Monopoly may be the most iconic board game out there. Its minimal design compliments the dry complexities of balancing mortgages, taxes and lengthy play.

That careful consideration is apparently thrown out the window with licensed versions, most recently MONOPOLY: The Legend of Zelda Edition.

The centerpiece Link on this board game mash-up is the worst eyesore. It’s a tiring distraction that takes me away from the other details. I would have much preferred a subdued Triforce behind a centered Monopoly logo, or just a lone gold and green Monopoly logo. Even the symbol collage on the cover of Hyrule Historia holds a fairly robust LoZ history. Why not pop that in the center of the board.

Aside from the obnoxious centerpiece, the box uses the same cartoon green from Hyrule Historia, a book I’ve walked away from purchasing number of times based on the shade of green alone.

It’s a sad state of affairs when officially-licensed video game products that don’t look like officially-licensed video game products are few and far between. Maybe this is why fan art is so prevalent and highly-regarded. (Hint, hint)

If you’re going to build physical items from virtual worlds (especially cartoony ones), tailor them to the aesthetics that work in the real world. Make them fit. We do not live in Hyrule nor The Mushroom Kingdom. It’s likely no mistake that Mickey’s Toontown rests at the rear of the Disneyland. It is of pure novelty while the rest of the park feels inhabitable.

Martin Scorsese, as quoted by FirstShowing.net:

We have many names for what we do – cinema, movies, motion pictures. And…film. We’re called directors, but more often we’re called filmmakers. Filmmakers. I’m not suggesting that we ignore the obvious: HD isn’t coming, it’s here. The advantages are numerous: the cameras are lighter, it’s much easier to shoot at night, we have many more means at our disposal for altering and perfecting our images. And, the cameras are more affordable: films really can be made now for very little money. Even those of us still shooting on film finish in HD, and our movies are projected in HD. So, we could easily agree that the future is here, that film is cumbersome and imperfect and difficult to transport and prone to wear and decay, and that it’s time to forget the past and say goodbye – really, that could be easily done. Too easily.

It seems like we’re always being reminded that film is, after all, a business. But film is also an art form, and young people who are driven to make films should have access to the tools and materials that were the building blocks of that art form. Would anyone dream of telling young artists to throw away their paints and canvases because iPads are so much easier to carry? Of course not. In the history of motion pictures, only a minuscule percentage of the works comprising our art form was not shot on film. Everything we do in HD is an effort to recreate the look of film. Film, even now, offers a richer visual palette than HD. And, we have to remember that film is still the best and only time-proven way to preserve movies. We have no assurance that digital informaton will last, but we know that film will, if properly stored and cared for.

Our industry – our filmmakers – rallied behind Kodak because we knew that we couldn’t afford to lose them, the way we’ve lost so many other film stocks. This news is a positive step towards preserving film, the art form we love.

Earlier today, I vocalized a theory to a colleague that within the next two years we will experience a technological “rubber band effect.” It’s not to say that we will fall out of love with the magic that tech provides or that we are desensitized to the magic, more so a realization that there are places where magic is not needed. Music production is over bloated and uncomfortably tight, there is an eeriness that all eBooks are the same weight and thickness, and the reliance of post-weathering filters and blurs on digital photos are non-starters. All different approaches to “improve” on digital mediums or mock analog as novelty, now overly used splinters in the senses.

I also predict an increased interest in non-fiction books in lieu of race-to-the-bottom listicles and online publications full of obnoxiously placed online ads. I’m not sure if it fits into the same argument but it feels like there is some overlap here.

Digital is becoming tiring. Surely a great outlook for a blogger.

Variety:

Warner Bros. Entertainment has conjured up the Harry Potter Global Franchise Development team, based in both London and Burbank, to “develop and execute a high-level strategic vision for the Harry Potter brand and its ancillary businesses,” Warner Bros. said Wednesday.

We’ve seen similar strategies with the Lord of the Rings (Middle-earth Enterprises) and Star Wars (Lucasfilm Story Group) franchises. I am all for unified canon management and more Harry Potter. Seems like great news for a potential Harry Potter MMO…

Polygon:

Warner Bros. Entertainment is not currently commenting on any involvement the team might have with future Harry Potter video games.

Time:

Hollywood’s woman problem is well-documented: researchers at San Diego State University found that women made up just 15% of protagonists, 29% of major characters and 30% of all speaking characters in movies last year.

Still better than the video game industry, but not far off. Also, I am slacking on my follow-up to the E3 2013 Genre/Gender Breakdown.

Great read on connecting from Wiseman.

Rosalind Wiseman, Anti-Defamation League:

Young people who game know our bias and the ignorance this bias comes from. It’s this reactivity about games that can make it much more difficult for us to develop strong relationships with young people. It’s also undeniable that gaming is an essential part of many students’ lives. We have an obligation to know about this incredibly diverse world so we can effectively help children and teens navigate it with informed, constructive guidance.