, none of this "could have," "should have" stuff...Be Cool, Scooby-Doo IS a great series! |
|
|
|
Post by jcb on Dec 28, 2017 12:34:33 GMT -5
Just to make this point again, here's a new article saying "gaming disorder" is already recognized as a serious problem and may be classified as a straight up DISEASE in 2018: gkmen.com/2017/12/27/gaming-disorder-added-to-list-of-2018-diseases/Wouldn't it be funny and SO like BCSD'd Daphne if Velma had lung cancer and Daphne mercilessly taunted her to have a cigarette in order to solve a mystery? No, no it wouldn't. It would be so sick and cruel WB would be boycotted and probably sued. |
|
|
|
Post by russm on Dec 28, 2017 17:13:37 GMT -5
Just to make this point again, here's a new article saying "gaming disorder" is already recognized as a serious problem and may be classified as a straight up DISEASE in 2018... It will be lumped under a general addiction or mental health code. I had a look in the SNOMED CT* browser and couldn't see a specific clinical code for gaming addiction. *Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms |
|
|
|
Post by Doo on Dec 28, 2017 19:45:56 GMT -5
Just to make this point again, here's a new article saying "gaming disorder" is already recognized as a serious problem and may be classified as a straight up DISEASE in 2018... It will be lumped under a general addiction or mental health code. I had a look in the SNOMED CT* browser and couldn't see a specific clinical code for gaming addiction. *Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms Out of curiosity, is there any category in the SNOMED for just a general digital (as in phone, social media, Internet, etc., not specifically just gaming) addiction? I would imagine if it were to be listed anywhere officially that would be the logical place. |
|
|
|
Post by jcb on Dec 28, 2017 20:35:22 GMT -5
It will be lumped under a general addiction or mental health code. I had a look in the SNOMED CT* browser and couldn't see a specific clinical code for gaming addiction. *Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms Out of curiosity, is there any category in the SNOMED for just a general digital (as in phone, social media, Internet, etc., not specifically just gaming) addiction? I would imagine if it were to be listed anywhere officially that would be the logical place. It would be ironic if "Pizza O Possum" ends up bringing the world's attention to gaming addiction and charities are established in its name and WB are hailed as heroes and all the people involved in making it get Nobel prizes. |
|
|
|
Post by russm on Dec 29, 2017 15:43:17 GMT -5
It will be lumped under a general addiction or mental health code. I had a look in the SNOMED CT* browser and couldn't see a specific clinical code for gaming addiction. *Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine - Clinical Terms Out of curiosity, is there any category in the SNOMED for just a general digital (as in phone, social media, Internet, etc., not specifically just gaming) addiction? I would imagine if it were to be listed anywhere officially that would be the logical place. I can't find one, there are findings of psychological addiction like 85758008 | Psychological addiction (finding) with the number being the SNOMED concept ID with similar catch-all buckets in ICD-10*. Now it's been a while since I've had any dealings with clinical coding, and most of that was using Read (a UK specific coding scheme which is being replaced by SNOMED) but I think you can add child qualifiers to the SNOMED concept so you could express it that way. If this had come up a couple of years ago I could have asked as my previous job was with medical software and had a clinical director I could have asked, now I build big black war-canoes for the Royal Navy instead. *10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) |
|
|
|
Post by russm on Jan 2, 2018 18:01:04 GMT -5
|
|
Scooby-Dingus
Mr. E
Like, this chocolate pudding tastes a little rank.
Posts: 29
|
Post by Scooby-Dingus on Jan 30, 2018 0:36:19 GMT -5
It was a mixed bag. On one hand, I like some of the little in-jokes the writers dropped in there. For example, this is the first SD cartoon to have two 11-minute shorts since A Pup Named Scooby-Doo. Speaking of, the "Pizza Pup" doll rather resembles Scooby-Doo in his "Mellow Mutt" costume (minus his blue booties). Even the background designs and the old-school arcade games in the place lent a retro-'80s feel to the episode. I think that was deliberate. Sure, little kids might not get it, but us old-school Doo fans who spent our misbegotten youth in skate rinks, bowling alleys, and the little room back of the corner store, eating nachos and pizza and Coke and playing on those machines for hours on end, are inwardly chuckling.
On the other hand, the convention of a Showbiz Pizza/Chuck E. Cheese-type place's singing robot mascot coming to life and terrorizing people has been around the block a few times, I fear, and it was a bit too easy to figure out the little girl was the culprit. I half expected an older version of Red Herring to turn up as a janitor or something (perhaps even further the plot by triggering Velma's relapse or something, being the jerk that he is.) And the bit with Velma's callouses was maybe a bit too Ren and Stimpy to suit this show. And I think could have been done with the resemblance between Scooby and Pizza Pup. Maybe if she had been a little less distracted she might have given us a thorough Jungian analysis of the old Shagster's unhealthy fixation.
|
|
