this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
1110 points (97.1% liked)

Comic Strips

15919 readers
2210 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Source: Alzwards Corner

(page 4) 43 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (5 children)

"Scooby-Doo doesn't have Scooby-Doo" is like saying that my PB & J sandy has neither PB, nor J, nor is it a sandy. Like, what are we saying, at this point? It's obviously not even the same thing, it's like, a bean bag chair, or whatever else. At the same time, I don't find myself crying for how the symbol has been dissolved, because that shit is happening all the time and only iron law of reality is that everything changes eventually.

I dunno I get it but at the same time the shit strikes me as dumb and every time I hear somebody complain about this shit I get flashbacks to 4chan and also real life where I'm gonna be like "yeah sure that's kinda stupid, scooby doo should have scooby doo or whatever" and then somebody's gonna take that as an opportunity to start extrapolating a bunch of shit about how postmodernism is ruining the culture and yadda yadda white genocide, and I'm like. Damn, I thought we were gonna talk about scooby doo.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago

And this is why Araki always has a "JoJo", so he can keep using the same JJBA brand for his -mostly unrelated- stories lol /hj

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I can't read the purple person's face in the last panel.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Same face from the frame before it, but eyes in a state of shock, blank.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Geez what's next, a Breaking Bad show without Walter White or Jesse?

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Walt and Jesse are there but there's no drugs.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Breaking Bad reimagined this time it's about the bad breakup between Walter and Jesse stretched into 8 seasons.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Or an All in the Family show with no Archie Bunker? Or a Happy Days show with no Fonzie or Richie Cunningham?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Hey, that last one could work as a movie if not a TV series. Chuck Cunningham comes back.

They could reshoot a few scenes from the TV show with lookalike actors, have Chuck play out his final bit, and then a few more scenes from the show that make it clear that no-one remembers him. At all.

Now, think about it: Extra-terrestrial aliens are canon in Happy Days (Mork and Mindy was a spin-off), so it's possibly some other alien race abducted Chuck and caused everyone to forget he ever existed.

Depending on what time period he comes back to, this could be played for laughs or for existential horror.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At this rate they're going to be making Star Wars stuff without Darth Vader or Luke Skywalker.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 99 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Wait, was Scooby-Doo not in the new show?

[–] [email protected] 140 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

Scooby-Doo was cut, there's a lot of race swapping, and basically it follows Velma who is an amazing girl-boss (/s) who solves all the mysteries, and everybody else is just kind of "around". There seems to be a lot of resentment of anyone who is wealthier, more successful, or popular. Fred is a punching bag for a lot of jokes, he's just a rich white boy who doesn't really know how to do anything.

Papa Meat (Hunter Hancock of MeatCanyon) has a review. It's pretty balanced, but even that's still negative, mainly rated high as it was because he liked the art. 😅

Apparently, despite a seemingly horrendous reception by the public, it has been renewed for a second season. ¯\(°_o)/¯

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago (5 children)

follows Velma who is an amazing girl-boss who solves all the mysteries

Velma as a character was a lot of things, but she was mostly an insufferable, pathologically egotistical narcissist with hallucinatory delusions and severe mommy issues. Like, the show was horribly written, don't get me wrong, but let's not act like she was a Mary Sue.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Sounds like they dragged a handful of lemmyists out of their basements to write it.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I believe it's because it's so universally seen as terrible that it got renewed. People couldn't believe it could be that bad, but was, in fact, that bad. So many people watched it either to rip on it or to see if it was as bad as it was made out to be and that got the show a lot of ratings on paper I bet.

Execs see numbers and conflate that with a "good show". It's our own fault really. I still haven't seen it yet though so I can't weigh in on it's quality at all

[–] [email protected] 68 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I think race swapping is a non-issue, unless doing so messes with the character's backstory or story arc in a meaningful way. So I could care less about that.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My only takeaway was the writing is bad.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

I'm all for racial inclusivity but just create a new fuckin character.

