Yay, Hollywood is political. (The shock of the century, no doubt.)

In an article that was written the day after the SAG Awards were given out and on the heels of the announcement that Golden Globe winner Mickey Rourke has decided to participate in Vince McMahon's sports entertainment spectacle Wrestlemania, pundits and the like think that Mickey Rourke's effort to be a case of life imitating art will cost him an Oscar. Now, there isn't much of an opinion on this to say that this is a legitimate issue. While the NY Mag article says that there's an implicit anti-Wrestlemania bias, they also have not had a major pro wrestling movie that has been solid enough to warrant even caring about such a thing. So basically, no one truly knows the truth in this situation.

However, if the issue of Sean Penn's performance and Mickey Rourke's performance is being decided because the latter actually wants to embrace the thing he portrayed, I see that as a non-issue. Of course, I'm viewing things through the scope of a perfect world where scripted sport is somehow shunned when scripted entertainment is seen as okay. But then again, that's another point for another time.

What is the point is the ridiculous possibility of something that's seen as "lower entertainment" being the cause of another's downfall and not say THE PERFORMANCE. Again, of course, politics is nothing new in Hollywood. Still, you kind of want some release from that perspective and that feeling that hey, maybe the BEST PERFORMANCE OF THE YEAR can win for such an achievement. Will that future subjectively ever happen? Well, no. But maybe I'm a dreamer. Maybe I'm just idealizing things. Who knows? Maybe Rourke wins an Oscar, goes to the main event of Wrestlemania, beats that Chris Jericho in a match with the Ram Jam, and grins the biggest grin he can. See kids? Idealized futures are pretty cool.