Can You Separate the Art from the Artist? Ethics, Cinema, and Cancel Culture

Introduction: A Cinema Fan's Dilemma

As someone who deeply loves cinema, I often find myself wrestling with the ethics of watching films made by problematic or cancelled artists. It's an issue I wish were easier to resolve, but the reality is complex — especially when you care deeply about the art form.

This year's Cannes Film Festival brought those questions to the fore again for me.

Cannes, Cinema, and the Contradictions We Scroll Through

Living in France, I can't avoid Cannes coverage — even if I want to. Instagram was flooded with paparazzi shots and media buzz. As a film lover, my focus has never been on celebrity culture. If a film is good, I'll feel it when I watch it. All the rest — red carpets, interviews, glamour — is just noise.

That said, some moments stood out. Martin Jauvat, a young filmmaker I admire, was at Cannes with his film Baise-en-Ville. His earlier work, Grand Paris, was an indie gem that doubled as a love letter to Paris's often-misrepresented northern suburbs. His success makes me feel hopeful about the future of cinema in Europe.

But not all Cannes coverage felt uplifting.

When Celebration Feels Complicit — The Tom Cruise Problem

I was unsettled to see Tom Cruise being lauded as a cinematic hero. His deep and vocal association with the Church of Scientology — a group accused of abusive and manipulative practices — makes his continued celebration in global media a source of discomfort for many, myself included.

While it's important to be cautious in how we speak about powerful institutions, it's equally important to hold space for honest conversations. Documentaries like Going Clear, and the testimony of former members of the organisation, have raised serious ethical questions about Scientology's practices — and Cruise's role as a highly visible and enthusiastic representative cannot be ignored.

Celebrating someone so instrumental in a controversial organisation, particularly at public events meant to honour human creativity and artistic excellence, feels ethically problematic.

Wrestling with the Art–Artist Divide

This brings us to a broader, thornier question: what do we do with art created by problematic people?

At one end of the spectrum, there are those who say, "I separate the art from the artist."

At the other end, "I will never watch a film made by someone whose actions I find unethical."

As with anything in life, an extremist positions on this is hard square the reality of life, so most of us fall somewhere in between.

My Own Approach — Case by Case

Roman Polanski: I do still watch Polanski's films. They are masterful pieces of cinema, and my engagement is highly limited — I avoid contributing financially to his career and only revisit his work occasionally, given the discomfort it stirs. I'm slowly working my way through his body of work, at the rate of around one film a year.

Woody Allen: I no longer watch Woody Allen's films, even if the viewing doesn't support him financially. His films often mirror aspects of his personal life, particularly around sex and power, making the experience feel unsettling. The intimacy of his storytelling used to be the appeal—but now, that same intimacy raises ethical red flags.

Tom Cruise: For me, avoiding Cruise's work is simple. I don't find his films to be artistically significant. And the praise he receives — usually for doing a fraction of the stunt work that professional stunt people do every day without recognition — feels misplaced. The true artists in these productions are often invisible.

Yet avoiding his films also means denying support to other collaborators, whose work I do respect. This is the collateral damage that one person's actions can have in collective art form like film.

Cultural Differences — France vs the Anglosphere

Living in France, I see a different relationship to "cancel culture." In the U.S. or UK, cultural celebration and moral standing often go hand-in-hand. In France, not so much.

Take Robespierre: a metro station is named after him. Or Serge Gainsbourg, who had a new station inaugurated under his name in 2023. For many French people, these honours are about cultural influence, not moral purity.

It's a form of historical compartmentalisation that I admire for its intellectual honesty — but I don't fully share.

To me, the people we choose to elevate and honour reflect our collective aspirations. No one is perfect, but some people are more deserving of being on our pedestals than others.

Self-Reflection Questions

1. Which problematic artist (filmmaker, actor, musician, etc.) do you find hardest to disengage from? Why?
   

2. Have you ever felt conflicted about enjoying a piece of art? What was the tipping point?
   

3. Do you think it's possible to fully separate art from its creator? What are the risks or rewards of doing so?
   

4. How do you decide whether to consume content made by someone with a harmful history?
   

5. If you are an artist or creator yourself, how would you want people to treat your work in light of your personal failings?
   

Group or Partner Discussion Prompts

1. How do cultural norms in your country shape your views on cancel culture?
2. Would you ever stop supporting an artist you love based on new information?
3. What do you think we lose — or gain — when we stop engaging with work made by problematic people?

Activity: Media Audit

1. Choose a film or series you've recently watched and research the creators involved.
   

2. List their known controversies (if any), focusing on well-researched sources.

3. Write a personal reflection (100–300 words) on how this knowledge changes or doesn't change your view of the work.