@NeoLosman said:

"We're trying to make a movie, not a film."

Yeah; movies set out to entertain their audiences first and foremost. While that mindset gave us our share of low brow fare in past decades, it also shielded us from the sort of "socially conscious" dreck which has contaminated our silver screens since the latter half of 2015

The contamination of screens was the manufacturing of the white male hero that is finally, refreshingly, and honestly being challenged by other people who also take up space on this planet.

I haven't seen this movie yet, but it's high on my list ever since I read Altman's thoughts on Kurosawa's "Rashomon" (1950), praising it for reinventing cinema by challenging our perception of what we see on the screen. Altman himself did a great homage to Rashomon in "3 Women" (1977) which is definitely not an entertainment movie so much as it's a mind blowing thought experiment through the medium of cinema. No explosions and t&a, sorry boys.

Kurosawa's generation (1930s-1950s, mostly non-Hollywood filmmakers) tried hard to take cinema into the realm of high art while keeping it enjoyable, just as painters and classical musicians did with their talents. But the mid 20th century killed all that with the almighty dollar--that is, studios demanded that films appeal directly and viscerally to the common man. The sad fact is if you're in the business of creating advanced art forms you're not going to get many fans amongst the average masses; high art is a specialized realm that requires vision and sacrifice from both the artist and the audience. While anything that's instantly popular is, by definition, average.

Same thing with music. The 4 minute pop formula can make someone a viral success and millionaire overnight. Why spend 5 years of your life composing a symphony when you'll be lucky to break even on meal expenses alone? But it's surreal to imagine that a mere 100 years ago, that's what drove art. The pop formula didn't exist. Composers and artists weren't paid or judged based on ticket sales. But now ticket sales are the only things that determine the success of art.

I do have some hope with the indie movements, in both film and music. With technology these days, the individual auteur can create an entire film or album in the privacy of their own home. Of course it'll never get noticed by the masses, but that isn't the point of art is it? I'd like to think 100 years from now the gems will outshine the polished turds.