>>That's all good and well. But none of that has any bearing
>>whatsoever on my thoughts and perception of the movie, and
>>what's I think is best for the franchise going forward- and
>>the Wachowskis ain't it.
>
>>I disagree completely. This take takes the fans- supporters-
>>of said art entirely out of the equation.
>>
>>The second we engage a work of art, it becomes ours,
>>individually.
>>
>>Not in a copyright sense, but when I hear a song, watch a
>>movie, read a book, it's mine, and I get to react to it
>>however I react- up to and including saying what I think
>>should or shouldn't have been done.
>>
>>At that point, I decide what it deserves, not the artist.

Summary: We're all entitled to hold and express our own subjective opinions on the art we consume.

>Vs This:
>
>>What I/you/they/we think should be, has no real bearing on
>>what the artist should decide to do with their art.
>>
>>Even if I said every artist must do exactly what their fans
>>say, that's ulimately benign, as I have no actual ability
>to
>>enforce that.
>>
>>It would still be nothing more than my subjective opinion on
>>their subjective art.
>>
>>That said, once an artist releases their work to the world,
>>that work is subject to the thoughts, perspectives,
>opinions,
>>interpretations, suggestions of every eye and ear that so
>much
>>as encounters an ad for that work.

Summary: ....but I have no right or ability to force an artist to bend to my will.

I can literally think whatever I want, and to a rather large degree, say whatever I want.

That i

>It just feels like you're simultaneously saying your opinion
>does AND doesn't matter.

Yes, in two completely diffrent contexts.

>that you both should AND shouldn't have a say on what
>someone's art is.

Again, these aren't mutually exclusive.

I have every right to say what someone's art is and what i think about that art.

I don't have a right- or ability- to force them to do as I say.

Frankly, I can illustrate this by applying the core of your initial response to this very conversation:

Everything you said was an opinion and critique of my opinions and critiques.

You're 100% entitled to express your thoughts and opinions on my own.

This is fundamentally true.

Yet, you don't have the right, authority, or ability to actually force my hand to express different thoughts or opinions.

This is also fundamentally true. Both things are true, and applicable to an entirely different context.

Your response is conflating the right and ability to express my subjective opinion regarding subjective art with the right and ability to force the artist to adhere to my thoughts and opinions. Conversely, I drew and explained the distinction between them.

Virtually everything is up for discussion, debate, and opinion. Even an objective fact, within certain contexts-i.e, the scientific method, etc- is up for that.

There's nothing sacred or untouchable about a work of art.

Particularly a work of art that expressly exists as a vehicle of public consumption to make money. That, as the Keymaker might say, is it's purpose.

The only art that isn't subject to this, is that which hasn't been presented to someone outside the artist.