Return to Monkey Island

[OzzieMonkey]

I'm still wondering what Ron's stance is on the press getting advanced copies, seeing as how it was a dot point in his 2013 blog that they wouldn't but he's changed his mind about a lot of things and also there's publisher requirements and all that. Will we be seeing reviews pop up before release? I mean, the Mojo review is ultimately the only one I really care about (as well as what I personally think when I play it), but still, I'm curious. 

[KestrelPi]

6 minutes ago, OzzieMonkey said:

I'm still wondering what Ron's stance is on the press getting advanced copies, seeing as how it was a dot point in his 2013 blog that they wouldn't but he's changed his mind about a lot of things and also there's publisher requirements and all that. Will we be seeing reviews pop up before release? I mean, the Mojo review is ultimately the only one I really care about (as well as what I personally think when I play it), but still, I'm curious. 

 

It's certainly one of the points I disagreed with at the time, and I'm still not entirely clear what the motivation was for making it back in 2013. Reviewers get advance copies because they work on deadlines, and if you want a timely review of your game then either you give them an advance copy or they're going to be under pressure once it's out to finish it as quickly as possible so they can write a review while it's still relevant - or not write one at all. Why would you want to put additional pressure on reviewers or stop them from doing their jobs?

 

I suspect though that review copies are probably going to be something Devolver controls

[OzzieMonkey]

7 minutes ago, KestrelPi said:

 

It's certainly one of the points I disagreed with at the time, and I'm still not entirely clear what the motivation was for making it back in 2013. Reviewers get advance copies because they work on deadlines, and if you want a timely review of your game then either you give them an advance copy or they're going to be under pressure once it's out to finish it as quickly as possible so they can write a review while it's still relevant - or not write one at all. Why would you want to put additional pressure on reviewers or stop them from doing their jobs?

 

I suspect though that review copies are probably going to be something Devolver controls

You raise an excellent point. My one concern about review copies going around is the increase of potential spoilers leaking out, like someone less well-versed in the series accidentally giving away what the Secret is because they undervalue its importance, or just someone carelessly laying out the plot beats or the solution to a puzzle they found difficult.  

Clearly I haven't read a lot of adventure game reviews  

Edited July 29, 2022 by OzzieMonkey

[Vainamoinen]

Completely unrelated to anything, here's some criticism of Tenet.

 

Two friends told me it really didn't click for them at all. I watched it, I liked it quite a bit. So clearly I wasn't influenced by the people who watched it at a movie theater when I finally got to stream the thing a year later. Were there points of criticism that I had? Yes, of course, but they didn't ruin the movie for me. Nolan doesn't really risk anything new, visually. It mostly felt like I was back in Inception. And the second point of criticism, it's the classic Nolan mindfuck, and that's simply not accessible. People are sitting there watching a 150 minute movie, stop paying attention at minute 30 because they don't have a fighting chance to understand it all, and then they're going online to be brought to understand it. And they're still the target audience, because they think that's art, a two and a half hour narrative that can only be understood in retrospect.

 

But let's talk about Return to Monkey Island for a bit.

 

Because clearly, risks were taken when a bold new art style was chosen. It was of course clear that you couldn't satisfy the pixel art fans, or the Curse of Disney Island fans, or even both, so in a sense Ron was nudged in the bold and shocking direction. A hint system AND difficulty settings will take care of accessibility in a genre that was once notorious for its punishing difficulty and obscure puzzles.

 

And those are just two great and commendable decisions that we know of where Dave and Ron have outdone Christopher Nolan.

 

One other thing that I just have to say. This idea that the more destructive critics were somehow "shamed" into silence, we simply know that this is not how it works. We see in the adventure gamers forum that a negative stance has taken a hold there. They are constantly saying horrible things, they are literally having a contest as to who says the worst thing about the art style. They weren't shamed into silence. I'm on two other German forums where we had this discussion up and down. On the whole, negativity persists, but three or four people are slowly coming to their senses.

 

Yes, they do come to their senses because they find something they like in the new art style, that does happen, but also because they are beginning to understand simple market realities. And some of those market realities are the probability of a heavily shitstormed game getting a gog.com release, getting non-English voiceover by some international publishers, a phyiscal release or even a "big box" with certain extras.

