Shaggy (Matthew Lillard) shares a snack with Scooby-Doo in their cluttered room
Film review

Scooby-Doo

2002 · Directed by Raja Gosnell · 1h 27m

In a sentenceMatthew Lillard makes a better cartoon character than the computer does

Mystery Inc. brings together Fred (Freddie Prinze Jr.), Daphne (Sarah Michelle Gellar), Velma (Linda Cardellini) and Shaggy (Matthew Lillard). Scooby is voiced by Neil Fanning. Mondavarious (Rowan Atkinson) and Mary Jane (Isla Fisher) are among the people the gang encounters. The group has a case to solve, with ghosts among the obstacles in an adventure that mixes live-action performers and computer-generated creatures. Shaggy and Scooby share the comic business as the investigation gives the human members of the gang a job to do together.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Matthew Lillard and Linda Cardellini make Scooby-Doo briefly worth the trouble. The computer-generated dog and the muddled comedy make it hard to recommend, even at 87 minutes.

Raja Gosnell’s Scooby-Doo is a patchy comedy with good casting and too few good jokes. Bringing these characters into live action leaves an awkward choice about how seriously to take them, and James Gunn’s screenplay keeps changing its mind. The broad physical comedy is pitched at children; the knowing references ask adults to enjoy being above it. Both approaches can work, but here they interrupt each other, and neither gets much time to develop.

Matthew Lillard makes Shaggy worth watching even when the surrounding business is not. There is pleasure in seeing an actor commit this fully to a cartoon character without making the performance feel like an apology. Linda Cardellini does similarly useful work as Velma, giving us another reason to stay interested in the human ensemble. Freddie Prinze Jr. as Fred and Sarah Michelle Gellar as Daphne help make the casting more appealing than the script. We would happily follow these actors into a better organised mystery.

The computer-generated Scooby is the harder sell. His artificiality would matter less if the comedy around him were sharper, but he is asked to carry too much of it. We were irritated by the dog’s farting-and-belching contest. There is little to the exchange beyond the bodily noises themselves, and giving the dog more personality would have been a better use of the effort. The affection that the performance of Shaggy encourages does not reliably extend to his companion.

David Eggby’s cinematography and Bill Boes’s production design give the film a colourful setting suited to its cartoon origins. That is a sensible starting point for a comedy with no obligation to look like everyday life. The bright surroundings are welcome, though they cannot do much for scenes whose jokes have already run out. Scooby’s uncertain fit alongside the actors remains distracting, even within this deliberately artificial setting.

Kent Beyda’s editing maintains a brisk pace, but the action can become difficult to follow. Moving quickly helps disguise a thin joke for a moment; it does less for an investigation whose plotting is already muddled. David Newman’s music contributes to the busy atmosphere without giving the comedy much breathing space. At 87 minutes, the film is short enough, yet it still feels hurried in places where a little clarity would help. We should not have to work this hard to follow something so slight.

A comic mystery needs enough order for the audience to enjoy the interruptions. Here the cartoon antics gradually make the investigation seem incidental, which weakens the reason for keeping this particular group together. The self-conscious humour is another distraction: too often, the film seems concerned that adults might catch it taking the characters seriously. The more committed performances suggest that taking them seriously would have been perfectly safe.

There are modest pleasures here, particularly whenever Shaggy and Velma hold our attention without assistance from an effects sequence. They make the disappointing passages harder to excuse, because the film has already shown that its human cast can do the job. Younger viewers may be more forgiving of the noisy comedy, but that is not much of a recommendation for the adults beside them. For a shared evening, we would choose something with more reliable jokes.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

45
Positive
0
Mixed
5
Negative
6
Variety
9 June 2002 · Joe Leydon
65*

Leydon finds the film fast, frenetic and amusing, though its plotting and some action sequences are muddled. He especially praises the seamless integration of Scooby-Doo’s CGI animation with the live-action cast.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
21 June 2002 · Mike Goodridge
64*

The page identifies this as Mike Goodridge’s review, but the review text is behind an access wall. Its verdict and any specific praise or criticism cannot be determined from the available page.

Read the full review →
Time Out
· TJ
64*

The available text is too limited to establish the critic’s overall verdict. It notes that the breezy CGI ghosts and fart jokes are aimed at younger viewers.

Read the full review →
RogerEbert.com
14 June 2002 · ★★/4 · Roger Ebert
50

Ebert’s verdict is mixed, finding the film only modestly entertaining. He singles out its broad, cartoon-like comedy as its main appeal.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★ · Sloan Freer
40

Freer finds the film colourful but woefully misjudged. She faults its self-conscious cleverness for undermining the story, while its adult-targeted references and childish gags fail to come together.

Read the full review →
Total Film
12 July 2002 · ★★ · Total Film
40

The critic calls the adaptation misjudged and disappointing, with appeal mainly for very young viewers. They praise the casting and Matthew Lillard’s Shaggy, while faulting Scooby’s poorly rendered CGI.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is Scooby-Doo worth watching?
Scooby-Doo is hard to recommend despite its appealing human cast; we score it 48 out of 100. Matthew Lillard’s Shaggy and Linda Cardellini’s Velma provide modest pleasures, and younger viewers may enjoy the noisy physical comedy, but the muddled mystery and unreliable jokes make it a poor choice for a shared evening.
How long is Scooby-Doo, and what is it rated?
Scooby-Doo runs 1h 27m. It is a mystery and adventure film.
Where can I watch Scooby-Doo in Portugal?
Scooby-Doo is streaming on HBO Max in Portugal. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.
How does Scooby-Doo compare to The Addams Family?
Scooby-Doo is the weaker comedy beside The Addams Family, which we recommend for its firmer jokes and more comfortable oddness. Both have appealing casts and thin plotting, but the Addams family’s warmth makes that weakness easier to forgive; Scooby’s distracting computer animation and the awkward shifts between children’s slapstick and knowing adult humour leave less to enjoy.
What should I watch after Scooby-Doo?
After Scooby-Doo, try The Addams Family (1991, Fi1m 77): Another cartoon household made flesh, with firmer jokes and more comfortable oddness. Then Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005, Fi1m 87): Creature trouble, comic detection and a dog who earns his screen time; and Beetlejuice (1988, Fi1m 83): A live-action cartoon whose human cast belongs beside its unruly supernatural creatures.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. The Addams Family (1991, Fi1m 77)Another cartoon household made flesh, with firmer jokes and more comfortable oddness.

  2. Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit (2005, Fi1m 87)Creature trouble, comic detection and a dog who earns his screen time.

  3. A Town Called Panic (2009) · not reviewed yetFor more frantic absurdity, with small plastic figures causing satisfyingly large problems.

  4. The Ghost Breakers (1940) · not reviewed yetSpooky surroundings and a frightened comic lead, with more patience for the jokes.

  5. Beetlejuice (1988, Fi1m 83)A live-action cartoon whose human cast belongs beside its unruly supernatural creatures.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever