HORROR?

"It`s a misconception to believe being commercial must mean sacrificing artistic integrity".

Well, obviously, in order to sacrifice or compromise, you first have to have that artistic integrity, that vision, to begin with. Which is to say folks like Spielberg or Zemeckis or Cameron or Ron Howard, despite producing shamelessly populist mush, never sold out or compromised cuz there was never really much of anything to compromise (although I`m sure they`re well aware that they`re selling products that are rich with saccharine and saturated fat). They always were merchants as opposed to artists and always will be regarded as such.


"Wants their film(s) to appeal to as wide an audience as possible".

I believe pretty much all directors would like to see their work reach as many people as possible, but there`s still a line to be drawn there which you do not cross without losing face and credibility. Even someone as idiosyncratic as David Lynch does care about his films being shown and known and indeed appealing to as wide an audience as... yes, POSSIBLE - without damaging the vision, taking away from where it really hurts. The basic key is that artistic consideration always has to come first and the commercial side of things needs to adapt, not the other way around. Can`t allow the audience dictate for you which kinds films you`re making.


"But that doesn`t automatically necessitate that they compromise their ideas for them to reach that audience".

But it inevitably does. As Gilliam himself has noted, the one thing the Hollywood bigwigs have never figured out, is that making a film that`s for everyone, that satisfies everybody`s tastes across the board, is, as a matter of fact, impossible to make... so what`s the point in worrying about that, in trying to? And, of course, in case a filmmaker wants to appeal to audiences below a certain age limit, he obviously couldn`t make his work particularly complex or contemplative or intellectual or "slow". He has to dumb things down.


"Examples of directors who were successful in finding mainstream appeal through their distinct vision. Taxi Driver, Chinatown, Pulp Fiction".

Firstly, none of these 3 films you mention, bears any notable signs of commercial calculation (in fact, at least the endings of Taxi Driver & Chinatown are quite starkly alienating, or so one would imagine). Secondly, these same 2 of the 3 were made in the 70`s when directors in fact did get away with a lot more "artsy stuff", and found fairly large, adventurous audiences for it, than they have in any time period before or after.





"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan