The Oscar hits just keep comin'

Some final notes on The Season and most of them revolve around the beating the academy is taking critically – and ratings-wise -- for its 80th annual show last Sunday night.

Leading the attack is The Times' own esteemed columnist Patrick Goldstein but he is hardly alone.

Most of the headlines are screaming things like "Oscar ratings a dud" but checking the charts it certainly appeared the Academy Awards was in its usual position comfortably on top, leading the pack in a competitive February sweeps week. The fact that it was the lowest rated Oscar telecast on record simply emphasizes that the Oscars is in a different category of its own, competing against expectations for itself and not other shows. Some years you are up and some you are down in that regard, but c'mon keep it in perspective.

The Academy Awards still draws numbers that would be the envy of any other awards show.

We've heard all the excuses for a 21% drop from last year: writers strike woes, downer films, non-existent movie stars, too foreign a list of nominees, who is Jon Stewart?

Bottom line is 32 million people tuned in overall and many more millions than that around the world. Plus the combined grosses of the five films nominated for best picture hit $100 million in the month between nomination announcements and the final awards, a whopping increase from last year.

Oscar still has it. And yet the Golden Boy still remains every pundit's favorite punching bag.

Some would say the show itself is the problem and needs to be "younged" down (and probably dumbed down). Goldstein says the technical awards must go. We've heard this before. In fact, we hear it every year like clockwork when the usual Oscar bashing begins.

First, let's make it clear: Calls for the academy to drop the below-the-line categories (i.e. sound, editing, makeup, art direction, costumes, etc.) from the telecast are a non-starter. NOT going to happen, not in this lifetime.

Any changes like that would have to be approved by the acad's Board of Governors, an august body that is made up mostly from members of those very branches Goldstein and his peers would like to banish from prime-time. It's our guess that a suggestion they be relegated to a cable broadcast, fronted by stars of "Superbad" who could apparently make viewers forget they are being force-fed acceptance speeches by lowly cinematographers and hair stylists, is going to fall on deaf ears – and we aren't talking just elderly acad members in this instance.

It's called the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and for 80 years has had a mission to honor just what its title implies. In fact, the academy already has one separate show it produces each year for scientific and technical awards. Do we need a third? Or should we just throw any below-the-line Oscars into that one, let Jessica Alba host (as she did this year for the sci/techs), give them all a one-minute recap on the big show and knock at least 90 minutes off the running time?

Aside from insulting the contributions of some of the world's greatest film artists, what would this accomplish? It would certainly eliminate the need for several star presenters, which also means less viewer-friendly glamour, gowns and jewels on the red carpet. Plus it would pretty effectively put the Oscar office pool business out to pasture. What could we bet on if all that is left are a few marquee categories that just about anyone could guess? And don't kid yourself, fans love to bet on the "contest" as much as the Super Bowl.

Speaking of that, sports fan Goldstein suggests the academy turn the show over to producers from ESPN or Fox where the "best innovation and new ideas come from." That would apparently include gutting the show as it is now and making it fast and flashy enough to hold the dwindling attention span of today's mass audience.

We kinda like the "tradition" of the Oscars the way they are now, Patrick. Why do we have to mess with something that has held its own since the days of silent movies?

Hey, we are sort of bored by baseball but we aren't asking you to cut three innings off every game or eliminate one strike and two balls from every at bat even though that would definitely move things along. How about making the Indy 500 the Indy 5 instead?