In addition to serving as celebrations of cinematic excellence, Bollywood awards such as IIFA, Filmfare, and Zee Cine also serve as venues for colliding forces of influence, image, and media power. These awards are an example of how awards can be used to recognise talent, but they also represent the complicated relationship between the award industry and the industry itself. Unlike many awards, Bollywood awards recognise talent through sponsorship pressures, celebrity relationships, and strategic narratives, which determine who is nominated and ultimately the winners.

For many actors, a trophy can alter the trajectory of their careers overnight; however, often that recognition is based on an actor's reputation, marketability, and how closely they align with current industry agendas rather than on their artistic merit. Therefore, the glitz and glamour of red carpets and televised performances belie the competition for continued engagement, presence, and stewardship of the story of culture.

This article seeks to explore how these award shows and their outcomes reflect deeper structural & social hierarchies, and how they ultimately serve to provide insight into how narrative & image are produced through cinema in India, and whether these awarding processes actually celebrate true artistry or simply reward individuals or organisations with more influence.

Well-known Backlash
“All award shows are rigged,” Ajay Devgn once said bluntly, laughing as he recalled receiving three awards without ever attending a ceremony. “They’re money-making ventures. It’s not about merit—it’s about presence, about doing the right thing backstage.”

Aamir Khan, one of Bollywood’s biggest stars, has made his stance even clearer: he stopped attending award shows entirely. “Popularity, lobbying, and backroom negotiations often outweigh craft,” he said. “I don’t want my work validated by a system I don’t trust.”

Akshay Kumar has been equally candid. During one award ceremony, he claimed he saw a name literally cut from the name card because the person failed to turn up for the show. “It was surreal,” he said. “You realise awards sometimes honour who’s physically present, not who deserves it.”

Kangana Ranaut has publicly criticised Filmfare for denying her an award because she did not attend the ceremony. “I was being used as a face to promote the event, not recognised for my work,” she stated.

Emraan Hashmi once walked out of an awards show in twenty minutes, remarking that awards are “doorknobs” for actors—functional for display, not for validation. Nawazuddin Siddiqui has repeatedly called the award culture hollow, emphasising that credibility matters more than glitter. Even Prakash Raj criticised the National Awards, saying, “Awards have become compromised. They’re given based on association, not cinema.”

These statements set the tone for a persistent truth: Bollywood awards are rarely just about talent. They are battlegrounds of influence, access, and perception.

Bollywood Awards: History, Purpose, and Prestige
The Filmfare Awards were founded in 1954, modelled on the Academy Awards. While they initially served as a measure of film reader base and star popularity, they eventually evolved into a metric of commercial success. In contrast to the Filmfare Awards, which are open to all films made in India, the National Film Awards (also started in 1954) honour artistic, cultural, and national significance for the country. Despite sponsorship from various state governments, political interference occurs and partly explains the split between the Filmfare and National Film Awards, as Prakash Raj and others have noted.

The formation of the International Indian Film Academy (IIFA) in the early 2000s raised Bollywood's global profile by hosting its awards ceremonies in cities such as Dubai, New York and London. The IIFAs sought to be more than just an awards show and serve as a means of promoting India's culture around the world, establishing a fan base for Bollywood films and generating revenue through corporate sponsorships.

More recently, awards for regional films and awards created during the digital era have added a layer of complexity. For example, the Filmfare Awards South, the Zee Cine Awards, the Stardust Awards, and the emergence of awards for OTT content all indicate the continued diversity of cinematic content produced in India. However, the prestige associated with these awards remains unbalanced — Hindi films receive the majority of media attention, while regional films that have not achieved crossover success are largely ignored.

The Politics of Nomination, Voting and Institutional Bias
There is little or no transparency regarding the nomination process, jury members, or voting methods for any awards, such as the National and Filmfare Awards. The voting tally process for privately owned award programs is not public, leaving jurors' names unknown.

Artistic merit is often secondary to commercial value. A film may take home several awards in public categories despite receiving poor reviews, while independent projects are frequently overlooked. Nawazuddin Siddiqui has noted that several films have received favourable reviews but were still ignored because they lacked lobbying, a star presence or a public relations department.

