I think you're overstating the importance of investors. With the exception of a few firms (Sequoia, Accel, Union Square and maybe 10 others) whose mere name probably brings you some advantage, most VCs are not all that special (look at the returns data for proof).

If you're partnered with a middle-of-the-road VC, the reality is that not all their children (portfolio companies) are equal in their own eyes. Investors are generally aiming for "return the fund exits" and of their own admission, of 10 investments, it might be 1 company that does this.

Given they are in it for a financial return and they have limited time to allocate to companies, they will as self-interest dictates spend more time with the winners in their portfolio vs. duds.

Your celebrity analogy is a good one except it breaks down because investors have to be promiscuous. You are not the only special snowflake in their world that they'll take to parties and if anything, they're going to want to show up at the party with their "trophy portfolio company" -- not some broken or even doing ok company.

There is immense survivorship bias in the ecosystem. Those doing well get even more attention while the others shrivel up and go away. The thing is those companies that die get little attention as founders and investors generally don't want to advertise failures.