Evidence For and Against MI being in Guybrush's Imagination.

[fwed1]

I just bought the special edition and when playing it through Guybrush asked "Why do you people speak like that" to which the pirate responded "Play along Guybrish that is how people talked back then."

This sounds like something a young child would ask while in a theme park. Don't you think?

I understand this could just be a 4th wall joke but has anyone else found any evidence in the first 2 games?

[Spadge]

Hey, you are not playing along! :D
Don't bring up the "Fake world" thing. Most fans hate it. In fact some of us like to pretend the MI2 ending didn't happen like that.

[hplikelike]

Eline said "I hope Lechuck hadn't put a curse on Guybrush " (paraphrased)

And Chucky's glowing Voodoo Eyes.

Game, set, match.

Oh, and MI 3.

[fwed1]

I hate the idea too but when I heard that line I just thought oh no! Maybe it is true. And wondered if there was anything (apart from the sequels) that made it more real/fake.

I also wonder is MI2 was Guybrush telling Elaine (a girl he met at the park) all about his adventures to try and impress her.

[Rather Dashing]

Eline said "I hope Lechuck hadn't put a curse on Guybrush " (paraphrased)

And Chucky's glowing Voodoo Eyes.

Game, set, match.
The fading remnants of a dying imagination, a little girl explaining away the disappearance of her playmate within their shared fantasy, or the world being slightly more real than we might expect? All quite possible from a narrative standpoint.

Oh, and MI 3.
Er, that doesn't count. For Tales and future Monkey Island games it does, and that's fine. But in terms of what was intended for Monkey Island 2's story when Monkey Island 2 was being written, it doesn't matter, regardless of whether or not you *like* what they did with it.

[fwed1]

Also I had another idea. What if when Elaine is taken from Mélee island by Lechuck, that is her going home with her dad in the "real world". Just a thought.

This could also be why all the pirates leave. It could be the park's closing time and the pirates could be the other people at the park.

[tmfm2000]

I don't understand how anyone could want to deny that it's an imaginary world? I was never put off by the ending of mi2. to me that just gives the whole game that extra dimension, one of the things that make it so great. the clues are there (soda machine, the aforementioned dialouge etc.), so why is it so hard to accept? And I agree with Rather_Dashing; don't mind the later games. they are not what this is about. 3, 4 and tales are all great in their own right, but they don't affect the intentions of the first two.
to me, monkey island's greatnes was never that it portrayed any "real" pirate world. it was allways a humorous game and also a game of great ingenuity and imagination. in that light, the whole ending of mi2 fits great in with the general build up to that point. what happens later is a whole different story :)

[StarEye]

I think there's enough evidence to believe it's his imagination AND enough evidence to believe it's not. Personally, I think the theme park/imagination theory is a bit too obvious. It's not like the hints are subtle or anything. Besides, LeChuck's glowing eyes and Elaine popping up midway through the cutscenes is probably there to tell us that things aren't necessary what it seems to be, and I think it's a bit of a cop-out just to call it remnants of his imagination.

Also, I refuse to believe that Ron Gilbert would be such a dickhead that he'd continue lying to us for all these years. I would certainly be insulted if fans didn't believe my own comments/statements on my own game.

[pilouuuu]

Against the theory:

-It's a really crappy story device
- Elaine mentions a SPELL
- Le Chuck's eyes
- Ron wanted to make MI3 and if Guybrush was a kid... then it would have been worse than the Phantom Menace with kiddie Anakin
- Ron is an intelligent man. He thought of something better for the series
- MI is full of anachromism and breaking the fourth wall. It's something like comical gags, not really about "it is all a dream!
- Did I mention that it would be crap and disrespectful to MI fans?

[ivan11111]

- The ending to MI2 added to the beginning of MI3 perfectly describe how the whole of the final part of MI2 was Le Chuck playing with Guybrush's head.
- The fact that he started MI3 in a bumper car - so the end wasn't his imagination, it was all a showing of Le Chuck's amazing mind control skillz, which Guybrush escaped by some stroke of piratey luck or Le Chuck's boredom and attempt at sieging Plunder Island.
- Then in the final part of MI3 he again becomes a child in a theme park, echoing MI2, except this time we know this is Le Chuck's curse, because it is cured by a hangover cure, but he is still stuck in the amusement park.
- So at the end of MI2 Le Chuck takes Guybrush to Monkey Island from Dinky Island, likely the same way as Herman went in the other direction, through the tunnel. Notice how the tunnel has the same artwork as the tunnel when you go from Phatt Island to the small island off this one. This is an obvious clue.
- OK, so there are questions over the whereabouts of Dinky Island, but doesn't this make sense? Otherwise at the epilogue to MI3, Guybrush is a boy in a theme park pretending to be a pirate in the caribbean pretending to be a boy in a theme park? Don't think so.

[darknessofheart]

- The ending to MI2 added to the beginning of MI3 perfectly describe how the whole of the final part of MI2 was Le Chuck playing with Guybrush's head.
- The fact that he started MI3 in a bumper car - so the end wasn't his imagination, it was all a showing of Le Chuck's amazing mind control skillz, which Guybrush escaped by some stroke of piratey luck or Le Chuck's boredom and attempt at sieging Plunder Island.
- Then in the final part of MI3 he again becomes a child in a theme park, echoing MI2, except this time we know this is Le Chuck's curse, because it is cured by a hangover cure, but he is still stuck in the amusement park.
- So at the end of MI2 Le Chuck takes Guybrush to Monkey Island from Dinky Island, likely the same way as Herman went in the other direction, through the tunnel. Notice how the tunnel has the same artwork as the tunnel when you go from Phatt Island to the small island off this one. This is an obvious clue.
- OK, so there are questions over the whereabouts of Dinky Island, but doesn't this make sense? Otherwise at the epilogue to MI3, Guybrush is a boy in a theme park pretending to be a pirate in the caribbean pretending to be a boy in a theme park? Don't think so.

Well people want to know what Gilbert had in mind had he stayed on with the company. MI3 is the story of other developers. Though I will say that the explanations they gave in the third one made an incredible amount of sense, gave the games much more story and meaning, and also branched off into very dark and violent territory. It made so much sense to me, it seemed like it was planned in advance, but it wasn't, just clever writing.

With that being said, I don't understand why we need thread after thread about an ending that will never get light unless Ron comes back. People will keep giving evidence, but the only evidence can be found in the first two games. Nothing will change and it's pointless to keep discussing something that has no more evidence and has not been a part of the Monkey Island series for almost two decades and is not even a part of Tales. I'm very happy with the course the series took.

[ivan11111]

Yeah, me too. I can find it within myself to feel content enough with the series that I don't really mind about this question. The whole point of the game was to be entertaining, and the end of MI2 was just a massive movie-pastiche lolfest, i loved it. No reason to get so worried about it.

[Rather Dashing]

I think it's a bit of a cop-out just to call it remnants of his imagination.
I think it's a huge cop-out to say "The events of the Monkey 2 ending NEVER HAPPENED LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU I'M NOT LISTENING IT WAS ALL REALLY A TRICK LA LA LA LA LA HEY LOOK THE STATUS QUO RIGHT HERE HOW CONVENIENT. WE CAN TOSS THAT NASTY SCARY IDEA THAT GUYBRUSH IS A KID OUT NOW YAY".

Against the theory:

-It's a really crappy story device
Why? And how is "That ending doesn't count because...MAGIC!" *not* a bad story device?

- Elaine mentions a SPELL
Considering that Big Whoop is not completely what it seems to be, and the ending of LeChuck's Revenge never makes it clear what scenes are "real" and which are "not", then that doesn't really count, does it? I can just as easily say "Guybrush doesn't question that he's a kid", "Guybrush recognized LeChuck as his brother", et cetera.
- Le Chuck's eyes
Which could be ANYTHING. A hint, a bit of imagination on the part of Guybrush, a fourth-wall breaking nod to the player for a cinematic "The enemy will be back" ending for the sake of the player, where it's possible for Chuckie and Guybrush to slip into that fantasy again.
- Ron wanted to make MI3 and if Guybrush was a kid... then it would have been worse than the Phantom Menace with kiddie Anakin
...How? Believing they're kids at the end of Monkey 2 would mean believing they were kids for the ENTIRE DURATION of both games. A third game would be EXACTLY THE SAME, because they're ALWAYS kids under the "imagination" theory. People make it seem like a third game under this guise would start with a puzzle in which Guybrush must clean his room, and then Chuckie comes and messes it up or something asinine like that. If we say it's in his imagination, then he was a kid when he defeated LeChuck. He was a kid when he talked to the Voodoo Lady. He was a kid when he gathered a crew. He was a kid when he went to Monkey Island. It's not like the third game would then have him taking up a paper route!

- Ron is an intelligent man. He thought of something better for the series
Or not. This isn't "evidence" so much as it is a guess, and more one based on your idea that somehow it's a bad story device and the fact that you don't like it.
- MI is full of anachromism and breaking the fourth wall. It's something like comical gags, not really about "it is all a dream!
Not if his interview in The Adventurer is to be believed.
- Did I mention that it would be crap and disrespectful to MI fans?
Why? How?

[Lennie Melvin]

Am I the only one that really really liked the ending to LeChuck's Revenge?

And I quite like the idea that it's all in his imagination, in fact I really like that idea.

[wisp]

no, i liked it too...

Against the theory:

-It's a really crappy story device
is it? even more crappy than guybrush being simply mindcontrolled and lecuck building an actual amusement park?

- Elaine mentions a SPELL
- Le Chuck's eyes
that's also awesome...at first the player is told a normal (more or less) pirate story and at the end..it suddenly changes to being simply a boys imagination. until that point it is still quite simple, but then you get another twist..in the end you can't really be sure what is real and what is illusion and then the game ends. that was the best game ending at that time. it left me completly startled.
- Ron wanted to make MI3 and if Guybrush was a kid... then it would have been worse than the Phantom Menace with kiddie Anakin
depends on how it would have been done. the beginning of curse was great in a way. you didn't know what had happend before, but he back in the pirate world, but there was still evidence from the amusement park. so again, you didn't know what was real and what not. i would have left it that way and played with it a bit more. you could play normally in the pirate world, but still don't know, if it is real or an illusion.
- Ron is an intelligent man. He thought of something better for the series
being intelligent is no guarantee that he had already planned a complete script for the next game. i assume, that he had some rough ideas on how to continue the plot, should another monkey island be made...not more. the mi2 ending would have worked as am ending to the series..at least for me.
- Did I mention that it would be crap and disrespectful to MI fans?
disrespectful? if you see it that way, then the explanation given in mi3 could be also considered disrespectful. it was also quite simple...

...anyway, it's all a matter of taste and personal preference, i guess. the ending of mi2 gave you two possible options: that everything so far was just a dream, imagination or illusion or that the pirate setting is in fact real and guybrush was somehow cursed or mind controlled to believe he was just a little kid at an amusement park and lechuck is his brother. we don't know what is real. it would have probably been better without a sequel though, 'cause in a sequel you had to choose one of these options. both aren't so great on their own. the whole confusion part is what made the mi2 ending interesting for me.

[Rather Dashing]

Am I the only one that really really liked the ending to LeChuck's Revenge?
It seems to be a strangely limited bunch.

And I quite like the idea that it's all in his imagination, in fact I really like that idea.
I definitely wouldn't mind if that was it. There's a certain quaintness and warmth to the idea that Guybrush is sharing in the fantasy with us. It explains his naive but mischievous nature, and it just gives another dimension to everything you do, retroactively adding depth and a "wink wink" feeling to everything you encounter in the first two games.

[StarEye]

I think it's a huge cop-out to say "The events of the Monkey 2 ending NEVER HAPPENED LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU I'M NOT LISTENING IT WAS ALL REALLY A TRICK LA LA LA LA LA HEY LOOK THE STATUS QUO RIGHT HERE HOW CONVENIENT. WE CAN TOSS THAT NASTY SCARY IDEA THAT GUYBRUSH IS A KID OUT NOW YAY".

Uhm, I never said the MI2 ending never happened, what the fuck are you on about? I was just saying that those two things alone speak against the whole imagination theory, but all you do is shoe-horn them into YOUR opinion. What I don't understand are people that can't see things from different perspectives - those are the worst kind of people.

