The Oscars: Let this be the final word

I got into a Facebook fracas about the Academy Awards show, which was pretty amusing. Far more amusing, in fact, than the show itself.

My friend Leslie Kelly thought cohosts Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin were, especially in the snuggie-sack scene, “Heeelarious.” I didn’t.

My young friend Connor Sands wanted to know what my particular problem was. And so I tried to explain.

There have been a number of stories written about how the growth in awards shows has stolen some of the Oscar show’s luster. What with the Golden Globes, the SAGs, the broadcast critics and the Independent Spirit Awards, just to mention a few, the Oscars have become a bit of an afterthought.

Did anyone really think there was a sense of drama over Jeff Bridges or Mo’Nique or Christoph Waltz winning their Oscars? Did anyone, in his or her office pool, miss “The Young Victoria” winning Best Costume? Sure, it was gratifying that “The Hurt Locker” and director Kathryn Bigelow won the Oscars that each was up for, but was either one really a surprise? Was there any real suspense over the Academy opting for a war film over a sci-fi blockbuster?

In a word, no. The larger question, though, is the role that the Academy Awards has in today’s world. When the Oscars were the only awards show we paid attention to, the Academy didn’t have to work as hard. Now the Academy not only has to work harder, it has to work smarter.

From what we saw on Sunday, smarter isn’t part of the equation. When you have to try to be hip, it shows. Remember what NBC did during the Olympics, what with Al Michaels telling stories of Ernie Banks - a baseball great that no one younger than 30 has even heard of, much less cares about? Martin and Baldwin and their writers were only slightly better.

Some things I liked:

the lineup of the Best Actors/Actresses, with invited peers giving speeches honoring each nominee (especially Colin Farrell - sorry, I first typed “Firth” - telling a story about his sharing a bed with Jeremy Renner during an infamous Mexican weekend);

some of the acceptance speeches, especially those delivered by Sandra Bullock, Mo’Nique and Waltz (who had had plenty of time to refine his speech, having won all the other awards leading up to this one).

Some things I disliked:

Martin and Baldwin, whose jokes were a blend of tastelessness and topicality that seldom, to my way of thinking, were truly funny beyond their methods of delivery (both are adept at stand-up comedy);

the dis of “The Cove” director Louie Psihoyos, after coproducer Fisher Stevens had his quick say, all because activist Ric O’Barry unveiled a placard telling viewers to text a certain number to show their support of dolphins. In this day and age, the Academy, not to mention network television, is afraid of a bit of blatant politicizing? No wonder people are opting away from tradition and toward the Web;

the obligatory dance sequence, which, let’s face it, sucked hog snot;

Ryan Seacrest and all the red-carpet posturing, which suggested the worst of reality-television, “American Idol” programming.

And so on.

I’m not ready to give up on the Oscars. I’ve been watching it since the mid-1950s. The show is changing, as it has over the past few years, because it has to. And pressure for it to change will continue.

I just hope that the changes turn into something good. And enduring. The one thing the Oscars always had was class. And while our overall cultural definition of class is changing, some things do stay the same.

True humor is timeless. Potty jokes and blatant crassness, not to mention marketing, is not.