Contrived Awards
A Consideration of
the False Nature of
the Academy Awards

by
Jack Rooney


I sense, from recent media coverage, net posts, and showbusiness related chatrooms, that many are beginning to see just how contrived the Academy Awards really are; I mean, after all, look at the list: only those actors listed in the Academy Player's Directory, Only union directors. Only union writers. Only union producers and signatory productions and union films. What a scam. Only union, union, union. How contrived. The union actors nominate the union actor's performances. The union writers nominate the union scripts. And all the unionists collectively nominate the union films. A bunch of unionist patting unionists on the back. Unionist touting unionists for being good unionists. Look how great our union is, though contrived and unreal, they sure have the ignorant masses believing they represent the status quo. They pull this cunningly orchestrated ruse on the public each year, and the American viewing audience and the news media have fallen for it hook, line, and sinker every single year since the awards were first created. Union followers make a show out of showing the union shows, and it is contrived and unreal. As the film shows are fictional stories, with made up characters, imaginary story, plot, circumstances, and context, the Academy Awards are a gigantic annual work of fiction. Films are fictional, smoke and mirrors, and the illusional nature of the film industry itself lends itself nicely to the creation of a false and illusory system designed to promote union films. After all, they are experts at it. The challenge of any good film is to get an audience to suspend their disbelief and to make them believe, if only momentarily, for the duration of the show, that something is true that is not really true, that actor A is speaking affectionate lines of love to actress B and means every word of it, that the Martians have landed, that dinosaurs live on an island in the south pacific, and that the Academy Awards represent a fair and accurate assessment of the intrinsic value and artistic worth and merit of film artist and of films produced in America and throughout the world. It just goes to show how easy it is to manipulate the public mind. X is the best screenplay. Y is the best actor/actress. Z is the best film. So says the Academy. Not. In a world where the average reading level is 7th grade, and the analytical skills of the mainstream film and television viewer are virtually non-existent, the ignorant masses are easily fooled because 99% of the mass audience viewers throughout the world are incapable of any kind of critical thought or of placing the Academy Award event itself in any kind of critical context. The event promoters know this. Just spoon feed the public a bunch of carefully orchestrated propaganda, and repeat it to them often enough, and the Bubbas of the world will believe it. There were more than 3000 films made in America last year by filmmakers from all walks of life. Funny how only union films ever make it to the Academy Awards. Funny how the mass mind tends to believe them when they tell it what is best. And funny how anyone who speaks out against this dubious system is ostracized at the Awards and eventually fade from the union controlled film scene into obscurity. This is not conspiracy theory stuff, they do it right out in the open, right under your nose. George C. Scott called the Academy "one of the most corrupt institutions on earth" and refused to accept their golden endorsement. Integrity does exit in the world, sometimes, and many good actors have alluded to problems within the award system and the academy itself and complaints about the artificial, contrived nature of the awards from inside and out have been floating around for years. And although the academy has taken steps in recent years to repair their image as the incumbent keepers of virtue and wisdom, of the status quo regarding feature film worth, the problems within the awards have to do simply with the fact that it is an elitist system manipulated by the unionists in favor of unionists. I believe most of the complaints about the awards by film artists in the past have been mooted by the fact that the artists complaining are themselves unionists and a part of the problem itself, and many complaining losers or "snubbed" artists are branded as winners singing sour grapes. The real problem is that society attaches more importance to the Academy Awards than it has a legitimate right to claim, and it appears this is exactly as the Academy wants it. Strange how much power these unionists have come to possess, and somewhat frightening to think that public opinion is formulated, in large part, by a carefully manipulated and controlled media machine consisting of journalists and programming executives who are too ignorant to see they are being controlled by a union propaganda machine, or else perhaps they do know and are indifferent to it or turn a blind eye to it because of the amounts of revenue generated by the Academy Awards' show ratings each year. Whatever the causes and effects, the question remains, how much longer must the world endure this phony and contrived system of rewarding and celebrating our film artists? Jack Rooney Http://home.att.net/~JackRooney Steal these words. -- Jack Rooney Virtual Movie Theatre Http://home.att.net/~JackRooney2/

Related Article

Email Us

JackRooney@att.net



Jack's Home