Okay, I'd like to start off this review by saying to all those who complained about the differing, colorful complexions of the show's characters: So what? Who cares if they aren't conventional and are more varied than the more realistic and common white, black, and brown? I read in an issue of Disney Adventures magazine that featured some coverage of Disney's version of the titular character, a quote by the series's creator Jim Jinkins stating something along the lines of "It's not what's on the outside, it's what's on the inside that counts". Aside from that, he probably simply wanted to make the show stand out more that way (at least, that is probably for the one thing that made it unique or distinctive at the time anyway) and I think that quite sums up his choice for giving a variety of color schemes to the characters. Additionally, this concept was inspired by a margarita stupor he had. Some reviewers here complained about the animation. Well, I'd say that the animation is fine for most of Nick's version's run, the notable exception of this and/or the art style being the episode segment, "Doug Can't Dance". The visuals in that aren't quite as crisp and it was the the first episode produced, but not aired. As for most of the characters' and cities' names, I didn't think much of them or give them much mind when I got into watching this years ago, but now that I think about it, they are odd. Although Beebe and her family's surname, Bluff, seems to suit them somehow. Recently, I found out the fictional town, Bluffington, is based in Virginia (the creator's hometown). An exception being Loretta Lequigly, who is a favorite character of mine, lesser or otherwise. Although in recent years, I thought about the name of the country that is her national descent, Yakistonia, and I wonder if it's supposed to be based on Estonia, seeing how if the "yak" part of the name were removed, the spellings of the fictional country and real country are similar. Just an interesting thought I had about that and wanted to point out that.
Anyway, further into my review about the show and the eponymous character. This show and the main protagonist, Doug Funnie, aren't perfect, but they aren't that bad. I never found him nor any of the series to be boring at all. With the daydreams and fantasy sequences he has as superhero, spy, and adventurer parodies, how can those not engage anybody? But whatever. I find that those were what livened up the show even more. If those aren't enough to engage everybody, then I don't know what else will or do for them. To give my explanation of the show's premise differently from what others already said, it's basically the stories revolving around the everyday problems of your ordinary fifth or sixth grade boy that he recaps via writing in his journal. There may be other shows, cartoons or otherwise, that I like more that Doug, by even so and despite that, I'll still take this as one of the earliest Nicktoons over the more recent, mindless horse manure like Breadwinners and Pig Goat Banana Cricket any day. Doug becomes extraordinary, at least temporarily, through his imaginations to conquer his problems and predicaments. As for the phallic/sexual names of some certain characters that one reviewer pointed out, Mr. Dink, Principal Buttsavitch, Mr. Bone, I never gave thought to those either, especially the first one, not knowing that's supposed to be a sexual reference too. I wish there was a spin-off show or something that focused on other characters besides Doug though. I discovered that recently Nick has considered having a Doug movie get made at one point, but that never came to fruition. I would've liked to see how and if Nick would've done better than Doug's 1st Movie by Disney, which I haven't seen, however, from what I read about it, it doesn't seem to be better than either Nick or Disney's series. I also learned that there might be a revival of Nick's Doug, but I'd rather see a spin-off with other main characters, secondary characters, minor characters, even background characters made. With one taking advantage of several, nameless background characters, especially the female characters at Doug's school. One of which being the light blue-skinned girl who spoke in one episode, "Doug Saves Roger", and who says, "Hey Roger, you got a sign on your back!". I wish there were more moments with her and the other, lesser, female students on the program. And if they were named at all, they could be more conventional names. Again, while the show may not be exactly the best, I can still take it for what it is, even if Doug may not be the best hero. I find the lesser/background characters more interesting, even if we don't get to see them getting into depth much, if at all. I'd like to see more of them. Not without its flaws, I still consider this to be one good start for the Nicktoons.
Anyway, further into my review about the show and the eponymous character. This show and the main protagonist, Doug Funnie, aren't perfect, but they aren't that bad. I never found him nor any of the series to be boring at all. With the daydreams and fantasy sequences he has as superhero, spy, and adventurer parodies, how can those not engage anybody? But whatever. I find that those were what livened up the show even more. If those aren't enough to engage everybody, then I don't know what else will or do for them. To give my explanation of the show's premise differently from what others already said, it's basically the stories revolving around the everyday problems of your ordinary fifth or sixth grade boy that he recaps via writing in his journal. There may be other shows, cartoons or otherwise, that I like more that Doug, by even so and despite that, I'll still take this as one of the earliest Nicktoons over the more recent, mindless horse manure like Breadwinners and Pig Goat Banana Cricket any day. Doug becomes extraordinary, at least temporarily, through his imaginations to conquer his problems and predicaments. As for the phallic/sexual names of some certain characters that one reviewer pointed out, Mr. Dink, Principal Buttsavitch, Mr. Bone, I never gave thought to those either, especially the first one, not knowing that's supposed to be a sexual reference too. I wish there was a spin-off show or something that focused on other characters besides Doug though. I discovered that recently Nick has considered having a Doug movie get made at one point, but that never came to fruition. I would've liked to see how and if Nick would've done better than Doug's 1st Movie by Disney, which I haven't seen, however, from what I read about it, it doesn't seem to be better than either Nick or Disney's series. I also learned that there might be a revival of Nick's Doug, but I'd rather see a spin-off with other main characters, secondary characters, minor characters, even background characters made. With one taking advantage of several, nameless background characters, especially the female characters at Doug's school. One of which being the light blue-skinned girl who spoke in one episode, "Doug Saves Roger", and who says, "Hey Roger, you got a sign on your back!". I wish there were more moments with her and the other, lesser, female students on the program. And if they were named at all, they could be more conventional names. Again, while the show may not be exactly the best, I can still take it for what it is, even if Doug may not be the best hero. I find the lesser/background characters more interesting, even if we don't get to see them getting into depth much, if at all. I'd like to see more of them. Not without its flaws, I still consider this to be one good start for the Nicktoons.