The fact that Aamir Khan has declined to present at several award shows underscores the pressure to participate in the industry's politics. Ajay Devgan suggests that one must have both the opportunity and the visibility to demonstrate the quality of one's work. Akshay Kumar's experience witnessing the omission of names from award cards is another example of how awards often reflect manipulation behind the scenes. Kangana Ranaut's refusal to accept a Filmfare Award illustrates how the requirement of attendance and compliance can supersede a film's quality.

Even the National Award, which many perceive to be unbiased, falls prey to political lobbying, as well as personal or business networks that create an uneven playing field when it comes to recognition; this raises the question of whether or not awards are truly objective evaluations of an artist's merit.

Case Studies of Controversies and Critique
To understand how the politics of prestige is contested, look at the controversies.

Prakash Raj and the National Awards
Prakash Raj's criticism of the National Awards has shed new light on how they have lost credibility. National Awards have always stood for the highest standards of credibility in Indian cinema, and Raj's statements indicate an underlying issue: that there are times when an establishment designed to recognise and value creative excellence may become tainted by political influences. Although supporters of Raj's statements viewed him as truthful and honest, opponents believed his comments stemmed from personal grievances. The National Awards were already thought to have lost their neutrality before this controversy arose.

Aamir Khan’s Refusal to Attend Awards
Aamir Khan’s decision to opt out of award shows altogether has become cultural folklore. For one of Bollywood’s biggest stars to dismiss the entire ecosystem—and stick to that stand for decades—shows the depth of his disillusionment. His absence isn’t casual; it’s a statement about how popularity, lobbying, and backstage negotiations often outweigh craft.

When an actor of his stature walks away, it forces uncomfortable questions: Why should attendance and televised performances be tied to awards? Why should recognition depend on whether a star plays along with the industry’s expectations? Over time, his refusal has grown into a quiet protest, one that still echoes every time award season rolls around, and his seat remains symbolically and deliberately empty.

Ajay Devgn once said, "All Award Shows Are Rigged"
According to Ajay Devgn, a veteran actor with extensive experience in the Indian film industry, India's award shows are simply "money-making ventures," and winners are determined by who attends and what they do, rather than their artistic merit. He went on to explain that he has not been interested in any award shows for more than 10 years and, jokingly, mentioned that he has received three awards without ever attending any ceremonies, simply to illustrate his point. Devgn's words add to the discomfort expressed within Bollywood regarding the legitimacy of award shows and the complex issues surrounding prestige in the film industry.

Akshay Kumar Embraces Awards—but Only on His Terms
Akshay Kumar feels pride and embarrassment about the connections he's made (and broken) within the film industry, and he has a realistic view of it. For example, he received the Best Actor National Film Award in 2016 for the film "Rustom". He has admitted he felt uncomfortable at the moment of his win because, after more than 130 movies, he was receiving the same honour as someone just getting started in the industry. In addition to feeling less valued, he was also embarrassed by the disparity between his career and that of the award winner.

He learned many lessons about the impact of awards on his career after 16 consecutive failures. He views awards as just one small part of an actor's life journey, not the entire journey; thus, the loss of that honour does not affect how he perceives himself as an actor or how he makes career decisions moving forward.

Emraan Hashmi has Walked Away from Award Shows and Never Looked Back
Emraan Hashmi has a long history of keeping his distance from award shows, stating that he places greater importance on audience appreciation than trophies, and once left an awards show within 20 minutes because he felt it would not add anything to his craft. In one interview, he jokingly claimed that actors use awards as "flush handles" or "doorknobs" in their homes because they don't hold much value once the cameras stop rolling. He has spoken out against the larger discussion of the credibility of awards, noting that if people use awards for motivation or for looks on their living-room shelves, that is up to them. However, he has stated that he will not pursue validation through trophies.

Nawazuddin Siddiqui Believes Award Shows have Lost their Gravitas
Nawazuddin Siddiqui has been outspoken about the hollow nature of the larger award culture in India. Nawazuddin has referred to many popular award ceremonies as "shallow" and called for the closure of such shows if they cannot correctly represent true artistic contributions, citing the example of Om Puri's lack of recognition. Nawazuddin's frustration stems from personal experiences: he was previously identified as a "rejected actor" in Mumbai and dismissed in his early years, while having to continue establishing his presence without industry support.

