Why Scooby-Doo?

How did Scooby-Doo, of all possible properties, manage to survive for so long? Over the years it’s had countless soft reboots, hard reboots, reimaginings, and live action adaptations. Hell, there was a (surprisingly good) Lovecraftian-lite reboot with Harlan Ellison as a major character, and the characters playing even more ridiculous caricatures of themselves. But how did it manage to survive this long?

Scooby-Doo, Where Are You! is not a particularly great show. It’s not irredeemably awful, and it’s honestly probably better than most cartoons of that era (and almost certainly one of the better Hanna-Barbera cartoons), but it was an extremely formulaic show with mediocre execution. When you watch it, nothing really says “classic” like a lot of old Disney or Warner Bros cartoons do. There’s nothing particularly memorable or quotable from any given episode.

It’s not even particularly merchandizable, at least not compared to any other mascot-driven franchise. There’s Scooby Snacks and then maybe some umbrellas and shirts with a dog’s face painted on them. Nothing that lends itself especially well to gluts of overpriced memorabilia marketed to different demographics and personalities the way Disney or WB can swing. Especially not when they fail to give their monsters of the week any sense of identity, instead opting for mostly interchangeable bad guys in masks in a slightly different location. Like does anybody really care about the difference between the Miner '49er and The Creeper?

Even The Flintstones is more merchandizable with the myriad of stone age gadgets and dinosaurs they can make toys of, and the Flintstones hasn’t survived in nearly the same way. At best you see a few re-runs now and then, along with the standard “babies version” they made in the mid '90s (which was a curse that afflicted a startling number of old franchises around that time, including Tom and Jerry, Loony Tunes, and, yes, Scooby Doo as well).

Yet, it got rebooted, and rebooted, and got weird movies and spinoffs where the monsters are real, and the shows with only Shaggy and Scooby, the ones with Scooby’s stupid cousins, the one with all the guest stars like Don Knotts, Sonny and Cher, and the Harlem Globetrotter, the ones that take place at a school for young monsters because ???, the live action film where Buffy is Daphne, the other live action movies where they played up a Shaggy/Velma romance only for them to kiss and declare there’s no chemistry, and all around a bunch of weird as hell series that are only tangentially Scooby-Doo and yet seem to embody its spirit at the same time. But it all still leads me to ask how this one mediocre, formulaic show for 1969 survived when none of the other properties really survived the same way. (Like, yeah, there’s that Flintstones comic, but it, like most other cartoons from Hanna-Barbera and that era, don’t get rebooted nearly as much. It’s not like we’re on the 25th Top Cat series which aims to be a gritty critique on the homeless crisis in America)

I’m waiting for them to do a reboot where Fred comes out of the closet and Daphne and Velma are hot lesbian lovers.

Velma … mmmmmmmmmmmm! :o

Yep, in the end, it probably boils down to the fact that the two female characters wore miniskirts, and danced in a lot of the episodes. Lord knows that’s the main reason I think about Scooby-Doo.*

But not quotable? You would have gotten away with that…if it weren’t for those meddling kids!
*Ok, other than the quote above, I also get Pretty Mary Sunlight stuck in my head, too. Thankfully, it’s the Jerry Reed version half the time.

I want to see the gritty Top Cat series. Benny the Ball would be a star today.

Ooooh that’s gold; you should totally pitch that.

Among the reasons for Scooby-Doo’s continued popularity as a franchise: people love dogs.

Also, the format helps: how many other children’ shows are real mystery shows? :dubious:

The mystery story format offers tension and release with affable and lovable characters at the center.

And those human characters are a pretty good cross-section of people so that nearly everyone can identify somewhat with at least one of the 4, while Scooby-Doo is the lovable dog that everyone either had, knew or wanted as a kid.

Plus there’s the whole parody/satire/social commentary thing going on as a meta subtext, even if most of that wasn’t nearly as deep as it could have been in the original cartoon.

Wiki says it’s because it’s a non-violent kids’ detective series:

I’d attribute it to the fact that the original series is highly formulaic. Every episode has the same basic structure; the gang is on the road, they pull into a town where they hear about some sort of haunting, they investigate and discover that the “supernatural” goings-on are all trickery done with lights and gadgets, and they capture the “monster” and reveal it to be a previously-introduced minor character who was faking the haunting in order to pull a scam for their own benefit. The repetition makes it memorable; even if you can’t remember any specific episode, you remember the basic story as a whole.

