remember that first live action scooby doo movie. where the antagonist was literally scrappy doo and he was stealing peoples souls, like actually really stealing and absorbing souls, and was planning on taking scoobys soul to rule the world with an army of demons and get revenge on the gang after they abandoned him because he kept peeing in the car, and near the end he turned into this huge dog monster
a real movie
shit. shit
I researched this because I saw this movie in cinemas when I was like 6 goddamn years old and remembering its existence just now blew my mind. James Gunn screenwrote this. The writer and director of Guardians of the Galaxy, 12 full years before his most successful film. He stated in interviews that he hated Scrappy’s guts and “their whole goal was to destroy Scrappy forever”, since the character was famously brought in to Scooby Doo in the 80s to help ratings and was almost immediately overexposed and overmarketed to the point that many fans hate him.
And they totally did. He hasn’t appeared in anything Scooby Doo related since, except for these throwaway allusions as a nightmare-like traumatic event for the rest of the gang. Depending how you wanna interpret those references the canon fate of Scrappy Doo was that he went nuts and tried to kill anyone. Also, according to this movie he was never even a puppy, just “had a glandular issue”, which makes all those times he went “puppy power” really creepy in hindsight tbh
I haven’t watched a SD related thing in years but I spent like a half hour looking into and reading about this. Worth.
The best part is that Gunn is still proud of this and admits to writing him as the villain because scrappy is a “completely fucking awful person”
I wish to be as proud of my fanfiction as James Gunn is of his SD movie
Frollo and Mother Gothel convince Quasimodo and Rapunzel that their lives are dependent on them. The two villains claim the outside world is a terrible place even though they know this is not true. They also constantly emotionally abuse their victims by implying their worthlessness and destroying their self-esteems. Quasimodo and Rapunzel sympathize with their captors and even believe their captors are protecting them and treating them with kindness. However, both captors are merely using and manipulating their victims for their own selfish purposes.
Belle does not sympathize with the Beast when she is treated poorly. She becomes angry and leaves the castle, only returning by her own wish so that the Beast (who saves her) does not freeze to death. She does not respond nicely towards the Beast until he treats her with respect. In this situation, Belle has control and is not manipulated into feeling for the Beast, nor does the Beast treat her disrespectfully after the first night. While the Beast does have an underlying motive as to keeping Belle in his castle, he abandons this idea and sets her free to make her happy. If anything, this story is a case of Lima Syndrome where the captor starts to sympathize with the victim.
Check out this post which refocuses the purpose of Beauty and the Beast from merely (and wrongly) being about Stockholm Syndrome to it’s original purpose.
FUCKING FINALLY
I don’t usually reblog stuff like this, but Beauty and the Beast is my favorite movie and I’d like to have this on my page!
this is actually a very good analysis. I take back all the times I’ve called Beauty and the Beast a ‘stockholm syndrome’ romance.