If you can't be racially inclusive by making a whole new character then all you're doing is pandering/race baiting.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't agree. If they'd just written a new character there would be grounds to complain that the new character was pointless tokenism.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So maybe actually integrate that character into a new concept entirely. Make a new story where you can choose whatever race everyone is supposed to be from the start. Don't take an existing story and change the races just so you can go "See guys! I'm being inclusive! I made this character black! I'm so progressive!"

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Scooby Doo doesn't have the best track record when it comes to integrating a new character.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm honestly speaking generally not just about Scooby Doo. It just so happens that this portrayal of Scooby Doo is just pure blatant pandering.

Why did they even call it Scooby Doo? Why even attach the show to that franchise when it's so separated in it's basic concepts?

The answer is because they were trying to use the franchises name to push some stupid race pandering bullshit.

They put in all the effort to change each character to the point that they only resemble their original designs by physical appearance. They literally could have just come up with a completely different show that had nothing to do with Scooby Doo at all.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is it "race pandering" to make a cast more diverse in order to broaden its appeal?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It is when you're just taking an existing character and basically giving them black face.

It would be infinitely easier to integrate a new character entirely than to just race swap a character without changing their cultural identity.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't think I understand what you mean by "race pandering". Is it a kind of pandering? Pandering to whom? And how?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Why does it matter that the characters retain their original races?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For me, it's an uncanny valley thing. If the only thing they change is skin colour or gender, and it's also relevant to the plot, it's too close to the original for me to enjoy it as a new thing, but too far to be enjoyed as a new thing. It fucks with my suspense of disbelief, since I'm supposed to know stuff from other movies, but not all the things, so I'm fucked if I pretend that it's just another episode of the same thing, or it's a completely different and new thing equally.

That said, Velma is different enough that it's "past the valley" for me, it's so far from the original that it could be enjoyed as its own thing, if it didn't fall flat for other reasons.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 84 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Imagine if you just made Peter Parker black. Cool, I guess. But is it enough just to swap the skin color? IMO, it is not. You have to represent the culture as well. So you change the family dynamics, the character background, relationship dynamics etc... after all of that is it still essentially Peter Parker? If so you have succesfully race swapped a character but most of the time I think it fundementally changes the character. At that point I believe it is better to create new character like Miles Morales and call him Spider-Man. But that is just my opinion.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (4 children)

How is that any different than any of the multiple other times they changed the "fundamentals" of peter parker?

Like when he is the sidekick of iron man who gets free robo spidey suit upgrades? Which completely changes everything important to his character?

Or when they make him a completely different age? Fundamentally changing the relationship he has with his romantic leads, with aunt may, with his villians, with his job, with his school (college? High school? Neither?), etc etc?

Short answer? Its fuckin not. Its the exact same as every other time theyve altered a key aspect of parker to shake up the story and tell a new angle with new spins and twists and turns.

It literally doesnt matter. Its just a big deal because its race this time.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (16 children)

It's interesting that you picked Spider-Man as the example of creating a different character being a better alternative, because there are plenty of racists out there that really hate that Miles Morales is even a thing. They would say "Why do we need a black Spider-Man? The original was fine!"

It's almost like racists are only ever going to whine about inclusivity, and "characters remaining their own race" vs "creating new characters" is a moot point because the people out there who are upset by the former are going to be upset by the latter anyway.

Imagine if the new scooby show had a cast of all white kids and a single black, well written character was added and made a pivotal role in the gang. The exact same people complaining now about race swapping would be complaining then about the new character being shoe horned in because of "woke" inclusion. Just like they do with Miles Morales.

The answer is just that we need to keep creating media with both of those scenarios and accept that shows created with a single color cast are products of their time and we can do better now. Racists aren't going to be happy either way.

Edit: Bring on the downvotes. If you consider "they're not supposed to be that race" as a valid, lone criticism of a character, you might have to ask yourself some difficult questions.

