>> “That is a determinant of what makes a good investment,” Brody added. “It is not a determinant of what makes a good film.”
Coppola is no Fellini, nor a Michael Bay. I feel film artists lose their ability to make art when their brain is infected by money and power. This happened to Spielberg and Lucas. It's okay. It's how Hollywood unfolds. Coppola should have restricted his budget and hired someone who is brave enough to tell him when he's wrong.
Creativity blossoms under constraint.
That happened to Spike Lee, with his "Malcolm X" movie. The big problem was length. The completion bond company pulled the plug at one point. Lee found enough rich black people to bail out the production, and eventually released the 202 minute version. It was a critical success, but just too long to make money in theaters.
With the notable exception of "Gone with the Wind", few Hollywood films over 3 hours made money.[1] This is less of a problem today, because there are alternatives to theatrical distribution. Long-form mini-series are a thing, and home screens are good enough for epic movies.
IMdb says of Megalopolis, "It's 138 minutes long, but feels like it exceeds the three hour mark." The worst of both worlds.
[1] https://www.digitaltrends.com/movies/the-longest-hollywood-m...
>> "... artists lose their ability to make art when their brain is infected by money and power."
I disagree. It's largely age based. Especially for filmmakers as novelty is part of the appeal of movies. As the artist ages, I think Yeats said it best: "What can I but enumerate old themes".
Coppola is 85. How many octogenarians are still creatively significant? Yes, they can still put out an album or a film or a book, but their best days are behind them.
Coppola paid for "Megalopolis" out of his own pocket. He wrote and directed the story and cast the actors that he wanted. What is art in its purist form but the self-expression on an individual?
Previously, Coppola mortgaged his home and went legendarily overtime and overbudget for "Apocalypse Now". That's regarded as a classic and was lauded in its time. "Megalopolis", not so much, though time could add a new perspective, as sometimes art becomes more favorably viewed upon reflection.
It’s not just age. Martin Scorsese is still making exceptional films. So is Clint Eastwood.
I don't think Spielberg ever lost it. He's made a lot of exceptional films since E.T. or Raiders of the Lost Ark or whenever you could say he had power and money. Saving Pricate Ryan, Schindler's List, Jurrassic Park, etc. Even clunkers like Ready Player One show how great a director he really is.