|
Post by scoobyfan27 on Apr 5, 2021 8:30:27 GMT -5
I know some people have an issue with skeptic Velma but I think the true issue is how she is being executed. Velma has always been the rational, skeptical, level headed one. While the rest of the gang was freaking out she was usually calm trying to make sense of things. HOWEVER, Velma was never obnoxious or condescending about it. Velma was more of a “hey guys it’s ok I’m sure things aren’t what they seem and we can explain this” rather than “you idiots monsters aren’t real you’re all stupid” type of attitude she’s had as of late. If you notice both are saying the same thing except one is being kind about it while the other is being condescending and rude. Take this example, if a kid is terrified of a monster under the bed what approach works better? “Hey kid there’s nothing to be afraid of see that monster was just a pile of toys, you will be ok ” or “hey stupid kid monsters aren’t real go to bed and shut up”. See the first one is much more likable. Velma has always been like the first one. Yeah she’s skeptical but she’s a team player and wants to reason rather than argue and shove her beliefs in peoples faces. If they used this method it would be more in line with classic Velma and people would be happier. What do y’all think?
|
|
|
Post by mattpricetime on Apr 5, 2021 10:31:30 GMT -5
Current Velma has been written too mean. A point to which I made in the other topic though is that if this is something that could have a long term direction then I think the snarkier and mean Velma at the onset that slowly mellows into the more normal Velma is acceptable to me for plot reasons.
Regular Velma just being mean to her friends for believing in the supernatural doesn't suit well with me.
|
|
|
Post by wileyk209 on Apr 5, 2021 11:00:30 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm not too keen on how Velma has often been portrayed as being so snarky and condescending. Lately she's been getting to be more like Daphne in "A Pup Named Scooby-Doo." The next thing you know, they'll have Velma say "Oh, puh-leeze! There are no such things as ghosts!" (Though in a way, Kellie Martin could be a good voice actress for this type of Velma; she'd sound noticeably less annoying than Kate Miccuci.)
A case in question is when I wrote my fanfic where Mystery Inc. meets the Funky Phantom crew (predating the "Scooby-Doo and Guess Who?" episode's premiere by two months, mind you), I had Velma exclaim among seeing Mudsy, "Jinkies! A free-floating spectral apparition. A real one! ... We've captured so many fake ghosts, it's amazing to see a real one for a change!" While I had Daphne be somewhat skeptical at first about Mudsy. And yes, I kind of based that bit off the "Pup Named Scooby-Doo" episode "Ghost Who's Coming to Dinner." MUCH better than Velma constantly trying to prove Mudsy isn't a real ghost in the "Guess Who" episode.
|
|
|
Post by ilovescoobydoo on Apr 5, 2021 11:03:32 GMT -5
I agree. I think she can be a skeptic without being mean about it. Lately I think it's been overboard, I almost want to count how many times she uses the word science.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Apr 5, 2021 11:21:53 GMT -5
I don't think the problem is her doubting ghosts as much as being an obsessive weirdo about it. Daphne didn't annoy me in A Pup Named Scooby Doo, but this Velma characterization is horrendous. Even worse is that she always ends up right, given Warner Bros recent stance on real monsters in Scooby Doo, and it just inflates her ego even more
|
|
|
Post by Dyland on Apr 5, 2021 11:49:54 GMT -5
Forgive me, I need to brush up on my SD:WAY episodes... But didn't she once, when face-to-face cornered by the monster, say something to the effect of "tell him that" to Shaggy's "didn't you say there's no such thing as monsters," and then run away screaming? I much prefer the skeptic Velma who's "willing to accept" monsters, demons, ghosts, what have you - so long as it can be proven scientifically. The modern interpretations (both condescending and not) tend to have her hold too strongly to her preconceived truth. So much so that it kind of makes her seem irrational in such conviction, especially when she doesn't really run away from the monsters anymore - she's just swept up by the group or something. Some of the classic "monsters" were actually felons and stuff under the suit, and pushing a "I refuse to be scared because of science" just comes off as irrational. I like a little mix of both. "I'm sure there's a rational explanation for this" but "just in case, I'm not sticking around to find out." Until, of course, they unmask the villain, or find out that they're on an island with real Zombies, or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by russm on Apr 5, 2021 13:47:45 GMT -5
Forgive me, I need to brush up on my SD:WAY episodes... But didn't she once, when face-to-face cornered by the monster, say something to the effect of "tell him that" to Shaggy's "didn't you say there's no such thing as monsters," and then run away screaming? I much prefer the skeptic Velma who's "willing to accept" monsters, demons, ghosts, what have you - so long as it can be proven scientifically. The modern interpretations (both condescending and not) tend to have her hold too strongly to her preconceived truth. So much so that it kind of makes her seem irrational in such conviction, especially when she doesn't really run away from the monsters anymore - she's just swept up by the group or something. Some of the classic "monsters" were actually felons and stuff under the suit, and pushing a "I refuse to be scared because of science" just comes off as irrational. I like a little mix of both. "I'm sure there's a rational explanation for this" but "just in case, I'm not sticking around to find out." Until, of course, they unmask the villain, or find out that they're on an island with real Zombies, or whatever. Yes. It's almost like they take some of the worst aspects of well known skeptics (really thinking of the likes of Richard Dawkins) and assumed that all skeptics are like that. So for all his ability at science communication, his Blind Watchmaker and Climbing Mount Impossible are excellent, he is a bit of an opinionated ass - especially as he's got older. As so it seemes with how Velma had been written.
|
|
|
Post by Dyland on Apr 5, 2021 15:17:55 GMT -5
Yeah, it's almost like subtly anti-skeptic with just how pig-headed and unbendingly certain she is portrayed. Give Velma a little bit of logical wiggle room. And don't make Scooby an absolute klutz either. When his friends are in danger/there's enough scooby snacks on the line, he'll grow a little bit of courage and face anything.
There's been a tendency (especially recently) to overly caricaturized the gang. It's not necessarily the VO's fault either. It's the interpretation and the writing.
I'd be lying if I didn't admit it can be done well, though. There have been a few more recent moments that have made me laugh or whatever. It's only really a problem when it becomes a crutch and is over-done.
|
|
|
Post by Doo on Apr 5, 2021 16:20:56 GMT -5
Totally agree with everything everyone's said so far. There's definitely a line between being skeptical and being obnoxious, and in recent films, Velma has gone way over the obnoxious line. Maybe the writers are intending it to be funny, but honestly, it's more frustrating than anything. I didn't find her too bad in Sword and the Scoob, so I hope they continue toning her down from how overly skeptic she was in the two sequels and to an extent, Happy Halloween.
|
|
|
Post by elemage on Apr 5, 2021 21:16:16 GMT -5
The earliest I remember this Velma popping up was in "Goblin King". When faced with REAL MONSTERS, she literally descends into madness. Despite this being part of What's New canon, where she canonically faced real monsters (albeit technological ones, such as the smart house), that real coral monster, and the Hex Girls exist in What's New, so SHE FACED OFF AGAINST SARAH RAVENCROFT. Scrappy exists too, thanks to that animated short packaged with Aloha, so SHE MET ANCIENT ASTRONAUTS AND SOUTH AMERICAN ZOMBIES. In that same short they talk about Morgan Moonscar. Whose ZOMBIE Velma was inches away from!
Then came Mystery Incorporated. And with it came the rudest, sassiest, meanest version of Velma. And with it, the beginning of CONDESCENDING DISBELIEVER Velma (Goblin King had delusionally skeptic Velma, not condescendingly skeptic Velma). But even in Mystery Incorporated, Velma still believed in mermaids when she made friends with Amy. And when confronted with the truth of Nibiru and the Anunnaki, she struggled with it, and then rationalized the supernatural aspects by applying SCIENCE to them. That to me is the perfect application of Velma's beliefs. Make her the science-based one, but allow her to provide a scientific, rational explanation for how the supernatural aspects could be real. Have Shaggy and Scooby be strictly run by fear, and have Daphne be the true believer like in Zombie Island. And let Fred be a lovable goober.
Condescending, delusional Velma (the worst of the three characterizations so far) begins in Frankencreepy. Then she shows up in full force in KISS. And the rest is history. Some movies have characterized her very well since then (Gourmet Ghost), while others have made her just as annoying but about different things (her unhealthy obsession with fonts in Shaggy's Showdown), but for the most part we've been getting Condescending, Delusional Velma. Which has been most prominent in 13th Ghost, Return to ZI and Happy Halloween, as we've all noticed.