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Because of the principle of it. If your goal is inclusivity how is completely changing the race of an established character inclusive? It's not. It's just pandering.

If you're actually trying to be inclusive then make a new character. Anything else is a pathetic attempt that just shows how disingenuous the attempt is.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

I mean I think the problem here is the like, "changing the race of an established character", right. What established character? Black superman, or whatever else, isn't superman, he's black superman. That's it, basically, that's my justification. It's not the same character text to text, even. Is it the same bilbo in every lord of the rings book? Is it the same bilbo sentence to sentence? It's not like girlboss velma and dumb rich white guy fred are the same velma and fred, they just share the same symbols. If you actually dissect the characters and compared them, then you'd find very little in common. The show doesn't even have scooby fucking doo, it's not even called "scooby doo", it's, in my mind, and I think it should be in everyone else's mind, it is tangentially related to scooby doo, at best, you know? I see it as a standalone work, and in that sense it's just kind of a mediocre show that I don't think anyone should really care about, rather than this kind of abomination on the face of scooby-doodom and this thing that we need to all be frothing about because scooby-doo has been done so dirty.

SO, all of that can be true, right, they just share symbols. But this is also true of race as a whole, the symbol of race, here, being like, whether or not somebody is black or white or asian or whatever. If you're race-swapping superman, you know, I think it's kind of more in line with the message of superman, if he's the same guy, regardless of whatever race you decide to cast him as, you know? If you don't change the backstory, if you do change the backstory, whatever, he sort of exists beyond it, as a kind of human ideal for everyone to live up to. For that to be true, superman has to be possible if you put him in basically any circumstance. So, even though superman himself is the same, have we "made a new character", even though we've changed his race, maybe changed his background, and then, in line with that, we've maybe flavored him different in terms of like, say, what music or food he likes? I dunno if we really have or we haven't. Made a new character, I mean. The character has changed, but the core remains the same, the label is the same, the symbols are the same. That's kind of the question I'm asking, where do you draw the line as to what's a "new" character, and what's not? You could just as easily draw it to be where any change in surface level characteristics, from eye color, to hair color, to skin color, results in a "new" character, even if the character, of that character, remains the same. Red shirt shaggy vs green shirt shaggy.

So I dunno, really, like, I've never got this critique of like oh no we're not being inclusive in the right way because we decided to make velma indian, instead of deciding to call the series Shmelma or whatever. What if they did that, what if her name was Shmelma? That's an extremely surface level difference between the two, but now they have a separate set of labels, so are they separate characters now, or what? I think if I'm going to critique the show, it's not really going to be on the basis of indian people not having their own shmelma, or even just their own separate scooby-doo, you know. I'm not going to condemn all indian people to forever only engaging with goobert and the ghost chasers, or whatever. If I'm going to critique the show, I'm gonna critique the show because the show itself is mediocre to bad, and has mediocre to bad writing, and cost too much money, and maybe I will critique it for, for some reason, the most popular multiracial iteration of scooby-doo has to also be the one that has the worst writing, where everyone can easily punch at it for that, and producers can also maybe try to use that as a smokescreen for putting out a mediocre show.

I dunno why I'm even talking about this shit, scooby-doo is bogus gen X bullshit. I'd rather watch like, the muppets. Nobody's ever gonna really complain about kermit being race-swapped, I'll tell you that.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (24 children)

This take always seems a bit myopic as it ignores the fact that it cements in the exclusivity that already existed. Not allowed to change an established character's race? Only option is to tack on a new character to the already existing cast and that certainly doesn't seem like pandering. Of course maybe the new inclusive characters should only be in new content that isn't established and has no following.

load more comments (24 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Assuming this is about Velma, it doesn't have Scooby Doo. They just reused the character names and basic-ish traits and changed pretty much everything else.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They should have had the Venture Brothers team write a show based on their version of the Scooby Doo gang

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It was that Velma crap where it has nothing to do with Scooby Doo, just random characters with the same names and no dog.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›