 

They're freespeeching Return of Monkey Island into the grave before it's even released, and that I find remarkably heinous. At least people watched Tenet before checking with their friends whether they should find it crappy.

 

Edited July 29, 2022 by Vainamoinen

[KestrelPi]

Ok, this is the last word I'm gonna say on this for now, but lately I've been thinking about the things we learned moderating the DF forums, and Discord.

 

We often talked about how we don't actually have to be for everyone. It's not automatically a virtue to be a debate hall.

 

Some places are just a... cosy hangout, or a bar or whatever, and sure, someone can walk up to the front and say 'here is why you're all wrong and the things you're excited about suck actually' but they're gonna get some funny looks, and if they can't read the room then they are very welcome to leave it. Just because that's not the vibe we're looking for doesn't make a place an irredeemable echo-chamber (we have enough disagreements here to know this to be the case, right?)

 

We don't actually have to be an enlightenment era coffee house devoted to the free exchange of ideas. We can just be some (relatively) like minded people who are happy and excited about a game announcement. Sure we'll disagree on points and debate theories and quibble over details and have different hopes and dreams for how stuff shakes out but as as soon as you shift the mood from 'we're all here to be excited over a video game' to 'this sucks and that sucks and I want you all to talk to me about how much I think it sucks' then you've lost the room.

 

We don't need to be all things to all people, we have no duty to do that, we can choose. It's not weakness, or intellectual cowardice, it's just creating an environment we want to continue to relax in. If someone else wants a different one, they're free to look for it, or create it and see who joins.

[ThunderPeel2001]

38 minutes ago, Vainamoinen said:

Completely unrelated to anything, here's some criticism of Tenet.

 

Two friends told me it really didn't click for them at all. I watched it, I liked it quite a bit. So clearly I wasn't influenced by the people who watched it at a movie theater when I finally got to stream the thing a year later.

 

Au contraire. You likely watched Tenet with likely lower expectations than them due to their dislike of it. 

[Vainamoinen]

31 minutes ago, KestrelPi said:

We don't need to be all things to all people, we have no duty to do that, we can choose. It's not weakness, or intellectual cowardice, it's just creating an environment we want to continue to relax in. If someone else wants a different one, they're free to look for it, or create it and see who joins.

 

I'm so torn on this. Because on the one hand, discussing the art style should be possible. On the other, subjective negative impressions, rhethorically sharpened for maximum derisive impact, aren't exactly a "discussion"; and also, there are so many places that allow and encourage these youtubey insult contests. adventuregamers is still THE website for point & click adventure game news, and look at their forum. Just look at it. If we get another Monkey Island, ever, I'm pretty certain adventuregamers won't bag the first exclusive interview again thanks to that community.

 

It's really not like I want to stifle free speech, but toxic fandom is just that: toxic. 😬

[KestrelPi]

16 minutes ago, Vainamoinen said:

 

discussing the art style should be possible.

 

I take your points and would add to this that talking about the art is not only possible, but has happened several times already in this thread.

 

Here, I'll prove it: I'll do it right now, and given an unvarnished opinion on the latest art we've seen: generally speaking, I've liked the vibe of the Brrr Muda art a bit less than the other stuff we've seen.

 

Of everything we've seen to me it looks the most angular and 'skewed', the hardest to get used to. I'll probably get used to it and it'll be fine, and as usual I think it all looks better in motion than static, and I certainly don't hate it but it's yet to 'click' for me. Maybe it's just because it's so unlike an environment we've seen before in MI, so the unfamiliar style plus unfamiliar environment are a bit daunting to look at.

 

I'm also not sure I love Guybrush's talking animation when seen from the back, but I'd be curious about what it looks like from the front.

 

That's it really. I haven't felt the need to bring it up before just because it's not really a big deal to me, I'd rather just focus on other things rather than talk about how I'm slightly underwhelmed by a single piece of art, and honestly it's more fun to talk about the stuff I'm curious about or excited by.

 

I'm not interested in a discussion about it, I'm not asking for people to debate me on it, or agree or disagree with me on it, this is just a personal take, delivered (I hope) respectfully.

Edited July 29, 2022 by KestrelPi

[Thrik]

1 hour ago, OzzieMonkey said:

You raise an excellent point. My one concern about review copies going around is the increase of potential spoilers leaking out, like someone less well-versed in the series accidentally giving away what the Secret is because they undervalue its importance, or just someone carelessly laying out the plot beats or the solution to a puzzle they found difficult.  