I'm not the one ignoring clues. I pay attention to ALL the clues, evalute them and make up an opinion. I don't just ignore the clues just so it can fit into the theory more. Also, I wouldn't mind if it was all in his imagination. I just don't believe it's that simple.

And I LOVE the MI2 ending. But even back then, it gave me a feeling that there would be a third game that continues the story. In fact, I never doubted it once.

[Purple Tentacle]

Speculation and theories are cool...arguing over something that was never officially explained is kinda lame.

To sum up:

Lots of evidence hinting the Monkey Island universe is just a small boys fantasy: Grog machine, Cap'n Crunch Cereal, reappearance of dark alley from SOMI etc.
Ending may or may not be a contradiction to that with Elaine's line about it being a spell and Chuckies glowing eyes. Take your pick.


What I find amusing is that there's always a chance that there was no deep explanation in the first place.

You never know.

[Eduardo]

Just asking, is it normal to find guys that pimp up adventure games in theme parks?

[Barnabus]

The idea that 'it was all in his head' endings are inherently clichéd and poor storytelling is a lazy cliché in itself. I could name plenty of movies and tv shows from recent years that employ the trope to great effect. People who hate the MI2 ending should be forced to watch David Lynch movies until they grasp that ambiguity can be a virtue.

[Rawr]

Heh, can argue about it till cows fly but we'll never reach an answer everyone agrees on. Plus it's doubtful we'll ever see what Ron had planned for MI3 before he left.

Personally I'm not a big fan of the idea that the first two games were all an imagination. To me it means that playing the first two games was a complete waste of time. It's like those stories you get where it ends that "Then he woke up. It was all a dream" or the time was turned back to before it all happened. Consequently negating the existence of the story. Anyone can imagine they're a pirate. =/ That said that's only my view. Everyone has different tastes and so they might think that's a really good way for the story to go.

With that I prefer the theory that LeChuck got a hold of the Big Whoop and used it to send him to another dimension as a child where there is no chance of him ever doing anything piratey again. Making it quite a big punishment for Guybrush as he's wanted to be a Pirate since the beginning. As backed up by Elaine saying "I hope LeChuck hasn't put a curse on Guybrush" and the Red Eyed Chuckie at the end. Which is how they went with CoMI. Although I do admit I was saddened that they didn't include a chapter at the beginning or atleast a cutscene of him escaping the Big Whoop.

[Zomantic]

As a partisan of the "child's imagination" theory, I'd like to point out a fact which I believe may not have been sufficiently considered in this kind of speculations (take for istance this (http://www.scummbar.com/resources/articles/index.php?newssniffer=readarticle&article=2) very good feature at the Scumm Bar): where are Guybrush's parents now? Who are they?
Guybrush's identity is much more malleable than one could think: when we find him on the shores of Mêlée Island, "armed with nothing more than a goofy name and the overpowering urge to become a swashbuckling pirate", we don't know anything about his past; we could even say it doesn't really matter: those two attributes are all we need to know. We don't question his origins (his existence?), we just start playing along with him.
When I first saw Guybrush's parents, during the amusing yet uncanny Skeleton Dance sequence (hey, another W. Disney reference (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkhxjzc9uuE)!), the thing which disturbed me the most was the fact that it suddendly gave the main character a depth I hadn't asked for. Guybrush was much more than a simple avatar I could hide myself behind: he had a life of his own. The sequence also hinted at another unanswered question: are Guybrush's parents dead? What if it was all a "spell" of some sort? How could we forget using his father's skull as an ingredient for LeChuck's voodoo doll? What was happening there?
The endless explanation at the end of Curse bluntly misses this point, bringing back the more reassuring past-free Guybrush we can happily fiddle with now: full of personality but lacking a real identity (and therefore "interpretable" by any player). EfMI developers Clark & Stemmle, much more aware in this sense, emphasized this absence in an eerie way: at Planet Threepwood, his very identity being objected, Guybrush is asked a question he just can't answer to: "what are your parents' names?"

(Guybrush's identity is one of the main themes of this classic, shamefully underrated fourth episode: just think about Pegnose Pete, or the Myst of Times)

[Purple Tentacle]

The idea that 'it was all in his head' endings are inherently clichéd and poor storytelling is a lazy cliché in itself. I could name plenty of movies and tv shows from recent years that employ the trope to great effect. People who hate the MI2 ending should be forced to watch David Lynch movies until they grasp that ambiguity can be a virtue.
Lol True:D

If The Secret of Monkey Island was indeed born from the imagination of a young Guybrush Threepwood, I still think it was done in a clever way.

All the subtle hints of reality creeping into Guybrush's day dream is a cool touch. Like the secret is right in front of you the whole time and you're not even aware of it.

Not saying it's necessarily much better as I think everyone wants Monkey Island to be real...:confused:...in a matter of speaking :p

But it's still better than a story with no plans or hints in that regard which then just slaps you in the face with a "it was all a dream" at the end.

[coolsome]

As a partisan of the "child's imagination" theory, I'd like to point out a fact which I believe may not have been sufficiently considered in this kind of speculations (take for istance this (http://www.scummbar.com/resources/articles/index.php?newssniffer=readarticle&article=2) very good feature at the Scumm Bar): where are Guybrush's parents now? Who are they?
Guybrush's identity is much more malleable than one could think: when we find him on the shores of Mêlée Island, "armed with nothing more than a goofy name and the overpowering urge to become a swashbuckling pirate", we don't know anything about his past; we could even say it doesn't really matter: those two attributes are all we need to know. We don't question his origins (his existence?), we just start playing along with him.
When I first saw Guybrush's parents, during the amusing yet uncanny Skeleton Dance sequence (hey, another W. Disney reference (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkhxjzc9uuE)!), the thing which disturbed me the most was the fact that it suddendly gave the main character a depth I hadn't asked for. Guybrush was much more than a simple avatar I could hide myself behind: he had a life of his own. The sequence also hinted at another unanswered question: are Guybrush's parents dead? What if it was all a "spell" of some sort? How could we forget using his father's skull as an ingredient for LeChuck's voodoo doll? What was happening there?
The endless explanation at the end of Curse bluntly misses this point, bringing back the more reassuring past-free Guybrush we can happily fiddle with now: full of personality but lacking a real identity (and therefore "interpretable" by any player). EfMI developers Clark & Stemmle, much more aware in this sense, emphasized this absence in an eerie way: at Planet Threepwood, his very identity being objected, Guybrush is asked a question he just can't answer to: "what are your parents' names?"

