In fact, to function as a classical narrative, it is imperative Dunston does not check in. The entire premise is dependent on an orangutan going about his mischief in a 5-star hotel unknown to staff and guests; a hijink-laden status quo that would be negated entirely were he to formally register his presence with reception.

I can only assume this is how our parents felt when King Kong died at the end of King Kong Lives. Or how Yahoo Serious fans felt when his comedy work revealed him to be actually very silly.

It all seems worryingly irresponsible, and I think I speak on behalf of a generation when I put the question to director Ken Kwapis: why lie to us? Why you promise a primate who played by the rules when you intended only boisterous pie-in-face mayhem?

When our formative entertainment can announce the literal opposite of what it delivers, how can we take anything to follow at face value?

Let's face facts: we live in a post-truth world, and we didn’t get there overnight. History repeats itself time and time again. It doesn’t begin with a revolution or an election, but a blind eye turned; a scientific community ignored; a first stone cast; a children’s film misnamed.

Do we have Dunston to thank for today's gas-lit, fake-news climate? Could something as pure and innocent as a cheeky primate - hilariously hurling coconuts onto human skulls, causing mass property damage, ending multiple careers - truly have heralded in something so sinister?

It seems an almost-inevitable conclusion... unless we dared consider the one and only alternative: that Dunston was ahead of his time, put on this Earth to teach us. To warn us. To arm us against those who would give us Alternative Facts.

To save us.