Clearly I haven't read a lot of adventure game reviews  

Ah yes, like the Atari review that casually shared all the screenshots of Hell HILL, which as we all know is the real secret of Monkey Island.

[Laserschwert]

The easiest fix would just be empathy. No matter how bad you find this or that, just imagine that instead of shouting your feelings on it towards a video or into a social media post, you are sitting in front of Ron or Rex and sharing your feelings about it all with them. The tone would automatically shift to *at least* "This isn't for me, but...".

[Toymafia88]

2 hours ago, Remi said:

ReMI then! Release date:

 

Seeing Devolver has a showcase in September I’m wagering the release date will be… Talk Like a Pirate Day. Original, I know.
 

I’ll also double down on a demo the week before.

 

We’re talking cold hard cash on this. 

I got my fingers crossed for this.

 

September is perfect for me as its a month before my first child is born and also my Birthday month. 😉

 

 

 

 

[BaronGrackle]

2 hours ago, Vainamoinen said:

Because clearly, risks were taken when a bold new art style was chosen. It was of course clear that you couldn't satisfy the pixel art fans, or the Curse of Disney Island fans, or even both, so in a sense Ron was nudged in the bold and shocking direction. 

 

I'm sorry, but I just can't be convinced that "you couldn't satisfy the pixel art fans, or the Curse of Disney Island fans, or even both". I think believing that is a rationalization mechanism to reduce people's frustration by thinking that a toxic fan backlash was inevitable.

 

Risks were NOT taken for the chosen music.

Risks were NOT taken for the choices in voice acting.

Risks were NOT taken in terms of having a 2D point and click design.

Risks WERE taken in using an art style that is remarkably d I stinct from any of the art styles before it and us instead more in line with games outside the franchise (e.g. Knights and Bikes).

 

A lot of people love the art, but they love it because of the distinction and the risk. This game is going to be heavily defined and remembered for its art style, moreso than for its less risky choices, similar to Windwaker I suppose.

 

Ron could have chosen a route that avoided fan conflict and backlash, but he chose the route that was shocking and has risk. Fans of the decision should support and appreciate that.

[Toymafia88]

6 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

I'm sorry, but I just can't be convinced that "you couldn't satisfy the pixel art fans, or the Curse of Disney Island fans, or even both". I think believing that is a rationalization mechanism to reduce people's frustration by thinking that a toxic fan backlash was inevitable.

 

Risks were NOT taken for the chosen music.

Risks were NOT taken for the choices in voice acting.

Risks were NOT taken in terms of having a 2D point and click design.

Risks WERE taken in using an art style that is remarkably d I stinct from any of the art styles before it and us instead more in line with games outside the franchise (e.g. Knights and Bikes).

 

A lot of people love the art, but they love it because of the distinction and the risk. This game is going to be heavily defined and remembered for its art style, moreso than for its less risky choices, similar to Windwaker I suppose.

 

Ron could have chosen a route that avoided fan conflict and backlash, but he chose the route that was shocking and has risk. Fans of the decision should support and appreciate that.

I may be wrong but knowing Ron I'm expecting risks to be taken with the story.

 

I'm expecting something out there like Mi2 and Thimbleweed Park.

Edited July 29, 2022 by Toymafia88

[Jayel]

50 minutes ago, KestrelPi said:

 

Here, I'll prove it: I'll do it right now, and given an unvarnished opinion on the latest art we've seen: generally speaking, I've liked the vibe of the Brrr Muda art a bit less than the other stuff we've seen.

 

Of everything we've seen to me it looks the most angular and 'skewed', the hardest to get used to. I'll probably get used to it and it'll be fine, and as usual I think it all looks better in motion than static, and I certainly don't hate it but it's yet to 'click' for me. Maybe it's just because it's so unlike an environment we've seen before in MI, so the unfamiliar style plus unfamiliar environment are a bit daunting to look at.

 

That's interesting! Brr Muda might be my favourite so far but for the same reason. It's clearly supposed to be a very hostile environment, and all the jagged edges and unstable angles are successful at reinforcing that feeling. The bear trap with severed human leg and dried up blood is also a nice touch. If I had one criticism of CMI's (and later games') background art, is that every location felt like they were sanded down and made child-proof - it was all so darn ...pleasant. I'm glad to see that there are locations in ReMI that gives me unease makes me feel unwelcome for a change.

