If they earn $100 and then spend $100, they have to write it off, because they no longer have the money, so they can't pay taxes on it.
If those materials have worth, then they shouldn't be writing them off in the first place while also sitting on them. If they don't have worth, it shouldn't be a problem. Except in some zero-sum type thing where they'd rather destroy it then let anyone else benefit, and then there's a question of if society at large should be footing the bill for the destruction of value in order to stymie competitors.
Now, clearly, that's not how the rules actually currently work or we wouldn't be in here at all.
These weren't expenses (which reduce net income in the period when incurred) but investments in a new movie (which create assets which sit on the balance sheet).
The decision to write off the asset in the current year (rather than amortizing it over time) is the result of a business decision.