Even today, after earning an International Emmy nomination for 'Serious Men', he insists he is not in a rat race for trophies, valuing credibility over glitter.

Kangana Ranaut vs Filmfare
Kangana Ranaut has had a long, public battle with awards shows, including a significant incident when her Filmfare nomination was revoked. After she accused Filmfare of using her only for advertising their award show rather than truly recognising her as an actress, the controversy erupted over the fact that award nominations have begun to create power struggles. For Ranaut, the incident was a part of her ongoing fight against nepotism and gatekeeping in the film industry. For Filmfare, it has raised serious questions about their institutional integrity and credibility.

Other Stars Who Spoke Out
Abdul Nahar is the first actor to publicly speak out against award shows for not recognising him and Farhan Akhtar for their work in Zindagi Na Milegi Dobara and splitting their nominations into two separate categories of Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor, so that they could achieve maximum benefit from both actors' much larger fan bases. Abhay has accused the award shows of being "Brand Ambassadors" for the major studios that fund them and of treating them as platforms to promote their movies. Many other actors and industry insiders have done the same, whether it's by mocking them from the stage at award shows, calling them out online, or from the comfort of a Television or Radio interview."

In addition to Abhay's comments, it's interesting to see that the pattern that emerges from all these comments is that the majority of individuals challenging the status quo of award shows and/or who criticize them (as non-organic) are typically outsiders or individuals who have achieved a certain level of success where they can no longer rely on receiving award recognition as validation of their work. In addition, it is interesting to see how those comments are amplified and shared on social media and the internet, reaching a much broader global audience than ever before.

Clearly, just as award shows are marketed as celebrations of excellence, they are, in fact, battlegrounds for establishing and negotiating an actor's reputation and for managing how, when, and where to present it.

Filmfare and Bollywood: Local Prestige, Global Aspirations
The Oscars and Cannes receive the most international media coverage regarding status within the film industry; however, one needs to look at the status of films across different regions to understand how political influence shapes status for cinema on a global scale. In this case, the Filmfare Awards play an important role in the prestige economy of Bollywood in India.

The Filmfare Awards are among the most prominent film award events for Bollywood films. They serve as a narrative of sorts to identify which actors are "stars", which films are viewed as serious, and which are viewed as "commercial". This not only supports the films' marketing and advertising for circulation, but also establishes a hierarchy of sorts in the industry.

However, many criticisms of the Filmfare Awards include charges of bias, elitism, and favouritism. There are two sides or facets of Bollywood: one is the creative aspect, while the other is the business side. The creative and national identities of studios, networks, producers, budgets, and actors intersect in both worlds. One publication noted that many of the Filmfare nominees faced accusations of favouritism. Although Bollywood is a creative and commercial driver for many Indians, it has become more internationalised and globally focused, while retaining its connection to national identity, social class structures, and cultural politics.

The Business, Branding and Industry Stakes
The awards themselves are a business model. The revenue generated by television rights is substantial, and sponsors receive increased brand resonance through their involvement and association with winning projects or performances. Actors use the award platforms to promote their own work - films, streaming releases, endorsements, etc. Designers, stylists, makeup lines, and jewellers benefit from the publicity generated by stars wearing their designs. Winning awards serves as an endorsement used by production companies to market their products.

In addition to being recognition for excellence in Bollywood, awards represent indirect financial value. An actor who wins an award becomes more sought-after for large-budget films. A director who is billed as an "award-winning" director can negotiate larger budgets for his projects. A film that wins multiple awards receives additional attention from streaming services and experiences extended life at the box office due to increased demand. Endorsement deals are timed to coincide with major awards since a brand would prefer to be associated with a face that is currently trending.