(Guybrush's identity is one of the main themes of this classic, shamefully underrated fourth episode: just think about Pegnose Pete, or the Myst of Times)

Iv allways wondered if he was abandoned or if his parents died also if Lechuck realy is his brother it was never adressed after 2 allmost like it never happened Guybrush aslo has trouble remembering what happened when he found big whoop tbh I think he has lots of memory laps he forgets the voodoo lady twise he forgot what Lechucks forms where in TMI he even forgot he was looking for big whoop in 2 when he was destracted by the largo embargo

[LuigiHann]

I feel bad for the people browsing this forum who haven't beaten MI2 yet.

[alexonfyre]

Iv allways wondered if he was abandoned or if his parents died also if Lechuck realy is his brother it was never adressed after 2 allmost like it never happened Guybrush aslo has trouble remembering what happened when he found big whoop tbh I think he has lots of memory laps he forgets the voodoo lady twise he forgot what Lechucks forms where in TMI he even forgot he was looking for big whoop in 2 when he was destracted by the largo embargo

I think the REAL Secret of Monkey Island, is that Guybrush is adopted and lives almost constantly in a fantasy world to escape the crushing pain of having dead parents and a family you don't love.

[coolsome]

if its all a day dream does that meen every persons day dream create a realty where it happens

[alexonfyre]

if its all a day dream does that meen every persons day dream create a realty where it happens

Let's not even go there...

[Kukulcan]

Does the line "Come on Guybrush that's how they talked in the past, play along" (or so) from the Special Edition said by a walking Mêleé pirate appear in the original Monkey Island? Or is it a new clue about the theme park?

My favourite one is that sign at the alley reading "Employees Only" which happens to open in Monkey 2....isn't it a door reserved for technical staff? If it is not, it really seems to be....

We'll never know for sure I'm afraid....

[tredlow]

I'm not even sure I buy the whole "LeChuck is Guybrush's brother" thing. I think the ending of MI2 is just one of LeChuck's devious plans to lower Guybrush's guard and then kill him, or hold him captive in that amusement park world. Those skeleton parents are probably LeChuck's parents, and not Guybrush's.

I think this happened in a Tom Strong comic once.

And the whole "Come on Guybrush that's how they talked in the past, play along" is probably because pirates aren't what they used to be anymore, but they still try to keep their traditions.

For me, Guybrush is kinda like one of the characters that's loveable because we don't know their exact origins, like The Tick or The Iron Giant.

[SHODANFreeman]

If he were his brother, why the heck didn't he know who he was when he first showed up on Mêlée, and how did he magically disguise himself as Fester Shinetop with no one noticing?

[bobhobbit]

The idea that 'it was all in his head' endings are inherently clichéd and poor storytelling is a lazy cliché in itself. I could name plenty of movies and tv shows from recent years that employ the trope to great effect. People who hate the MI2 ending should be forced to watch David Lynch movies until they grasp that ambiguity can be a virtue.

Mulholland Dr. <3

[wisp]

I think the REAL Secret of Monkey Island, is that Guybrush is adopted and lives almost constantly in a fantasy world to escape the crushing pain of having dead parents and a family you don't love.

something like this just came to my mind as well. he definitely seems to have a problem with his parents. either he lost them at a young age, maybe they died or abandoned him, or he left his parents behind somehow. so we could either have the whole boy's fantasy setting or maybe something deeper. as zomantic and the article he linked to had elaborated, there are indeed several occasions were a modern world interferes with the monkey island world and to me it always felt like they were intentional and not just some lame fourth wall break joke. so, was everything just a boy's dream and he goes home with his parents in the end? that would indeed be kinda silly and also, why would he have his dead parents in his fantasy several times, if everything is fine...and why would his real life brother be able to shoot blue sparks from his eyes. the point is, that everything isn't real including the amusement park.
did anyone see the movie "identity"...kinda like this. maybe guybrush was as an amusement park with his parents when he was little, but now he grew up and is a complete nutjob. case solved.

when monkey island was originally planned the concept wasn't for a comedy game, right? correct me if i am wrong, i don't want to look it up now. so, with this in mind, couldn't the real secret indeed be more sinister than we would think it is? check out the mi2 cover, that's also not really funny...it's quite dark.

[pilouuuu]

I think it's a huge cop-out to say "The events of the Monkey 2 ending NEVER HAPPENED LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU I'M NOT LISTENING IT WAS ALL REALLY A TRICK LA LA LA LA LA HEY LOOK THE STATUS QUO RIGHT HERE HOW CONVENIENT. WE CAN TOSS THAT NASTY SCARY IDEA THAT GUYBRUSH IS A KID OUT NOW YAY".

I never said that I assume that MI2 never happened. In fact I like its ending. But it is its solution in the follow up from Ron Gilbert that never happened. So we had Curse which I think is not the exact explanation is a pretty close one.


Why? And how is "That ending doesn't count because...MAGIC!" *not* a bad story device?


It is considered an stardard in the entertainment industry be it movies, books and hopefully videogames too never to end some story with the "all is a dream" device. It makes fans feel cheated like if all the adventures and journey the protagonist went by were good for nothing. I guess Ron was pretty aware of that "rule".


Considering that Big Whoop is not completely what it seems to be, and the ending of LeChuck's Revenge never makes it clear what scenes are "real" and which are "not", then that doesn't really count, does it? I can just as easily say "Guybrush doesn't question that he's a kid", "Guybrush recognized LeChuck as his brother", et cetera.


I think it's not clear after Guybrush fell, which scenes are real and which not. He realises something is hapenning. Even asks something like "what's going on here?". But then the effect of the spell is probably too strong and he believes he is a kid (which he is not)


Which could be ANYTHING. A hint, a bit of imagination on the part of Guybrush, a fourth-wall breaking nod to the player for a cinematic "The enemy will be back" ending for the sake of the player, where it's possible for Chuckie and Guybrush to slip into that fantasy again.

