Billionaire-funded film companies produce no critique of capitalism

Evidence

Ortner argues that “the general point that emerges from analyzing these trends resembles the conclusions of critical studies of development and humanitarianism,” as “the desires and efforts to do good on the part of billionaires and capitalist enterprises rarely succeed in accomplishing their goals, while often causing a lot of damage in the process, leaving a mess in their wake, or both.” What Ortner and Tyron argue here about Participant Media, I would tentatively extend to the entire category of billionaire boutiques, plutocratic patrons, independently wealthy film, and findies. The vast majority of the films produced by these companies are noticeably lacking in anything that challenges the hegemony of capitalism, the causes of our encroaching climate collapse, or the deep roots of any of our many escalating crises, including gendered and racialized injustice, structural wealth inequality, democratic decline, and mediated misinformation, among others. — Andrew deWaard, Derivative Media, 294

Categorization

• QUESTION: The author extends the finding ‘tentatively’ — worth checking whether any billionaire-boutique film does actually challenge capitalism, e.g. via a search of the libraries’ catalogs.
• XREF: Strongly echoes the causal question of this book: does funding structure (billionaire ownership) leave fingerprints on aesthetic form? This is a direct example of that thesis.