No, the jist of all this is business. George and Francis had some ideas, but in the end George saw those ideas getting in the way of a marketable story, so he dropped most of them and made Star Wars, and Francis kept most of them and made Apocalypse Now. Both got famous, both got rich, neither really changed society, but that’s because movies don’t change society.
You are wrong. They most certainly do change society. I can give several examples. "China Syndrome" had a massive impact on the licensing for nuclear power reactors.
"Silence of the Lambs" is how we got the Homosexual censorship board on all subsequent movies.
"One flew over the Cuckoo's Nest" finished off what the book started, which was a complete flip on the national attitude regarding involuntary incarceration. This not only released all the homosexuals out of the asylums, it released all the other sorts of crazies into our society as well.
"To Kill A Mockingbird" was instrumental in passing the 24th Amendment and the Civil Rights act of 1964. Both of which have opened the door for massive abuse by the Federal Government.
"I was a fugitive from a chain gang" and "I don't want to die" softened the public's attitude towards both incarceration and the death penalty.
You have not a freakin clue. Movies (and books) do indeed change society. According to Abraham Lincoln, Harriet Beecher Stowe basically triggered the Civil War with her book "Uncle Tom's Cabin."
"The Jungle" caused massive upheaval in the Meatpacking industry and thereby created the Federal inspection system."
Not all movies or books have significant societal impact, but many do, and significant societal impact is often what their creators are attempting. Sometimes they succeed.