[Congrats to Mr Siegel for inspiring a new feature, Frak You! I'm really, really surprised I haven't done this before, aren't you? Submit future nominations here.]

I don’t usually watch the Oscars ceremony. Certainly, not in its entirety. Although I am as interested in the movies nominated there as I am interested in any other movies — I like watching bad movies, after all — instead I’ve really been trying to catch up on all the stuff I’ve missed while hiding away from film art in the Czech Republic for the last 5 years. [Except for the ten days a year in Karlovy Vary, that is.] And, for obvious reasons, I’ve been trying to educate myself about Argentinean cinema.

Still, I’m just as weary of the self-serving snark that pundits, journalists and bloggers aim at the Oscars as I am of the self-congratulatory smarm that radiates off the podium on a typical Oscar night. (Stephen Soderbergh, I’m looking at you.)

First, we get Andrew Sullivan’s dismissal, which, besides slanting negative what was actually a sympathetic review, also, as usual, reads like envy. Yes, Andrew yet another party to which you were not invited, attended by people with whom you share absolutely no political affinities whatsoever. I’m sure.

Worst, however, was this bit of displaced anger on the part of The Daily Beast’s Lee Siegel:

The Worst Oscars Ever – The Daily Beast

I’m glad Mickey Rourke lost, sorry but hardly surprised that Langella didn’t get it, appalled yet again by Sean Penn’s smugness and arrogance—he was so caught up with bravely flaunting his opposition to Prop 8 (you could just see the entire foreclosed, unemployed, defrauded, confused, and frightened country roll its eyes) that he didn’t thank his wife, his children, or anyone unrelated to him professionally in his acceptance speech. He did, though, make sure to offer a conciliatory hand to Rourke, whom he called “my brother.” Penn’s private drama. [My emphasis.]

I guess Siegel expected Penn to stick in something about the stimulus package? To empathize with his fans? I dunno. And as a correction to that omission, Siegel sticks in his own homophobic non-sequitur. Exactly whose homophobia it is were supposed to guess, I guess.

(And by the way, Siegel said he watched the speech, but then said Penn did not thank anyone “professionally-related to him”. Well, I read the transcript and it seems he did. Maybe a skinback is in order? Ya think? Or should The Daily Beast simply let that lie stand?)

It’s not possible, apparently, for large swaths of the American public to both object to institutionalized injustice and wish for a way out of the economic mess they’re in. The inability to walk and chew gum at the same time, like Andrew said. Which reminds us of the similar attitudes of a certain out gay Republican and his clueless, brown-nosing, blanket-e-mail sending staffer.

Left out of Siegel’s blog post, and Andrew’s blog, for that matter (Isn’t “God loves you, too,” one of Sullivan’s hobby horses? Nope, no similarities there.) , was the most passionate, timely acceptance speech of the evening: Dustin Lance Black’s for winning the best adapted screenplay Oscar for Milk. Click the pic to view.

[flash http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC_9CIh3u-w preview=force mode=3]

I’ll let you wonder why Siegel left that bit out.

But I do have some advice for him: Do what I do, just don’t watch.

Also, take a look at Sean’s speech and see if he comes off as the gargoyle Siegel wants him to be:

[flash http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dnM8v9aaR0 preview=force mode=3]

[Sullivan has now mentioned Black's acceptance speech in a recent post, admitting it was "superb." But he still goes on to slam Penn's speech. I dunno; I don't hear smug in Penn's words or manner at all. But wait, did Sullivan watch the damn thing or didn't he?]