Or a nod to Thriller


...How? Believing they're kids at the end of Monkey 2 would mean believing they were kids for the ENTIRE DURATION of both games. A third game would be EXACTLY THE SAME, because they're ALWAYS kids under the "imagination" theory. People make it seem like a third game under this guise would start with a puzzle in which Guybrush must clean his room, and then Chuckie comes and messes it up or something asinine like that. If we say it's in his imagination, then he was a kid when he defeated LeChuck. He was a kid when he talked to the Voodoo Lady. He was a kid when he gathered a crew. He was a kid when he went to Monkey Island. It's not like the third game would then have him taking up a paper route!


He doesn't act like a kid in the first game, but like an inexperienced teenager and wannabe pirate


Or not. This isn't "evidence" so much as it is a guess, and more one based on your idea that somehow it's a bad story device and the fact that you don't like it.


Most people don't like it


Not if his interview in The Adventurer is to be believed.



I don't believe it. Ron knows how to keep a secret. Even if he needs to lie! Evil Ron...


Why? How?

Would you like that when your life is about to end that someone wakes you up and says you were in the Matrix and all your life was a lie? It's something like that. Saying that Monkey Island 1 and 2 were a lie and had no reason to be. That the love of Guybrush for Elaine is a lie. That he becoming a pirate was a lie. Would you like that?

[pluizig]

It is considered an stardard in the entertainment industry be it movies, books and hopefully videogames too never to end some story with the "all is a dream" device. It makes fans feel cheated like if all the adventures and journey the protagonist went by were good for nothing. I guess Ron was pretty aware of that "rule".

(...)

Would you like that when your life is about to end that someone wakes you up and says you were in the Matrix and all your life was a lie? It's something like that. Saying that Monkey Island 1 and 2 were a lie and had no reason to be. That the love of Guybrush for Elaine is a lie. That he becoming a pirate was a lie. Would you like that?

I don't think Ron meant to turn Monkey Island 1 and 2 into 'it was all a dream.' I think he rather took the Calvin and Hobbes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_and_hobbes) route. Do you feel cheated because the tiger is actually a stuffed toy?

[pilouuuu]

I don't think Ron meant to turn Monkey Island 1 and 2 into 'it was all a dream.' I think he rather took the Calvin and Hobbes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_and_hobbes) route. Do you feel cheated because the tiger is actually a stuffed toy?

Good question. Are you sure Hobbes isn't in fact possesed by a spirit or something? Well, I think it is a bit different having one character being product of imagination instead of a whole story.

[phattbooty]

so, was everything just a boy's dream and he goes home with his parents in the end? that would indeed be kinda silly and also, why would he have his dead parents in his fantasy several times, if everything is fine...

Haha that's true - it seems a little morbid to go off fantasising about finding your parents' lifeless bodies and picking up your father's skull as another nifty inventory item.

[coolsome]

guybrush is either a mighty pirate or an emotonaly desturbed kid

[harald]

A pleasant surprise that I'm not the only one loving the amusement park plot! I admit I was a bit peeved when I first saw the ending to MI2, and I understand why people would consider it a rip-off if it was all in the mind of a 10-year-old. But the idea has grown on me since then and I think it's incredibly clever and unique.

Also, I don't really find it too weird for a young child to have morbid fantasies, in contrast to what some people have said here. If Guybrush really did find his way into the theme park's unwelcoming and dark service tunnels, with his older brother hot on the trail, why shouldn't he have been able to imagine the skeletons of his parents in the ward?

I admit that this theory is an easy way out, since you could make almost any discrepancy fit. But the metal railings below ground on Dinky, and the underground tunnels... they are obviously in a theme park. I'm more or less sure that's what Gilbert had in mind. And his presumably last part of the trilogy was going to take place with this obvious to the player, with Guybrush struggling to stay in his enjoyable fantasy. My, would I like to play that game. Regardless of how much I enjoyed Curse (and Escape, right up to the part with the monkey head).

[Arwald]

Hey, I'm just afraid, that Lucas Arts had a good laugh, when making the ending of MI2, never really bothering to think about future sequels...and now we are cracking our minds trying to see a "hidden message"...well, there never was one. After all, the company is well known for changing plots in the middle of the story - remember, in StarWars, Darth Vader was not initially intended to become Skywalker's Dad and they had a hell of a trouble, writing the scripts for the following chapters of the movie...
Don't search deeper than you have to - even Tolkien never gave much trouble thinking about stuff like second meaning of his works - he just told his story and did it well. It were the fans, who started writing their college diplomas based on study of his literature.

[tmfm2000]

just to clear things up (for some of you):

the theory isn't about "it all being a dream", it's more or less about two brothers playing pirates in an amusement park (with their friend elaine, perhaps). am I not right? it's actually very well orchestrated, all the way from the beginning of mi1, through the second act building up to the imaginary climax in "the secret revealed or your money back". all those little hints giving away that this isn't quite the real pirate world it looks like. there are no pirates anymore (not in that way;)), there were no soda machines back then, just play along! it's a game, in more than one sense..

I totally agree with the David Lynch and Calvin & Hobbes references btw..

[coolsome]

in the phat libery the card on the book E-ticket says see fiction think that has any relavance?

[Iron Curtain]

The idea that 'it was all in his head' endings are inherently clichéd and poor storytelling is a lazy cliché in itself. I could name plenty of movies and tv shows from recent years that employ the trope to great effect. People who hate the MI2 ending should be forced to watch David Lynch movies until they grasp that ambiguity can be a virtue.

Ughh. I hate David Lynch. He and his movies make no sense whatsoever. If that was the direction Ron Gilbert was going for, I have completely lost all respect for him.

[Iron Curtain]

Hey, I'm just afraid, that Lucas Arts had a good laugh, when making the ending of MI2, never really bothering to think about future sequels...and now we are cracking our minds trying to see a "hidden message"...well, there never was one. After all, the company is well known for changing plots in the middle of the story - remember, in StarWars, Darth Vader was not initially intended to become Skywalker's Dad and they had a hell of a trouble, writing the scripts for the following chapters of the movie...
Don't search deeper than you have to - even Tolkien never gave much trouble thinking about stuff like second meaning of his works - he just told his story and did it well. It were the fans, who started writing their college diplomas based on study of his literature.

