You keep coming back to this idea that if something makes money it must have be the 'right' thing to do (artistically or commerically or both).

And I just don't feel that's the case.

In this instance it's flawed logic for a number of reasons. The orginal drafts of those scripts that he’d had those changes ordered to, (the versions of them that had initially gained their original writers 'buzz' doing the studio rounds), those versions were NEVER filmed so we have no point of comparison. No means of directly calculating the degree to which the changes Sandler ordered and (that his studio writers) implimented to those movies, may or may not have translated directly to an increase (or decrease) in profit.

Would Alexander Payne's I now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry (starring someone else) have made more money than the Barry Fanaro's Adam Sandler star vechile that we the audience actually got in the end? No one can say for certain either way. All you can do is track down different versions, read them in script form and draw your own conclusions about impact (posetive or negative) that those changes have had on the story.

Profit/loss/revenue etc in the film industry doesn’t work the way you are suggesting it does and this isn’t the time and place to get into why. But take my word for it.

Anyway...that's besides the point.

I’m coming at this from the perspective that I think writers/artists and creatives ought to have some sense of social and moral conscience with regards to the ideological implications inherent in the works they put out for public consumption. Some obligation to the audience to present that which they (in accordance to their own life experiences/and knowledge) understand to be true or valid.

So it comes back to the question...is this stuff the result of genuine misunderstanding and widespread ignorance in relation to social dynamics on the part of the writer's involved ? (something you seem whole heartedly convinced couldn't possiably be the case for some reason?)

OR is it WILLFUL misdirection (based on the assumtion that movies that sell a lie are going to SELL better/more than movies that challenge their audience with some version of the cold hard truth?).

You might well argue that none of this matters because it’s all about giving the people what they want and taking their money for doing so?

And you might well be 100% right.

But if that’s the case my next question would be:

-WHEN exactly did the ‘people’ become such a bunch of limp wristed dorks?