Like you said, 99.9 % of people wouldn't recognize a Patek Philippe if it hit them upside the head. By definition it's not ostentatious. Rolexes are ostentatious (it's the only luxury brand most people know), but also incredibly cheap as far as mechanical watches go.
A Patek Philippe is a status symbol, but only to those very select few already in-the-know. And that is not mutually exclusive with those movements being incredible art. Is a Van Gogh ugly or evil just because some asshole bought the painting for $100.000.000? Art doesn't have to be collateral damage to your class consciousness just because rich people have more access to it.
Capitalism is a system that sustains itself even if literally everyone knows how evil it is. This is part of the fundamental conceit.
Capitalists literally have nothing to gain by "hiding" some truths, as if the masses were living with a veil in front of their eyes that one can just pull back to radicalize them. We were all there in 2008. We all saw behind the curtain. Literally nothing fundamentally changed and no movie is going to come close to having that cultural impact.
Also capitalists aren't any less prone to the tragedy of the commons than any other group of people. One corporation would end capitalism next quarter if they believed it would make them richer this quarter.
The truth is much simpler than any conspiracy theory: Hollywood is largely systematically incapable of competent social commentary. There are occasional brilliant exceptions, but rampant nepotism, incompetent corporate meddling, and a strong history/culture of "character stories" means that Hollywood doesn't know how to make a story about anything other than a character story.
Anyway if the topic interests you here's a one hour essay on how Apple failed to adapt Foundation, with a truly masterful ending on an anticapitalist message.