The tricks of the trade (un)exposed
One of the genres which has been neglected by the Academy Award is the metacinema, which for practical purposes I will consider to be a cross between the complexities of self-reflexive cinema (highly connoted with modernism) and the Hollywood Film (the classical films about the urge to “make it” in Hollywood). Indeed, these films have always existed and some, as Sunset Boulevard (Billy Wilder, 1950, USA) and Mulholland Dr. (David Lynch, 2001, FRA/USA), have even made it to the ceremony, but were, predictably, defeated by other more serious or less reflexive products in the main categories. The United States has always insisted on not revealing the tricks of the trade at the same time that made films about it to cater to the curiosity of the cinema-inclined spectator. For this reason these films are usually about the universe of cinema but not its medium, at least not in a way that discloses the operations of the technical apparatus.
Why are these films not viewed as serious enough and artistic enough to be awarded Oscars by the Academy in the categories of Best Film, Best Director, Best Screenplay, and Best Cinematography? Are they being discarded for the same reasons that comedy and musicals usually are? Or are they being punished for being too unveiling? Or is the industry going for commercial products that can easily pushed on a global scale and make a profit?