Richard - what I thought was particularly interesting about the Capra story is that he didn't so much lose confidence in his directorial abilities/talents as he did in his ability to gauge what a mainstrean audience would like/react positively to. For many years he had prided himself on knowing/understanding/serving the popular tastes, and when audiences rejected the film it was a blow to that sense of himself. What's interesting about courses like Pine Valley and Oakmont is that, for any early criticism, their creators had successfully understood and served the tastes of their 'audiences', their members. Then and now there's rarely high critial praise for the extremely hard golf course; but it seems that, then and now, there is always a smaller/niche market for them.
Peter
And Jim makes a good (and maybe the fundamental) point about the differing economics and resulting life-spans of movies vs golf. Another element is one of eras: Frank's movie came out near the tail end of the studio days - and I think much like the now-gone era of the three television networks, there was only 'one' audience back then, one big mass of collective taste that had to be satisfied in order to be viable. (Not a good description but I hope you know what I mean). I don't think that was ever the case in golf, not for PV and not for Ballyneal. The one time it was -- during the huge explosion of high-end country clubs for a day type courses -- hasn't worked out so well for the viability of the product.