Shockingly bad. I mean, I knew it was going to be poor, but this bad? Dragged along by my seven year old daughter, who is entranced by thirty year old re-runs on Cartoon Network (and they haven't aged well, speaking as someone who used to rush home from school to watch it), I didn't expect the cynical, set-piece laden exercise in making money which was served up. The good bits: any time Scooby (and therefore Shaggy, who Matthew Lilliard gets to a 'T') is on screen (and it isn't as much as you'd think it would be, couldn't they afford the computer time?). The bad bits: the rest, boy does it draaaaaaaaagggggg. The plot is weak, isn't explained very well and is thus confusing, but never mind because here comes another set piece that has absolutely nothing to do with advancing the plot. Why does Velma change from dowdy and homely into sex vamp, and back again? Why is Sarah Michelle Geller completely unbelievable as Daphne - she's a fine actress, but she sure does need to get away from playing Buffy clones? Why did I want to punch Freddy Prinze Jr. every time he appeared? <br /><br />A cynical lazy Hollywood pic, lowest common denominator stuff, recycling ideas that weren't really that good in the first place and should have been left well alone. Already setting up the sequel at the end as well. Please, don't do it.<br /><br />Within an hour of the film ending, my daughter was struggling to remember ANYTHING she liked about the film, bar -surprise- the fart scene. She was more entranced by the fast food she'd had afterwards.