Last year, as with the years before it, the cinematic world gifted us with stunning performances and breathtaking visuals (we can’t quite tell the difference between computer generated or reality anymore). Luckily though, it’s near as much a certainty that Cate Blanchett was the real one, and not in fact a well crafted copy, programmed to play a woman trying to re-invent herself.
Having acknowledged the creative genius of the industry, it seems that what is left is an award ceremony filled with pretentious socialites (and some trying so desperately to be understated that we do a full circle back to pretence) being paraded and exhibited in the classic Hollywood fashion. Yes, it’s glamorous and fun, but it’s all becoming a bit grandiose. A special effects gimmick that is so close to reality we can’t discern, or have given up on trying.
Here we come to the other Oscar and the televised trial. He has committed a crime and now the court is trying to determine whether or not there was intention. This is a very serious matter, which is why there is a trial with a judge, a jury, witnesses, a prosecuting and defence attorney, as well as the traditions and protocols of the law and the court. So let’s televise it, on it’s own channel. Yes, it’s all very interesting and we have every right to spectate, but the whole saga is sordid and losing focus. The fundamentals of justice proceedings are being blurred and sullied. It reminds one slightly of a game show. Here in lies the issue. As with the Oscars, something exceptional is being wrapped in cheap, garish paper. We all know the superseding reason for media coverage, and unfortunately it’s not for the good of humanity.
You want our verdict? Throw your arms around the Steenkamp’s and let justice follow its natural course.