You're confusing George Lucas, the owner, with Ron Gilbert, The Director.

[SHODANFreeman]

I don't think Ron meant to turn Monkey Island 1 and 2 into 'it was all a dream.' I think he rather took the Calvin and Hobbes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvin_and_hobbes) route. Do you feel cheated because the tiger is actually a stuffed toy?

Calvin and Hobbes has absolutely no interconnecting storyline whatsoever, and even if it did, you know from the beginning that the tiger is a toy, it's not like they went on 2 big adventures and then suddenly said "oh by the way one of the main characters is imaginary"

[onlyamonkey]

The idea that 'it was all in his head' endings are inherently clichéd and poor storytelling is a lazy cliché in itself. I could name plenty of movies and tv shows from recent years that employ the trope to great effect. People who hate the MI2 ending should be forced to watch David Lynch movies until they grasp that ambiguity can be a virtue.

Yeah, thing is since MI was done when this was heavily used by the entire genre (or was getting popular)- it seems rather likely.

Personally I just don't see the story as such an integral part of my experience so I really don't put much thought or care into it.

[Bagge]

Calvin and Hobbes has absolutely no interconnecting storyline whatsoever, and even if it did, you know from the beginning that the tiger is a toy, it's not like they went on 2 big adventures and then suddenly said "oh by the way one of the main characters is imaginary"

No, but that's basically what Fight Club did.

[BobTGoldfish]

Why? And how is "That ending doesn't count because...MAGIC!" *not* a bad story device?

Because it's magic, DUH!


anyway... I have to weigh in here.

I have been a monkey island fan since I played the first part on the Amiga oh, so many years ago.

I played the first part doggedly until I kicked LeChucks ass.

Then Part 2 was released. It was like one of those moments where you walk into the game store, and there is a spotlight shining and a choris of angels singing in my ear that only I was aware of. I took it home and I played it with an even more dogged determination, I was going to take it to LeChuck and I was going to beat this game. I got to the end and LEChuck Told Guybrush about him being his brother. and I thought "AWESOME Empire Reference" then a few minutes later, LeChucks Eyes Stormed up and Elaine was waiting for the love her life.

And that was it, I never looked at is as more than an Empire reference that lead to an awesome "Double twist" moment, and that Empire ended very similarly, with the good guy(s) being on the back foot.

Then Curse came out.. and I had another "Moment" as I walked to the counter and handed over my money and I started playing it, and I smiled and I LOVED the game, agree with me or not it's my favorite game of the series right now. I LOVED the beginning. I actually thought that they DIDN'T explain how The 'Brush escaped was awesome, made me trust more in his Mighty Pirate-y wiles. (I always had issues with adventure heores that only have adventures when we are watching). IT also Started much the way "Jedi" had, with time having elapsed. It fit to me that a "Jedi" opening follwed an "Empire" ending.

I never knew of Gilbert's planned Arc. I never knew he hadn't planned Curse to go down that way. I just took the ending to MI:2 to be what it was and moved on.

I'm not going to lie, if it turns out that all this is some childs imagination, I'll feel that is a bit too "Meta" for it's own good. especially after all this discussion. But, I won't feel put off.

But we can agree it was a good ending.. wasn't it?

[Rawr]

just to clear things up (for some of you):

the theory isn't about "it all being a dream", it's more or less about two brothers playing pirates in an amusement park (with their friend elaine, perhaps). am I not right? it's actually very well orchestrated, all the way from the beginning of mi1, through the second act building up to the imaginary climax in "the secret revealed or your money back". all those little hints giving away that this isn't quite the real pirate world it looks like. there are no pirates anymore (not in that way;)), there were no soda machines back then, just play along! it's a game, in more than one sense..

I totally agree with the David Lynch and Calvin & Hobbes references btw..
Never said it was a dream exactly. But it follows the plot same device of Deus ex machina is what I meant, of it being all in their imagination. It negates everything that happened. It virtually means the story never existed, two brothers just made it up to pass their time. To me that's lousy, and lazy on the story writers part.

As I said before. Theres enough hints for either of the 2 possible conclusions one could come to from this ending. No matter how much one argues, neither side will change their opinion on what they thought the ending means.

[Barnabus]

Curse Of Monkey Island is basically the equivalent of another filmmaking team making a sequel to Mulholland Dr. that comes up with a way of retconning the final stretch of the first film out of existence and continues the more straightforward story of the first two thirds as if nothing had happened. It's possible that it could be done well and result in an enjoyable film, and could even spawn an ongoing series that pleases all those people who enjoyed the first part of the story but were angered by the radical shifts that occurred in the original. But even if I got some enjoyment out of the new films, part of me would always wish they'd left well alone.

[turingmachine604]

People are citing the "It was all a dream" ending the wrong way.

The cliched use is you say it was all a dream, therefore negating everything that happened before. Literally, nothing happened, it was all one character's imagination.

This isn't what happens in MI 2 with the child theory. It doesn't say that MI 1 and 2 didn't happen (as per above) rather they did happen, just what you were experiencing wasn't straightforward.

Say you tell a story and someone does something unbelievable like killing a dragon.

You say it was all a dream, then it never happened.

Instead if you say he was taking drugs, had an hallucinatory experience, and the next day his iguana is dead.

Both stories are told the exact same way until the end where you say either he was dreaming or he was on drugs (in both the 'story' was literally in his head). The first one has no consequence on his life, the second has the implication that while experiencing the story he actually killed his iguana.

In this way, the ending of MI 2 is not saying Guybrush was sitting on a bench and had the whole adventure in his head, he was actually interacting with people and the real world ("Hey, play along kid", etc.).

The first use is the cliche, not the second use.

Alternatively, you keep it being all a dream, however, all the events of the dream have direct corollaries in Guybrush's real life. In this way, the game is not about Guybrush being a pirate but an analysis of his psyche.

I don't personally believe the ending of MI 2 implies the child's imagination theory, I'm just saying people are immediately dismissing it by saying "it's all in his head" is a bad story telling device. It isn't, it just has the reputation of being used very poorly in media.

[alexonfyre]

No, but that's basically what Fight Club did.