The awards ceremony itself has become content. The performances create viral videos; the speeches provide memes; and public relations teams prepare for the events meticulously - right down to who sits where and who presents the awards. Given the significant commercial weight attached to the awards, any assertions of bias should not be surprising. Organisers need stars to attend, look glamorous, and perform, so it’s hard to ignore that nominations and victories often favour the most commercially influential figures. Some actors play along for visibility. Others boycott the entire game. Prestige isn’t organic. It’s engineered.

What It All Means for Cinema and Society
The impact of Bollywood awards on the film industry isn't just that they reflect the films we see; their success also influences filmmakers' decisions. When filmmakers see that award ceremonies repeatedly reward specific genres, stars, or storytelling styles, they begin to follow those trends in future projects. Over time, award celebrations also become part of a person's cultural memory; people remember movies not only for how well they were made, but also for the awards they won. In addition to shaping how movies are remembered, award celebrations create a framework for the construction of beauty and glamour, establishing and maintaining celebrity hierarchies and influencing mainstream aesthetic values.

If individuals believe that these awards are not legitimate, the cultural foundation weakens. People begin to doubt whether an award was awarded to someone based on their talent or based on their relationships, generating hashtags and discussions about whether or not the award process is transparent, privileged, and equitable. However, this same cultural foundation is changing. Streaming services have opened new avenues for defining cinema. Some series are offering award categories that separate popular selections from the jury's choice. Regional films are gaining a greater representation. Younger generations prefer "authenticity" to "flash." As Indian cinema evolves, so will the need for award celebration structures; otherwise, they will no longer be viable.

The Hidden Economy of Prestige
Filmfare is an example of a prestigious award that seeks international attention, but the pressure to achieve that results in even more emphasis on the already established metropolitan, English-speaking, and socially privileged identity. The focus on a global perspective does not result in a broader spectrum of viewpoints; instead, it narrows the stage even further. Regional cinema, alternative forms of storytelling, and performers whose roots are entrenched in their culture tend to be shunted aside for titles deemed “global-ready,” i.e., urban-based, affluent social classes, and familiar to the international festival circuit. Although there is often an emphasis on inclusivity in the films selected for an award, the artists revered within each award ceremony's selection processes tend to reflect the industry's hierarchy, public relations structures, and the longstanding financial interests of the corporations that sponsor the awards.

For Executive Producers and movie stars, being nominated for a Filmfare Award is much more than just receiving recognition. A Filmfare Award nomination directly affects marketing strategies, distribution negotiations, sponsorship agreements, and social media impact. The enormity of the award enables the winner to leverage it in the marketplace. Award-winning filmmakers and actors benefit from the increased prestige, allowing them to receive better compensation, access more sponsorship opportunities, gain greater visibility, and negotiate more favourable terms than non-award winners. What appears to be a glamorous life is really a meticulously orchestrated machinery that supports the prestige marketing effort within the background of the film and television industry.

And so the larger question lingers: do these awards genuinely honour creative merit, or do they continue to reward the same cycles of star power, access, and money? Prestige can uplift. Prestige can also replicate what already exists.

The Takeaway
Bollywood’s glittering award ceremonies ooze star power, talent, and emotionalism. However, behind the glitz of the awards lies a sophisticated system of branding, influence, cultural politics, and strategic visibility that drives careers and creates cinematic history. In addition, these awards further entrench the existing power hierarchies that place the greatest value on particular stars, styles, and stories.

While awards can honour, uplift, and memorialise talent, they can also exclude, negotiate, manipulate, and portray prestige rather than craft. The public can often see that an award statue does not always represent the most courageous or sincere performances or films, but rather the studio that invested in the best marketing campaign, the actor who agreed to be featured, or the film that best fit the industry's understanding of "success."

Rather than questioning if awards exist, there’s a larger question about whether awards will grow. However, while an award is valuable to someone, it is worthless if it is not awarded fairly. If India is truly going to have a diverse cinema that represents a multitude of voices, regions, stories and emotions - as stated previously in this article - if we have a celebration of cinema from India, it must represent these aspects too and not solely about what is deemed beautiful or internationally appealing by the media and an award ceremony. In the meantime, it would be prudent for us, as an audience, every time we celebrate the victories of an award recipient, to also think about how much an award recipient has to endure to win, and about those who will not be able to experience this recognition and celebration.