"Strip Monopoly" might sound like a fun game but I can think of several problems with this mode of play. For one, this notion that players are to strip "instead of paying rent" - um, doesn't that negate Monopoly's entire in-game economy? Here's just one hypothetical scenario that shows the cracks in paying rent by stripping: Let's say I invest all of my money in building hotels on the orange properties (St. James Place, New York Avenue, and Tennessee Avenue, considered by experts to be the most powerful properties in the game). Then, one of my opponents lands on one of my hotels. They strip naked (it's not clarified whether higher rent equals greater levels of nudity, but let's assume for the sake of argument that it does), but they still have all their money and I'm still broke! Perhaps if some kind of barter system were in place, a workable secondary clothing-based economy could be arranged (for instance - "I'll trade you my windbreaker for your Water Works" or "I'll give my blouse to the bank if you put Park Place up for auction"), but one of the players in the movie specifically overrules this idea by saying that you can't get your clothes back by landing on Community Chest. Well, why not? You've rendered the money in the game practically worthless, so why not restore at least some of Monopoly's proper working mechanics? There's a reason that Monopoly is one of the longest-running and most popular board games of all time, and it isn't because you can just make up or change its thoughtfully-calibrated game components whenever you feel like it.