I didn't watch one second of this year's Oscar awards show. I checked a few times online to see who had won what.

Everyone said ahead of time that "Slumdog Millionaire" would win everything. And it did. (And I haven't even seen the film.) So what did I miss exactly by not watching the Oscars? Were there any surprises? Was it a surprise that "Slumdog" won after everyone said it would?

I watched a few years ago when Marty Scorsese finally won for Best Director - because he deserved it after being denied the award too many times, given that he is one of the best directors in Hollywood history. Didn't see any reason to watch this year.

The only film I saw that won anything was "Man on Wire," a great film that was worthy of the award. I also saw Mickey Roarke in "The Wrestler" but he lost anyway - so I didn't miss his speech.

I saw bits and pieces and the last hour. Badly directed and the sound was poorly mixed and poor co-ordination in the booth. Missed cues by the director. Poor production with some pre-taped elements -- at home viewers couldn't read the name of some recently deceased actors/movie biz people. No Emmy for tonight's presentation for sure.

So what did I miss exactly by not watching the Oscars?

Nothing.

In fact you gained something. 2 un-wasted hours of your life!!

One thing is certain about last nights Oscars and that is that Hugh Jackman needs to be asked back next year to host. He brought a very fresh approach to hosting duties.

Great show overall from previous years. The staging and production IMHO were near flawless.

The only exception I felt was the tribute to those who have passed in the last year. Watching at home you could not see the screen behind Queen Latifah singing.

Sean Penn, and the screenplay writer for Milk gave political speeches based around the intolerance of Prop 8 and the struggles of those coming out at young age.

There was not a dry eye in the house when Heath Ledger's family accepted on his behalf.

The musical numbers and the way in which Best Actor, actress, and supporting roles was very interesting and a way in which the awards needs to be presented in future years.

Those who were absent this year and it was very evident were Jack Nicholson, and Clint Eastwood.

The set and staging were however the highlight of the show as it really felt like something special, and grand. Getting rid of the orchestra pit was one of the best moves overall. It seemed all the more intimate that way.

KABC's preshow of the red carpet however needs to be blasted as a production with amatuerish public access like quality. Shame on the producer and director of that show as it was a disaster.

Only one surprise all night and that I felt was Sean Penn's win as best actor but at least he acknowledged Mickey Rourke in his acceptance speech.

Hmm - I had heard that Best Actor was supposed to be a contest this year between Penn and Rouke; I thought both were favorites to win it, so you may have been one of the few surprised by Penn's win.

Evidently that KABC pre-show was just for the west coast, in the mountain zone it was Barbara Walters before the awards.

I agree, Jackman was a very good host.

Barbara Wa Wa?

Paulwalker>>"I agree, Jackman was a very good host."

Me too. My wife and I, for the first time in many years, watched the show from the beginning to end and were both quite satisfied with it.

This Oscar show was supposed to be forgettable, or so we were told. But the ratings were up big.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/24/arts/television/24arts-OSCARRATINGS_BRF.html?r ef=television