Fight Club and Monkey Island are only similar in that respect. I believe that Monkey Island is a great game and all, but imaginary child's tale and mature look at modern consumerist psychosis aren't exactly the same.

Kind of like how the same eggs and flour and milk go into a supermarket cake and a top-tier wedding cake, its the chef that makes the difference.

[Rawr]

That is true, that could possibly be one take. Although that said how would a next game have been made out of that if there was one? Running around in real life trying to solve the problems he faced in his hallucination? Plus it was aimed at Children too, not just adults. I think they would have been pretty scared by that as an ending. Also the series wouldn't be where it is at now if it followed that route. Wouldn't have had CoMI, which I really enjoyed. Nor ToMI. Personal Preference though I guess.

[roberttitus]

Arguing over if the ending of a video game really happened or or not is quite possibly one of the lamest things that ever happened in the history of the world. Don't take it so seriously... it is just a game.

PS. The answer to it all is... no.... it is not real. Its a game!!!!

[Rawr]

I can't help it. It's in my nature to debate(Much nicer word for it <3). All of my real life friends used to say I should have been a lawyer because of it. D=

[PariahKing]

After all these threads and these discussions my official opinion is now I could care less if the secret of monkey island is that Ron Gilbert is really a woman who modeled the game after the twist at the end of Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, explaining the Guybrush dress scene and why he's uncomfortable with the idea Elaine and Guybrush are married - Ron sees himself as Guybrush and he could never marry a woman.

[Bagge]

Fight Club and Monkey Island are only similar in that respect. I believe that Monkey Island is a great game and all, but imaginary child's tale and mature look at modern consumerist psychosis aren't exactly the same.

Kind of like how the same eggs and flour and milk go into a supermarket cake and a top-tier wedding cake, its the chef that makes the difference.

Nobody ever claimed that Monkey Island and Fight Club were related in any other respects than the revelation at the end. My point is that if done right, an ending revealing that a lot of what you took for granted in a movie/game was indeed imagination is not by default a bad ending, like some have claimed.

Arguing over if the ending of a video game really happened or or not is quite possibly one of the lamest things that ever happened in the history of the world. Don't take it so seriously... it is just a game.

PS. The answer to it all is... no.... it is not real. Its a game!!!!


You know what's even lamer than discussing the ending of a video game? Registering on a game specific internet forum and telling people to stop discussing certain aspects of the game because it is "lame" and "just a game".

Discussing one of the most ambiguous and controversial endings in video game history is absolutely valid - especially on a forum dedicated to that very games series.

[wisp]

Arguing over if the ending of a video game really happened or or not is quite possibly one of the lamest things that ever happened in the history of the world. Don't take it so seriously... it is just a game.
so far this was more of an discussion than argument. of course you could say that discussing something like a game plot is lame...just like discussing movies or literature. aren't games officially considered art now? so, we're discussing art here...you could also see computer games as lame in general btw. i sure hope you're here because you like games and not because you can hang arount with some lame people being the least lame.;)

Ughh. I hate David Lynch. He and his movies make no sense whatsoever. If that was the direction Ron Gilbert was going for, I have completely lost all respect for him.
i don't think the david lynch comment was to compare his work and ron gilberts. in another thread i also used the lynch example to describe the mi2 ending...ron gilbert is definitely not copying lynch, but lynch movies often contain elements that are supposed to be confusing and make you think. the movies are supposed to look like they were highly intelectual, but in the end it's just a bunch of stuff that is just possible, because it's a movie and won't work in the real work, regardless how much you think about it.
sooo...maybe ron gilbert just wanded to make an ending that made people think...without having a solution for himself.

...and make us think he did.

[tmfm2000]

It negates everything that happened. It virtually means the story never existed, two brothers just made it up to pass their time. To me that's lousy, and lazy on the story writers part.



first, it does not negate anything. just because the game takes place at an amusement park doesn't mean it didn't happen. the twist is just that in the mind of the child, the game seems as real as anything. with a risk of sounding lika a parrot - you just have to play along ;)

second, I don't agree with it being lousy, lazy storytelling, definately not compared to the magic theory. if if you end a story with "it was just a dream", just because you couldn't come up with anything better, I can agree with you, that would be kinda lame. I don't see that being the case here though.. we got plenty of hints and details pointing in that direction.

[Rather Dashing]

first, it does not negate anything. just because the game takes place at an amusement park doesn't mean it didn't happen. the twist is just that in the mind of the child, the game seems as real as anything. with a risk of sounding lika a parrot - you just have to play along ;)

second, I don't agree with it being lousy, lazy storytelling, definately not compared to the magic theory. if if you end a story with "it was just a dream", just because you couldn't come up with anything better, I can agree with you, that would be kinda lame. I don't see that being the case here though.. we got plenty of hints and details pointing in that direction.

This is precisely it: Just because elements of the story were imagined does not mean the story "didn't happen". Also, it doesn't matter if it "didn't happen", because it never did ANYWAY, it was all made up by a set of men working at LucasArts. And more than THAT, saying "it was all imaginary" is inherently lazy storytelling while AT THE SAME TIME saying that "It was magic, so what you saw wasn't real!" is GOOD storytelling is a terrible contradiction.

[Rawr]

Never said it was Award winning story telling, however. The entire game is about curses and magic. The Big Whoop being a voodoo spell to send you to another dimension works for the story. If there wasn't any magic in the game atall then I would agree with you, but the fact of the matter it is, consequently it makes a hell of alot more sense if it's a curse/magic than it being all in his imagination.

An ending makes or breaks a story, I mean if we put this in another situation; If you read a book, a book which the primary purpose of it is to tell a great story, the story was brilliant, all the characters were amazing, gripping and they all evolved, and the ending was the entire story of the book was all in the narrator/main characters imagination, how would you react? None of the epicness happened, all the characters weren't real etc. Not very good is it? Deus ex machina is never a good story telling technique.

