The parent is not disagreeing imo, just that an artist feels their art/message is their primary responsibility and a financiers primary responsibility is making money. Just as someone else's responsibility might be showcasing poverty or delivering a political message. Most of these basis are covered as the "art" market is very large.

> You can make a joke about Holocaust and say "hey, the purpose is to entertain" and expect not to offend people?

I don't understand this analogy with relation to the parent post.

> I think it's a good thing these issues are brought up.

I also believe this. I think it is important we question the status quo and convention to assess what has value. I agree with the parent comment that after these questions I came to a similar conclusion.

Cinema is entertainment but the side effect of making people think is undeniable.