Movies are not for intellectuals

[Anomalocaris]

If w

e say that movies are moving pictures on a screen, with sound, then there's nothing intrinsically bad about them. They can be art.

In the real world, though, nearly all movies are made by corporations and their only goal is to make a profit. This nearly always prevents them from being more than lowest-common-denominator cliche. The same story gets made again and again, with small variations, because it sells. 

Unfortunately publishing is increasingly the same, so a lot of what gets sold as "literature" is nearly as bad. Great literature sells a lot of books over time, but for-profit publishers don't think in terms of centuries. They want immediate appeal. 

Overall there have certainly been more great books than great movies. But that's just due to the medium being newer, and the fact that it came of age in a time thoroughly saturated by capitalism. 

Here is a movie which I think is as worth your time as most books you might pick up at the bookstore. 

https://www.sitasingstheblues.com/watch.html

It was made by an individual, for relatively little money. She didn't have to please the accountants or satisfy focus groups. Of course it's also been seen by a tiny fraction of the number of people who've watched the latest stupid action flick.

I refuse lectured on culture by a man who thinks Sauron  was one of the wizards and doesn't understand or appreciate the moral  nuances of Star Wars

The flashing neon sign that says “obligatory nuance quota fulfilled, sign on the dotted line” sort of detract from the nuance.