The fact of the matter is, any person can go to a funfair and imagine that they're a mighty pirate and do stuff like that in their imagination. I'm sure you as kids imagined that you were in some fantasy flick. It ain't anything special. I'm not quite sure how you see it as a better direction for the story to go than the way it already took. CoMI was a good game, and if you had your way with the story, then it might not have happened. ToMI wouldn't have happened either. :/

[Rather Dashing]

An ending makes or breaks a story, I mean if we put this in another situation; If you read a book, a book which the primary purpose of it is to tell a great story, the story was brilliant, all the characters were amazing, gripping and they all evolved, and the ending was the entire story of the book was all in the narrator/main characters imagination, how would you react? None of the epicness happened, all the characters weren't real etc. Not very good is it? Deus ex machina is never a good story telling technique.
Depends on how it's pulled off. I've genuinely loved stories that use this execution PURELY for it. Others have been ruined by it, but it can ADD weight to a story rather than remove it.

The fact of the matter is, any person can go to a funfair and imagine that they're a mighty pirate and do stuff like that in their imagination. I'm sure you as kids imagined that you were in some fantasy flick. It ain't anything special. I'm not quite sure how you see it as a better direction for the story to go than the way it already took.
I think it's better because, first, it is a shocking ending. It's dramatic. It turns everything on its head, and I *like* that. And it adds depth to an otherwise one-dimensional story, adds another level. The idea is charming and warm, in that we're sharing this child's adventure.

CoMI was a good game, and if you had your way with the story, then it might not have happened. ToMI wouldn't have happened either. :/
I don't think that that's relevant, or even exactly true. We don't know how a Ron Gilbert game would have turned out, and I heavily doubt that as some expect it would completely eschew the pirate narrative for a mundane adventure about Chuckie and his brother cleaning their room or something of that nature. And anyway, my only real issue with Curse(other than vomit-inducing character art) is the ending explanation that hard-coded "it was just magic" into the canon. I can't say it's ambiguous anymore. The rest of Curse can exist just fine, they just should have kept ambiguity.

I think a lot more people would accept the imagination ending if it had been given time to develop in a third game. The ambiguity and sort of half-dream state was played around with in the first two games, and I'd love to see it fleshed out. I have every belief that it could be used effectively. A lot of people's issues stem from the fact that it's the "end", and I think it would be more popular if it was an ingrained part in the middle of a large story arc.

[pilouuuu]

I just thought of a new theory. I don't know if this has been mentioned before. Couldn't Guybrush be unconconcious when he falls with Big Whoop? Interestly most things that happen during the segment beneath Dinky Island refer to Guybrush's memory.

Just think about it. Meele Island dark alley. It's a memory from The Secret of Monkey Island. As is the Grog machine. The dog that takes Le Chuck's hand. Is it Walt? Even if not, Guybrush saw two dogs during this adventure. The parent's skeletons. A memory from the dream Guybrush had. And the pipes in the tunnel? Obviously a memory from beneath Ron's house. It would seem odd that this island's subterrean tunnels. would be connected to Dinky and to Monkey Island. Why does Le Chuck says he is Threepwood's brother? Maybe it's some subconcious message from Guybrush's mind, just like the appearance of his parents.

And when they appear as kids it's possibly a memory of his childhood. Maybe even LeChuck entered Guybrush mind. Big Whoop may be a portal to people's mind. Yeah, something like Psychonauts which Tim Schaffer worked later. Wasn't he involved in this game? And the surreal stuff seems more work from Schaffer than Ron Gilbert.

What's confusing is how much of these scenes are real, how much is hallucination. The tone here is much more surreal than the rest of the game and you can realise that something really strange is going on. And please, don't tell that previous anachronisms and breaking the fourth wall both in TSOMI and MI2 like T-Shirts and "play along Guybrush" show that he is really a kid from present time. They are just the humour of the game.

If Guybrush was a kid he would be really scared of Hook's "monster", he wouldn't be in love, or have difficulty to talk to Elaine. He probably wouldn't have the guts to go to the Cemetery at night and dig to get some bones. He really never acts like a small boy. Just like a silly young guy that wants to be a pirate.

And if he was a real kid... Wouldn't he remember it? Why does he feel confused at first when he sees little Chuckie and his parents?

Why didn't LeChuck told before that Guybrush was his brother? Why didn't he use that knowledge to his benefit before? LeChuck maybe has some characteristics of a bully kid, but again a bully kid doesn't usually dream about marrying a beautiful woman until they are teenager. Even so he would be an extremelly evil bully. He doesn't really act like a kid neither.

And if we are to believe that nonsense that Guybrush is a kid, then why does Elaine appear later? Where is her? She is definitely not an ilusion from Guybrush mind as Threepwood is at that moment in the amusement park confused and starting to believe he is a small boy, so he couldn't be imagining her. She seems real to me. And if she is real, then why would she mention a spell?? Could that have something to do with Big Whoop, the voodo priest, the E-Ticket or the voodoo doll?

Why does LeChuck's eyer sparkle at the end? Is that normal behaviour in contemporary bullies?

There are a lot of stuff that are just for the fun and for being references. Guybrush and LeChuck being brothers is obviously a reference to Empire Strikes Back, but in this case LeChuck is lying, unlike Darth Vader. Chuckie sparkling eyes is possibly a reference to Thriller, which leaves it ambiguous, but I guess it really shows that this is some dream, hallucination and shows that LeChuck is really an evil undead pirate. Let's not be so over analytical about details that are not so relevant.

And if Ron was consulted for the creation of TOMI, why would he keep with the lie? Are these series a farse? After all he knows that Guybrush is a kid, so he never became a pirate. Why does he insist in having piratey adventures instead of going to school?

I don't intend to bash people that think that both first games are just a dream, it's a theory that I considered my self, but after many years I realised that it is not true.

Really most things that lead to believing that it's all a dream, that Guybrush is a writer kid in coma or some strange conclusion like that is wrong in my opinion and I think that if Lucasarts does a new game they have the obligation with its fans to hire Ron Gilbert and that he makes an adventure after Le Chuck's Revenge and explain what happens here in case people still have doubt. I mean, even Lost will have answers to all or most of its secrets. Isn't about time we get some real answers?

Monkey Island has one of the most brilliant endings ever in any medium, because it still has us here debating about what it is all about. But it is about time that we leave this with a conclusion and can have new mysteries in the adventures of Mighty Pirate Guybrush Threepwood. Don't we deserve it after being a fan after so many years and loving so much this amazing creation?

[Barnabus]

Keeping a story going indefinitely just to please its fans isn't generally a very good idea.