[demone]

Ron's tweets today make it seem like they're putting the finishing touches on the game now. Come on September release. 

[KestrelPi]

Huh. Maybe it's just me, but I don't find the change that shocking. I mean, in comparison to what we've had in the previous games.

 

I don't think I'm as surprised by this as I was by say... the character designs in CMI, at the time. I don't find this as huge as a switch to 3D, even though I liked that at the time. MI has a history trying different artists and making different artistic choices, so while the art style is very distinctive and new for the series, as a choice to do that, it doesn't strike me as particularly bold or provocative.

 

A lot is made of Ron talking about how he likes to provoke the audience but in the end he's just going with a style he thinks is cool, and this is hardly the first time that's happened. The MI series has been pulling this for years in the art department (while the music has always had at least Michael Land involved, it's always been an adventure game, and the voices have largely, but not completely remained consistent.)

 

I have a suspicion that when the dust settles, we'll be too busy talking about the story and its ramifications to worry about anything else.

[Vainamoinen]

14 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

I'm sorry, but I just can't be convinced that "you couldn't satisfy the pixel art fans, or the Curse of Disney Island fans, or even both". I think believing that is a rationalization mechanism to reduce people's frustration by thinking that a toxic fan backlash was inevitable.

 

I actually do think a toxic fan backlash was inevitable. It's a conclusion I drew by looking at the reaction towards each new and always radically new art style of every Monkey Island in the past, and present online discussion culture as a whole.

 

17 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

Risks WERE taken in using an art style that is remarkably distinct from any of the art styles before it and us instead more in line with games outside the franchise (e.g. Knights and Bikes).

 

In the same vein, I am utterly convinced that any Monkey Island art style is remarkably distinct from any of the art styles in previous Monkey Island games and instead more in line with styles outside the franchises (e.g. EMI looked like Grim Fandango, CMI looked more like a Disney movie, and ToMI, for several reasons, was often compared to Wallace & Gromit).

 

21 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

Risks were NOT taken in terms of having a 2D point and click design.

 

Oh, you think so? I actually hope you're right, but you could still be very wrong. But when it turns out they're doing something radically new with the UI, I won't throw myself to the ground wishing eternal hell to the creators.

 

23 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

Ron could have chosen a route that avoided fan conflict and backlash, but he chose the route that was shocking and has risk. Fans of the decision should support and appreciate that.

 

I see where you're going, and I like it, but I can't fully agree. Because the art style wasn't chosen to shock the fans out of their wits, not just "to risk something". It was chosen because Ron really liked it, he called up Rex first chance he got. It was chosen because Ron assumed that if he chose something he liked, his fans would like it as well. So in a sense, he may have thought that he doesn't take any risk at all, and he was wrong because he underestimated the toxicity in Monkey Island fandom. And that is a highly depressing thought. 😔

[KestrelPi]

Septembrrr

 

Muda

[Knight Owl]

To add to the point of this form not being an echo chamber - when the trailer came out, I mentioned that I felt like the animation was a bit stiff and that I would have done it differently (a stance that I mostly disagree with now, but that’s beside the point). Rather than bullying me into submission, some people here agreed with me, and others brought up valid counter arguments, which showed me a different perspective. That was awesome and totally non-toxic.

[Aro-tron]

28 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

Risks were NOT taken for the chosen music.

Risks were NOT taken for the choices in voice acting.

Risks were NOT taken in terms of having a 2D point and click design.

Risks WERE taken in using an art style that is remarkably d I stinct from any of the art styles before it and us instead more in line with games outside the franchise (e.g. Knights and Bikes).

This is an interesting point, looking at where Return chooses to hit the familiar, nostalgia buttons, and where it departs from what longtime fans of the series might expect. I thought it would be interesting to look at the art style in contexts of the other 'safe' choices the games make.

 

Hiring back the original composers and classic (since MI3) voice cast, both of which were highlighted even in the teaser reel, are clearly indications that they are looking to appeal to longtime fans, and to honour the legacy of the games. I wonder how members of this forum would feel is they had gotten an entirely new composer, or if they had recast Guybrush. I think it would depend on what creative choices were made. I think it could be exciting, but also risky.

