"For example, literature, which by far is my favorite form of art, invariably always has some kind of message behind it whether intentionally or unintentionally placed there by the author."

When an author does intentionally place a message in their work it becomes an allegory, and and usually there is only one correct way to solve this allegory and the author offers the solution.

The other way the way i prefer and i think is less harmful to a story is applicability, an unintentional metaphor or reading pulled out by the reader.

There is pure allegory like Dante's Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost.

Middle of the road allegory still heavy of an allegorical influence like chronciles of narnia,

Or books that have no topical allegory whatsoever and its left up to the reader like Tolkien's lord of the rings.

Subtext in films is not an abuse of art, it is an abuse of art for films to be a puff of air representing nothing other than noise, special effects and ticket sales. The idea of film is that it is supposed to provoke a response in the viewer, whether of joy, sadness, fear, absolute terror, horror, being uplifted, or being shown the destitute and evil character of man.

Even bad and poorly made films provoke a response.

I think it was Lucas himself who said film as art was a lot of pretentious bullshit, and that he preferred to think himself as a toymaker.

I don't have the direct quote, but i remember that from an article on the making of thx or graffiti. Though it very well could have been during star wars.