Talk:Scooby-Doo! The Mystery Begins

Untitled
http://www.moviehole.net/2008/07/21/scooby-doo-3s-velma-and-fred-cast/

That^ lists Robbie Amell and Hayley Alcroft as being Fred and Velma. Is that enough for the article?--Marhawkman (talk) 10:00, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

That link is broken. This one works Rojomoke (talk) 08:23, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

http://www.moviehole.net/200814300-scooby-doo-3s-velma-and-fred-cast

Whole Movie Is Messed Up
Has Cartoon Network forgoten one CRUCIAL detail to their movie? They forgot about A Pup Named Scooby Doo where the gang was still together and solving mysteries as kids. Not to mention Shaggy and Scooby STILL knew each other! --FairlyOddStar (talk) 23:39, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that A Pup Named Scooby-Doo was one of those non-canon baby spinoff shows where they just reduced the ages of the characters, like the Muppets Babies or Baby Looney Tunes. Mack (Yackity Mack) 00:39, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

i agree, and besides, they were in the 60/70s, it states its a prequeal, but it feels as if its a squeal, because its telling the viewer that they had interent when they were teenagers, and and what about the mystery van? if it is now in the 2000s, then why would they paint the van those colors??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.34.48.228 (talk) 01:24, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Further Mess
Filmography status - Seen on TV 9 days before going direct to video, Also makes the live action category... but not theatre release. Where should it be placed on the list Live Action or Direct to Video ?  Piandao  08:29, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Prequel Continuity
I can see why there is a whole new cast in this film; because it takes place while the gang was in high school.

In the article for this film, it states that this film is set prior to the events of the 1969 cartoon. I beg to differ with this, due to the fact Velma has a laptop and Shaggy has an MP3 player and DVD player. I believe this film is actually set prior to the original 2002 film, which goes along with the 1969 cartoon but set in modern-day time instead of the '60s and '70s. This would make more sense as laptops, MP3 players, and DVD players did exist in the late '90s. So basically, these films are set 30 years after when the cartoon was originally airing, as a reboot of Scooby Doo.

Fred's hair being brown could be explained by brown is his natural hair color. Later in life, he dyed it blonde, which is actually what Freddie Prinze Jr. had to do for his role in the first two films. Maybe it will be blonde in Scooby Doo! 4, but highly unlikely. My guess is it is to be assumed to be dyed between the fourth and original film. Jeanlovecomputers (talk) 01:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Scooby-Doo! The Mystery Begins. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090912032454/http://www.cartoonnetwork.com:80/tv_shows/scoobymovie/index.html to http://www.cartoonnetwork.com/tv_shows/scoobymovie/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:53, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Cartoon Network Studios
For this movie, Cartoon Network Studios really wasn't involved in its production. This because:


 * 1) There are absolutely NONE official sources on the Web that confirm about it;
 * 2) The "Cartoon Network Original" that you see in this link, means that it was acquired/owned/trademarked by "The Cartoon Network, Inc.", and only the main channel can broadcast exclusively.

Luigi1090 (talk) 19:30, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I certainly understand and respect your point-of-view but your explanation is only based on your own interpretation/original research. None of the other Scooby-Doo movies have that CN original logo (and they all are trademarked/owned by CN), which leads me to believe CN was involved in the production somehow. Your own personal interpretation/synthesis can and should not be used as a source. If you can find an actual source that spells out what you are saying in words (not simply the CN original logo again and then your interpretation of what it means), please cite it. Otherwise, please stop removing the info until you get somewhat of consensus on this on the talk page. Thank you. Katniss   ♥  02:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Mine is NOT a personal interpretation, it's the absolute truth. Luigi1090 (talk) 12:42, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * One of the major policies of Wikipedia is that all info or "truths" need to have a reliable source to back it up. While I don't think for a moment you're making your edit in bad faith, you still need a source to prove that it's the "absolute truth." Without sources (other than your personal assertions), anyone could say that what they were adding is "the absolute truth" even if it were vandalism. Katniss   ♥  15:49, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * , while I do understand and respect your opinion, you still have yet to come up with a reliable source for your edit. I've avoided reverting you temporarily while we discuss (which I'm happy to keep doing, if you feel you have a legitimate reason for keeping the info removed), but if you do not add a source or discuss how we should handle this further soon, I will have to revert your edit once again, due to it not being backed by a reliable source. Respectfully, Katniss   ♥  03:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC)