That's true, but at the same time, why are we laying that at the feet of the public when one of those "experimental" or "daring" movies turns out to be a huge pile of shit?

We're not allowed to criticize when they fail because then they won't be able to do more? That sounds like a "them" problem. It's not like human history has a shortage of art, film, and music to peruse. So much new media comes out every day you could never see it all in a lifetime. Why is it our problem anymore? Sure they can keep making em, but it doesn't mean we have to keep showing up or keep quiet online because of the fucking off chance that MAYBE someone might be given creative license. And if we don't boo, it gets taken away. That's bullshit to be blaming it on the people who dislike the movie and voice it online.

Cool, like you said, the banks are the issue so maybe Affleck can blame them instead of the people who actually fucking enjoy art. If these fucking jabronis care about a spreadsheet more than anything, then go fuck yourself Affleck and do like fucking Joel Haver and just make fucking movies. He's done like numerous feature films over several years, all incredibly low budget, all straight to his youtube channel.

Henry Ford and Thomas Edison were both terrible people, but both truly loved inventing new things.

Now we have terrible people with no imagination or creativity in charge

I am interested by the movie as it reminds me of Doctor Strangelove, but man I fucking cannot stand Tom Cruise.

It seems to be getting rave reviews from some Hollywood-associated folks. (just going by the article)

Kind of surprising so many critics are harshing on it, as it seems like almost a perfect critics' movie.

Specially when we're talking about movies that cost hundreds of millions to produce. I have no sympathy, and declining interest, for Hollywood movies. I spend my days watching small scale and film festival stuff, or old movies.