 

I'm often surprised by how vocal many fandoms are about original voice actors being a 'make or break' deal, when other creative talent (art directors, writers, sound designers, etc) can be switched out without as much of a fuss. I like Earl Boen's voice, but I'm not going to lose sleep over who voices LeChuck. Dominic has such close ties with the fan community, that I think a lot of people would be upset if he were recast. There would be outrage, and thinkpieces about it, and certainly petitions to get him to return! His return is perhaps the main nostalgic element they had to get right.

 

The voice actors, and the composers have largely been consistent throughout the series, but 2D, point and click design is more of a throw-back to the first three games. I don't think we would expect anything else from Ron Gilbert, but this is the first game in the series where the UI hasn't been 'modernized' to some extent to keep up with changing technology and tastes. I suppose in a way, changing tastes have made this kind of 2D, Point and Click throwback fashionable again, but it definitely has a 'nostalgia' flavor to it that was not present in the previous games.

 

I mean, it's conceivable that someone would pitch a 'Return to Monkey Island' that was a fully 3D, high-polygon, procedurally generated, open-world adventure game, and swung for the fences. I think that might have pleased some of the fans who are upset about the new art style, actually. I'm not sure that I would be interested in that kind of game, but it would have been a choice. It would have been more expensive, of course, and maybe MI is not the kind of intellectual property that Disney feels comfortable investing that kind of budget in.

 

Perhaps that is at the root of the many complaints I've seen of fans calling the art style "cheap" -- they are forced to reckon with the reality that something they loved since childhood isn't worthy of a big budget, AAA rendition, and is a niche product. I don't think that's the main reason, but maybe it's a small part.

 

They had safe choices available to them about the voices and music, and a nostalgic option for the gameplay/UI that Ron had clearly been thinking about for a long time, but I'm not sure there was a safe choice for the art style. There's no consensus on what a Monkey Island game looks like, and I think the new style does a good job of evoking both the pixel art of MI1/MI2 and the style of MI3. That said, while it succeeds in not feeling like a throw-back, but it also doesn't feel like a natural evolution from any of the previous games -- I think it would be a shocking change after any of the games in the series. The biggest comparable shock would be the transition between MI2 and Curse, but I think in that case the evolution of the technology gave a reasonable justification for the change. The art direction on Curse also felt lush and expensive, "Disney-esque" in a way that only CD-ROMs made possible at the time.

 

For RTMI they've managed to find an art style that IS in continuity with the previous games, but doesn't really push nostalgia buttons the way that the voice cast, music and interface do. I like that, personally, but I can see why it bothers some fans.

 

What else could they have done? More of a faux pixel-art style would have been an option, but that likely would have made the game feel too 'meta' as well as regressive. It would have limited its overall audience, but I imagine the comments on Ron's blog would have been much more positive. A Curse-style animation style would have pleased other fans, but with essentially the same problems as pixel-art.

 

I actually think if they had gone with either a slightly 'softer/cuter' version of Rex's art, or with a more 'realistic/naturalistic' style, less people would be upset. These are tendencies that I've seen in a lot of Monkey Island fan art that tends to be well-received. Either approach would have less risk. However, I don't think Ron Gilbert tends to make games that are particularly cute, or naturalistic. (Even the Humongous Games, while soft, childlike and cartoony, aren't very cutesy, and are certainly NOT naturalistic. The characters don't exactly lend themselves to plush toys).

[ThunderPeel2001]

41 minutes ago, Knight Owl said:

To add to the point of this form not being an echo chamber - when the trailer came out, I mentioned that I felt like the animation was a bit stiff and that I would have done it differently (a stance that I mostly disagree with now, but that’s beside the point). Rather than bullying me into submission, some people here agreed with me, and others brought up valid counter arguments, which showed me a different perspective. That was awesome and totally non-toxic.

 

Echo chambers produce people who wander around thinking their opinion matches everyone else's. When they do meet someone who thinks differently, they look at them as if they're part of some long lost tribe, convinced they form part of a tiny (misinformed) minority.

 

"Doesn't this person realise how outlandish their beliefs are?"

 

When they join forums, they make bold statements and can't back them up... because they've never been challenged before. Instead they fall back on their mistaken belief that they represent the vast majority of people, and so don't need to defend themselves. They never properly engage with what's in front of them. Or question their own beliefs.

