Liberals, fascists, and communists all tend to have different artistic preferences. Fascists like Duck Dynasty, liberals like Harry Potter, communists like Parasite. I know people are going to jump down my throat with that last one and there are subjective exceptions but I think you know what I mean. I loved the movie Us, for example, but a lib friend of mine said he "didn't get it." I felt the same after I watched the movie Snowpiercer back when I was a lib. The obvious class politics in that movie repelled me. (I haven't seen it since.)
I also have another idea I want to test out here. I think that the farther you get from the imperial core, the less interested people are in Star Trek / Star Wars. Both of these are basically outgrowths of the Western, so it probably applies to superhero movies too, since these are also just westerns with different costumes. The bad guys in cowboy movies are always the indigenous, and the indigenous are the ones who live in the Global South. Living in South Korea, I was fascinated at the seeming total lack of interest people there had in Star Wars and Star Trek. They also have no interest in Kurosawa movies, at least in my experience, since they aren't really too fond of samurai (and I know Kurosawa didn't just make samurai movies).
I'm out of time, so I'll just reiterate my question: are artistic preferences just another expression of politics / class? If you like or dislike a work of art, is that entirely because of your class or are there other factors?
class obviously has a strong impact on what art you enjoy, but it isn't the end all be all. plenty of liberals and fascists enjoyed parasite, which led to a whole genre of tweets in early 2020. there's a million other examples as well. i feel like westerns are less exclusive to the imperial core than you think, although obviously they take different forms in different cultures. an idealized and stylized depiction of a lawless past where larger than life figures had the chance to shine is a fairly universal genre.
i do have to take issue with the idea that villains in westerns are always indigenous. obviously westerns almost universally don't treat their indigenous characters well, but a lot of westerns don't feature indigenous villains, and many don't have any indigenous people at all, but that's a totally separate can of worms.
I feel like there’s just no way to make an ethical western. The Indigenous are either villains, caricatures, or a sort of blinding, deafening, very present absence. If the Nazis had won the war, they would have made similar films about Eastern Europe.
that's a totally fair perspective. i don't agree completely, but i totally get it. i like westerns, but most of them are kind of morally bankrupt. i think it's totally possible to make a western that has indigenous characters that aren't caricatures, but i don't actually know if its been done.