They’re still doing the celebrity crossover movies, even. The one where the gang teams up with John Cena to save WrestleMania from a ghost bearwas pretty good, even.

It also utilized (invented?) the Lets Split Up Gang trope in every single episode. Which of course was simply a way for Fred, Daphne & Velma to get some time away from the dog and the stoner to get their freak on.

Mystery Machine
Scooby Snacks
70’s stoner vibe
What’s not to love?

Quotable line: (Shaggy to Scooby) Let’s flip a coin: Heads I win, Tails You Lose

I agree with the formulaic structure and the cultural subtext. It was like Dora the Explorer meets Gilligan’s Island.

Interesting OP; thanks.

Yes, and an awful lot of us watched it in that era because it was one of the better options available. Entertainment for kids was much more limited in those days: we didn’t have VCRs (let alone DVDs or streaming video) or kids’ cable channels or video games or the internet.

Cool theme song, too.

Scooby Dooby Doo, where are you? We’ve got a job to do now.

I don’t blame them. You know how BAD that dog probably smelled?

Pure dreck. Probably the only series worse was the one with a talking shark that sounded like Curly Howard.

Not as bad as Shaggy, I’d guess.

Jabberjaw!

It’s a talking shark that plays the drums and gets no respect! Nyuk-nyuk!

Seriously: that show sucked. Seriously.

I sincerely doubt that Scooby Doo originated that line! :slight_smile:

I was exactly the right age for the original iteration of Scooby Doo, Where Are You! Looking back on it, I can see that objectively it wasn’t a terribly good show, but gosh I loved it as a kid. And there really was some undefinable “something” about it, that’s allowed it to survive and flourish while so many of its imitators are long forgotten.

Speaking for myself, it was the “ghosts” and the mystery solving aspect. It was, for a kid, just spooky enough to be exciting, without being so scary as to give me bad dreams or make me want to stop watching. And as a matter of fact, I actually did care about the differences between the Miner '49er and the Creeper, as well as the Mummy and the Snow Ghost, and that creepy Ghost Clown. They may seem repetitive and formulaic now (and in truth, they were), but to the little-kid version of me, they were richly imagined and memorably spooky, as distinct from one another as Superman was from Batman.

I haven’t watched any of the newer or rebooted cartoon series, although I did see the first live-action movie. The new versions may well be objectively better as cartoons. But I’m now out of their demographic, and I’ll never recapture that feeling of getting up early on a Saturday morning to watch Scooby and Shaggy running from the latest creepy ghost who turned out to really be a guy in a cheap costume.

I fucking hated Scooby-Doo, too, but the idea here is to try to figure out why it has endured in the popular culture. I would have loved for it to be forgotten and Top-Cat become immortal instead.

Hell, even the 1970 Dr. Dolittle animated series, for that matter. Which also sucked.

What’s New Scooby Doo was decent (there’s an episode where the villain is someone they hadn’t met yet so Velma couldn’t guess who it was and she throws an absolute fit), Mysteries Inc. was great, whatever the hell they’re doing now I don’t know but the art is abysmal. Really, the whole of the Scooby Doo “formula” has evolved into this strange meta-commentary on itself where the characters grew increasingly strange personality quirks, and then it proceeds to relentlessly subvert itself. When it does play the formula straight, it tends to do it in the weirdest ways possible. It’s the kind of formula you can only sustain when your property has infiltrated the cultural consciousness so thoroughly everybody gets the joke even though your entire movie or series never touches the original formula.

FWIW Scooby Doo had something that few shows had, and even less nowadays; while goofy it did respect inquiry and the bottom line lesson was that superstitions and paranormal mysteries had a rational explanation.

Tim Minchin in his classic short Storm makes a fond mention to the show regarding that lesson (at 6:49).

[QUOTE] If you're going to watch tele, you should watch Scooby Doo. That show was so cool because every time there's a church with a ghoul Or a ghost in a school They looked beneath the mask and what was inside? The f*****g janitor or the dude who runs the waterslide.

Because, throughout history
Every mystery
Ever solved has turned out to be
Not Magic.
[/QUOTE]