Also, even Pup Daphne, who was the most skeptical of any member of the Gang pre-this Velma was willing to believe in ghosts. She was very kind to Mr. Boo, and even told him something along the lines of "if ghosts are real, you're very nice for one" (correct me if I'm wrong. I haven't seen the episode in FOREVER.)
Speaking of Pup, it's canon to both Happy Halloween (where Red Herring appeared) and Sword and the Scoob (where it, Zombie Island, Mystery Incorporated, New Movies AND Scooby & Scrappy all appeared in the time warp). MEANING VELMA HAS ENCOUNTERED REAL MONSTERS DOZENS OF TIMES, and still refuses to believe that magic could've sent them back in time. DESPITE TIME TRAVELLING IN SCOOBY DOO TEAM UP, WHICH IS CANON TO NEW MOVIES. Ugh.
|
|
|
Post by Dyland on Apr 6, 2021 0:41:06 GMT -5
"Canon? What is this canon you speak of?" - WB Execs
|
|
|
Post by mattpricetime on Apr 6, 2021 7:17:50 GMT -5
Velma being written like a Dawkins/Randi/PZ acolyte these days annoys me as well. Mostly because they annoy me on a regular basis. There is most certainly a line between being skeptical and wanting harder proof to supernatural claims than being a cynic who thinks they've already solved everything and the plebes needs to rise up to their level. You're never allowed to be skeptical of them and their authority even if that's the label they love to throw on themselves, even if they give other areas of the ideology a bad wrap they don't deserve.
But count me in on wanting Velma to be written back like she used to be. Reel her back off that cliff her characterization had been dangling over please.
|
|
|
Post by elemage on Apr 7, 2021 20:13:31 GMT -5
"Canon? What is this canon you speak of?" - WB Execs Honestly, if you ignored the DC Comics (which are simultaneously part of every continuity and yet a continuity all their own) then there were very clear timelines: the Get A Clue timeline where Shaggy and Scooby came together later in life due to having Zoinks and Groovy Don in their lives, the Mystery Inc. timeline where Fred's parents are Brad and Judy rather than Skip and Peggy, the Be Cool timeline where Fred's father is not Brad or Skip or even Fred Jones Sr. but rather Donald Jones/Professor Huh, and then the Classic Timeline which incorporated pretty much everything else that was animated and had all of Mystery Inc. know each other since infancy. Then recent direct-to-video movies (which are usually considered part of the main Classic timeline), specifically Frankencreepy (which features Angie Dinkley and Dale Dinkley as Velma's parents), Happy Halloween (which featured Crystal Cove but left it ambiguous as to whether or not it was the Gang's hometown) and now Sword in the Scoob (which featured flashbacks to Be Cool, Mystery Inc and a ton of Classic timeline stuff, and mentioned Fred's dad being a jerk, which doesn't describe Skip OR Donald, but does describe Brad or Fred Sr. pre-apocalypse), have muddled what little canon we had. I absolutely loathe Warner Bros. for making everything so freakin' muddled.
|
|
|
Post by Dyland on Apr 7, 2021 21:11:00 GMT -5
There could always be dual-canon shows; i.e. one show being in several continuities simultaneously. That, or certain newer additions (like Sword in the Scoob) being in its own unique timeline, which has several familiar events resembling other series/timelines. IDK, I'm a big fan of the 90's series Sliders, and alternate dimensions (even fictional ones like DC's multiverse) interest me so. Of course if the same character (like Scooby) exists in multiple timelines, there's bound to be some things, aside from general look & voice, that are similar - like personality, past events, thought processes, etc. Or maybe we're just reading far too deeply into it. I still find it fun trying to make sense of it all.
|
|
|
Post by mattpricetime on Apr 8, 2021 6:27:46 GMT -5
I think a lot of the more recent confusion came down to Sheridan and Atoms having entirely different opinions and there being no firm editorial to steer them away.
By what Sheridan said he made it seem like there was an actual stance to just assume all the old adventures took place in the past but the status quo of them still being teenagers has to be retconned in no matter what the plots previous entailed. Curse of the 13th Ghost and Return to Zombie Island pretty well reflected that idea.
Then Atoms got writing privileges and said he didn't view there being any canon and he could just assume to pick and choose whatever elements he wanted from any versions. If there was something stopping Sherican that force certainly didn't do anything on Atoms.
|
|