What does everyone always think of Velma was ugly in the cartoons Velma was actually good looking She had a great body she just had a big bulky sweater and she was short and had glasses and had short hair. I mean have you seen the ones where she’s like at the beach and stuff she’s not wearing that big bulky sweater.
I don’t know- the thing about cartoons- especially period cartoons- is that they are just that- cartoons. Generally protagonists tend to be made somewhat visually attractive to viewers- because of how human bias works and such, the well known phenomenon known as “eye candy.” In fact- shows (animated or otherwise) where the main cast aren’t attractive- that have been popular are largely the exception and not the rule. If we look at original Velma for the time she was made- she isn’t what was considered “attractive” at the time- she just wasn’t super plain or completely unattractive. But ESPECIALLY women in fiction tend to have an emphasis places on their looks.
So whether Velma was or was not “hot” is subjective- but the character was designed with key cues to show she was perhaps... average or somewhat “less than” the standard of beauty- and traits likes her name- which was popular up to the 1920’s but fell out of favor and by the time Scooby doo came out- would have been an “old lady name” more or less. You an see the original Velma had somewhat thick legs and calves- especially compared to Daphne. And short as well. While I appreciate these things and many others do- traditional standards of the time would have had these traits being seen largely as unattractive.
Looking at hair we can see Fred and Daphne both have “hip” but “proper” hair cuts for the time. Shaggy is... well... shaggy... and Velma, she has a hair style that would likewise be very plain- commonly see as perhaps... not really an attractive cut- a cut that was perhaps a decade or half out of its time.
The character has changed subtly over the decades as has society. In various cannon Velma had even had her sexuality changed around by the era and work. To be clear- I am in no way saying Velma is not, or is attractive- not that there is anything wrong with finding her attractive. I am merely saying that I think that later castings of Scooby doo in live action, at least to some degree, offer more realistic portrayals of what an “American girl next door” than the cast of the original film who are celebrities noted for uncommon beauty- beyond the “cute girl at school” for most people- but largely while on can have their preferences, I don’t see the later castings as problematic in that regard.
This is a sentiment I see a lot of. If one looks- Daphne and Velma doesn’t get much worse audience scores than either of the two original live action films. Critics scores of the later films are harder to get aggregates for because they were straight to home releases and... well... let’s say not as notable. That said- you can find many glowing reviews of the actresses performances and even the direction the film took- with most detractors pointing to writing or budget related issues. If we are judging the women on looks.... I won’t go there too much. Looks are subjective. But Sarah Michelle Gellar as an example is a star noted for her beauty among other things- and while Daphne is portrayed as “pretty” and popular- the later casting choices may be more “realistic” to what one might expect both in the real world as well as for more modern time periods. I’ll leave looks alone other than that though as another thread in the comments discusses that and we will leave that there.
@guest... I really hate to do this... but according to VERY popular, and RECENT tests, one should "Never underestimate the ability of a situation to get worse" (see March to July 2020 as reference material). In 5 years we may look back on third film the way we do Star Wars prequels, as "better by comparison".
Lest ye forget the social trend of replacing red heads with persons of color and intellectual Caucasians with "alternate sexual orientation" or "differently abled". Live version # 6, Daphne is played by Kumail Nanjiani in drag... and Velma is Idris Elba as a paraplegic in a wheelchair with hentai addiction, married to a waifu pillow of Klein from SAO. What terrifies me... is that my vision of this future hell... may not be as bad as reality comes.
My sleep does not bring pleasant dreams.
Lol. Well- hate to add to your nightmares but Sarah Jeffrey who played Daphne in “Daphne and Velma” is a woman of color- African American, Canadian Native and English- at least that’s what the press info says. So Idris Elba would be late to the party to replacing a red head with a person of color. Of course- lots of people thought Daniel Craig was a horrible mis casting of bond too- and cake around. So I’d have to see that version of the film to judge it.
Honestly, as long as the actor feels right for it, and the writing staff is quality, I can get behind almost any change. I like the new "Jimmy" on Supergirl, Kid Flash, not Hawk Girl... whole storyline, just... no. But Heimdal, yes. If you're going to change a fundamental characteristic of a character, rewrite the whole thing for the actor appropriate to play THAT character. Scooby-Doo should NOT be A chihuahua, Shaggy should NOT resemble Dexter Morgan, and Freddy should NOT be Amish. Either do minor tweaks to show a new side to the old character or burn it to the ground and let the zombies run full speed.
I can respect where you’re coming from, but I disagree. I DO think that we need to clear a lot of space of sequels and reboots and spin offs, to allow new content, creators, and characters. I DO agree that generally, with some exceptions, a character and story should be re written or written for the character and casting- to reflect the different experiences and perspectives in the world and respect the character and actor. In some cases- a character is- we an say “generic” or we can say “universal” where they don’t really NEED a re write, especially in stories where we don’t really explore the characters but the characters drive the plot. If Fred Flinstone was black- unless we want to write racial issues into pre historic flagrant fantasy- how would that change his character- for example.
Where I disagree is radical change. Scooby Doo is iconic and has an iconic image- but sometimes change is good, or at the least interesting. It’s nuanced. Complex. On the one hand- most stories are just stories that have been told- we mix up some elements and names and such- but the core and often even major points are... largely fairly the same. Tolkien tells us a pretty simple story, hardly original on its own, and most fantasy to follow can be heavily compared to Tolkien’s stories. But Tolkien built a world. That’s where things are complex and unique.
Not every property is about world building- and really... many sequels start out as scripts by written for the franchise that with a few changes- fit. Many stand alones start as sequels or such. Then there’s the “what if’s” like Rick and Morty- which is Back to The Future. They looked at it and said: “this is kinda screwed up. What if the characters were a little different..?”
That’s slightly different from CALLING it back tot he future and using the same names- but... you’ve got the basic structure to and the premise. Ghost Busters- I’ve liked the cartoons and the movies. Some more than others. But- some times there are universes that people like and want more of- but the story is done. Or people see spaces the original could have explored but didn’t- or another angle. And of course things change with time and sometimes it’s cool or a way to take a property that may be too “dated” for a mass modern audience but is still good.
Long story short- people have been retelling and modifying stories for as long as writing has existed. I think there are cases where “reboots” and “sequels” and “reimaginings” have their values. But... we do have too many IMHO, and in the end, it really comes down to wether they are “good” or “well done” or bring something worthwhile and interesting asides a “pallet swap.”
Lest ye forget the social trend of replacing red heads with persons of color and intellectual Caucasians with "alternate sexual orientation" or "differently abled". Live version # 6, Daphne is played by Kumail Nanjiani in drag... and Velma is Idris Elba as a paraplegic in a wheelchair with hentai addiction, married to a waifu pillow of Klein from SAO. What terrifies me... is that my vision of this future hell... may not be as bad as reality comes.
My sleep does not bring pleasant dreams.