Scan barcode
professor_dinosaur's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
mysterious
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.5
I enjoyed myself, which I think is the single most important element of a book like this. It has a heart, and I think fans of Scooby-Doo who can stomach a lot of cheese will enjoy themselves too.
The biggest nick to my enjoyment was the stiffness of the characters. Though distinct and fun, they struggle to feel round in the way the narrative seems to ask of them, more “caricature” than “character.” I think the source material does a lot of leg work for this book. Without having the background knowledge of the Scooby-Doo cast, much of the characterization is fairly flat (ex. the term “jock” had considerable economy). Many of the interpersonal conflict feels stilted as a result, subservient to the action-plot. The prose can be very clever at times, and then too clever, almost like a charming but metaphor-bloated college essay. Action scenes got increasingly hard to follow, not impossible to understand but maybe too nitty-gritty-detail-heavy.
I know it’s a toss-up, but I found the switch between prose and the “play” style nice. I can see its utility - what would the author really do in between these snappy scenes anyways, write dialogue tags? When it came to the more self-aware parts of this fourth-wall-flirtation, I was skeptical. Especially references to “the camera” and whatnot. Really just felt out of place - there’s no cameras in Scooby-Doo.
Maybe I wasn’t the target demographic, but I felt the Big Bad was trite. The book can’t help this, if you are going to write “Children’s Property Meets Lovecraft,” you need Lovecraft there. It’s difficult to make that fresh, I respect that. The accomplice to the Big Bad, now she was fun (albeit again corny, but who really minds a corny villain?). She did a lot for the story, but she’s not in the story much. Oh, and “le epic twist” regarding her is not very rewarding. In fact, most of the “le epic twists” aren’t. A reader has scant opportunity to suspect that we were even meant to be looking for a deception. Y’know, like clues… like in Scooby-Doo. I found myself saying things more like “okay, sure, that’s plausible” than the much better “ah, I should’ve known!” Is this meant to be in the fashion of actual Scooby-Doo villains? Maybe. That’s where I give those elements a little leniency.
The whole “Scooby-Doo for adults” pitch was dicey with me the second Andy kicked those guys in the nuts. I never felt like the book treated its more serious “adult” themes with disrespect, but there were times (ex. Arkham Asylum, just about anything involving Peter) where the cartoon-ifying of adult (and traumatic) experiences gave me tonal vertigo. Maybe I can compare it to an Adult Swim program. This is where the prose did the book a disservice. It’s a difficult tightrope to walk, when you put “edgy” (read: adult) material into an otherwise playful book it can be hard not to fall back on “edgy” (read: angsty) prose. I think this issue is a symptom of the quirky prose and overwhelming identity of the book (Scooby-Doo x Lovecraft, you won’t forget this for a single page), and not one that spoiled the book for me. For the record, the scene where Andy kicked those guys in the nuts felt sort of like a Reddit comment, if that makes sense. I feel like Andy uses Reddit. That’s all.
The biggest nick to my enjoyment was the stiffness of the characters. Though distinct and fun, they struggle to feel round in the way the narrative seems to ask of them, more “caricature” than “character.” I think the source material does a lot of leg work for this book. Without having the background knowledge of the Scooby-Doo cast, much of the characterization is fairly flat (ex. the term “jock” had considerable economy). Many of the interpersonal conflict feels stilted as a result, subservient to the action-plot. The prose can be very clever at times, and then too clever, almost like a charming but metaphor-bloated college essay. Action scenes got increasingly hard to follow, not impossible to understand but maybe too nitty-gritty-detail-heavy.
I know it’s a toss-up, but I found the switch between prose and the “play” style nice. I can see its utility - what would the author really do in between these snappy scenes anyways, write dialogue tags? When it came to the more self-aware parts of this fourth-wall-flirtation, I was skeptical. Especially references to “the camera” and whatnot. Really just felt out of place - there’s no cameras in Scooby-Doo.
The whole “Scooby-Doo for adults” pitch was dicey with me the second Andy kicked those guys in the nuts. I never felt like the book treated its more serious “adult” themes with disrespect, but there were times (ex. Arkham Asylum, just about anything involving Peter) where the cartoon-ifying of adult (and traumatic) experiences gave me tonal vertigo. Maybe I can compare it to an Adult Swim program. This is where the prose did the book a disservice. It’s a difficult tightrope to walk, when you put “edgy” (read: adult) material into an otherwise playful book it can be hard not to fall back on “edgy” (read: angsty) prose. I think this issue is a symptom of the quirky prose and overwhelming identity of the book (Scooby-Doo x Lovecraft, you won’t forget this for a single page), and not one that spoiled the book for me. For the record, the scene where Andy kicked those guys in the nuts felt sort of like a Reddit comment, if that makes sense.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Body horror
Moderate: Animal cruelty, Gun violence, Racism, Suicide, Kidnapping, and Murder
Minor: Panic attacks/disorders, Transphobia, and Classism
More...