Films is less important form of art than literature or painting. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There was debate over which form of art is more important, literature and painting or movies and films. From my perspective, films is a pervasive art that has abundant influence in major groups of people, which make it as much crucial as other sorts of art Firstly, it is undeniable that films and movies are more accessible to contemporary people than classic literature or paintings. This is because the movies are full of motion and dialogue, which makes it an exciting way to connect people via vision and imagination. For example, although Van Goth’s pictures are credited as some of the most valuable in the world, regular people find them hard to access and emphasize with these. By remembering famous films, they become more close with the working class and make those pictures become symbols over time. Second, films have as much historical and cultural significance as other forms of art. Compared with literatures and painting, which used to considered one of the most abstract form, with the creativity of human, films are evolving to become more diverse and reflect multiple aspects of life toward multiple types of viewers from professors to normal audiences. Take Historical films for example, it can bring into relief hidden or competing histories that either challenge or compliment prevailing narratives and authoritative accounts of the past, asking the viewer to consider the present as being shaped by multiple histories rather than by one history. To sum up, I believe that films are undeniable as much important as other form of art.