 

It's essentially a sort of self-brainwashing now that I think about it. (Of course it's human nature to want to feel part of something larger. Something that makes sense. Instead of a chaotic mess. So I get why you'd want to lie to yourself this way.)

 

Nobody leaves Mojo thinking they're part of some right-minded majority. There's too many disagreements, debates and discussions to be convinced . They're just done civilly (although fools don't fare well).

 

Edited July 29, 2022 by ThunderPeel2001

[KestrelPi]

So then we're all agreed.

 

This isn't an echo chamber.

[ThunderPeel2001]

47 minutes ago, KestrelPi said:

So then we're all agreed.

 

This isn't an echo chamber.

 

This statement both works for and against what I said, which means it's perfect.

[BaronGrackle]

2 hours ago, KestrelPi said:

Huh. Maybe it's just me, but I don't find the change that shocking. I mean, in comparison to what we've had in the previous games.

 

I don't think I'm as surprised by this as I was by say... the character designs in CMI, at the time. I don't find this as huge as a switch to 3D, even though I liked that at the time. MI has a history trying different artists and making different artistic choices, so while the art style is very distinctive and new for the series, as a choice to do that, it doesn't strike me as particularly bold or provocative.

 

A lot is made of Ron talking about how he likes to provoke the audience but in the end he's just going with a style he thinks is cool, and this is hardly the first time that's happened. The MI series has been pulling this for years in the art department (while the music has always had at least Michael Land involved, it's always been an adventure game, and the voices have largely, but not completely remained consistent.)

 

I have a suspicion that when the dust settles, we'll be too busy talking about the story and its ramifications to worry about anything else.

Curse was a major change, but... it came after Day of the Tentacle and Full Throttle. There was a full trend of pixel games shifting to something else. Similarly with Escape, which came at a time when most games had already gone 3D. They weren't major artistic statements; they were sort of following the normal, expected path of the culture.

 

Ron didn't want Return to look "expected".

 

"I wanted the art in Return to Monkey Island to be provocative, shocking, and not what everyone was expecting."

 

Do you think he was exaggerating, in this blog post? When he gave that talk and said he didn't want to make puppies; he wanted to make something that half the people loved and half the people hated, do we believe him?

 

The choice for music is a puppy. The choice for familiar voice actors is a puppy. The choice for 2D is a puppy. The large amount of returning, familiar characters as evidenced by the trailer is a puppy. And if Ron had wanted to make whole thing a puppy, he could have gone with advanced pixel art... people like me would've shrugged because we've been used to better graphics, and people like the majority here would've shrugged because maybe they'd want something more unique (the same way I susspect we're all shrugging a little at the large anount of returning characters, plus Mêlée and Monkey Island again)... but we would've both recognized its continuity with MI1 and MI2, and we would have recognized it was the version Ron told his blog fans to expect... we would have recognized the puppy, I think.

 

We can recognize that this art is sonething bold and something with message, and it is not a puppy. But there's value in recognizing that the non-puppy creates far more drama.

 

If anyone believes the MI2 ending has brought more conflict than the MI1 ending, then I don't think you consider fan backlashers to be inevitable.

[Vainamoinen]

8 minutes ago, BaronGrackle said:

Ron didn't want Return to look "expected".

 

"I wanted the art in Return to Monkey Island to be provocative, shocking, and not what everyone was expecting."

 

Do you think he was exaggerating, in this blog post? When he gave that talk and said he didn't want to make puppies; he wanted to make something that half the people loved and half the people hated, do we believe him?

 

Isn't that a common phrase used by artists when they are just doing their own thing without bothering about public opinion? Sounds to me like a promise kept, to release something so polarizing and non mainstream that you'll "either love or hate it, but nothing in between"?

 

On the other hand, it would be "just" a phrase.

As they say over here, the soup's never eaten as hot as it is boiled.

 

And last not least: LeChuck's Revenge was provocative and shocking, and not what everyone was expecting. Curse of Monkey Island was. Escape of Monkey Island was. Tales of Monkey Island was. It would have been odd if Return wasn't.

 

Maybe our brains are so washed out and brittle that we can no longer cope with the provocation and shock, the range of stylistic choice and the reinvention of an entire franchise that was a daily occurrence in the 80s and 90s.