Is shooting in 2.39:1 too wide for a microbudget movie in this case?

I want to shoot a feature film that I would enter into film festivals and shop around. Hopefully it gets distribution, but if it receives recognition for future work, that would be good too.

But I am wondering if 2.39 calls for a too high budget if it's a microbudget movie?

The cons of 2.39 is that you have to fill the extra space with a lot more and dress the sets a lot more. For example, there is a scene with extras as protesters, protesting an issue, and if I go for a wider aspect ratio such as 2.39, I will need more, to fill the scene with more extras.

However, some pros of 2.39, is it cuts off unnecessary information such as if actors sitting at a table, talking, you don't have to see the legs under the tables, and there is also less of the ceiling if certain shots you will in 2.39. 2.39 also means you can get the mic in closer but lots of movies not in 2.39 have great sound, so I guess that's not too much of a difference therefore then?

Thank you very much for any input on this! I really appreciate it!