Note: I did not watch the 93^rd Academy Awards ceremony Sunday night. I almost never watch the annual event; in fact, I cannot remember the last time I watched one while it was happening. And it’s not for some stupid political reasons or because I’ve got some sort of beef with Hollywood or entertainers. Pageantry is just not the reason I am interested in movies. I follow the results online as they are happening because that’s what I am interested in – the results, not what the actresses are wearing on the red carpet, not what funny or controversial things the host is saying, not the thank-you speeches. Given that, here’s my take on the results.

The Academy got it right … maybe

Awards are subjective (a concept many apparently are not familiar with), but most of the Oscars picks felt, for lack of a better word, correct. Or at least defendable. Only one of the six big selections (Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor, Best Supporting Actress) would fall under the heading of “surprising” if not “shocking,” but even that one wasn’t stunning to anyone who had taken the time to watch the movies and performances in question (more on that later in this piece). The field for each of the six categories was solid, and any nominee would have been a deserving selection for the Oscar. But the winners in each category felt like they were a tiny sliver ahead of the rest of the field, and at least in my opinion. And this space is where I offer my opinions.

I don’t want to talk diversity, but I will

This is 2021, in America, and we are talking Hollywood, and people are reacting to the Oscars on social media, so of course diversity and race will be a point of discussion because those are the subjects we use to divide the good people (those who agree with us on such matters and thus reinforce our smug sense of self-righteousness) from the bad people (those who disagree with us and thus must have something terribly wrong with them). It would be difficult to justify applying #OscarsSoWhite to Sunday’s results, though no doubt some will try. If you are keeping a diversity scorecard (and who among us isn’t?), Chloe Zhao became the first woman of Asian descent to be nominated for Best Director, and when she won for “Nomadland,” she became just the second female to take home the Oscar. Youn Yuh-jung (South Korean) and Daniel Kaluuya (Black) earned the Best Supporting acting honors. “Soul” won Best Animated Feature and Best Original Score; H.E.R’s “Fight for You” from “Judas and the Black Messiah” won for Best Original Song; and “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom” was honored for Best Makeup and Hairstyling and Best Costume Design. Still …

I don’t want no snubs

The Academy saved the most controversial selection for last, as it was, apparently for many, a foregone conclusion that the late, great Chadwick Boseman would posthumously receive the Best Actor Oscar. He was, in most prognostications I saw, at least the favorite, if not a heavy favorite. And he would have been beyond deserving for his gut-wrenching performance as a young musician in “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom,” a career-defining turn even more heartbreaking knowing that Boseman was ill during filming and would die of colon cancer after the movie was released. He was just 43. Understandably, people were upset when Anthony Hopkins (“The Father”) was announced as the winner. Was much of the public upset because they thought Boseman was more deserving? Were they upset because the Academy missed an opportunity to honor his brief legacy? Does their outrage boil down to Boseman being Black and Hopkins White (and old to boot; at 83 he is the oldest winner of the award). Maybe race played into it; maybe it didn’t. Maybe some voters took Hopkins over Boseman because of race; and maybe some had Boseman over Hopkins because of race. And perhaps voters didn’t consider race at all. We have no way of knowing; anyone who says they do is fooling themselves. Both men would have been worthy winners. Watch “The Father” and tell me that isn’t an Oscar-worthy performance. All five nominees (Boseman, Hopkins, Riz Ahmed for “Sound of Metal,” Steven Yeun for “Minari” and Gary Oldman for “Mank”) were sublime in their roles. To say that Boseman was “robbed” or “snubbed” or “victimized” might be a genuine emotional reaction talking. Or it might be melodramatic petulance. And the stuff of clickbait.

About that best picture

I think most of us who follow movies assumed “Nomadland” would be the Oscar winner. It certainly wasn’t an overwhelming favorite, but (for a low-key film) it seemed to create just enough buzz to lift it slightly ahead of the rest of the field. It has a lot going for it (an Oscar-winning performance by the great Frances McDormand, beautiful cinematography and music, Zhao’s near-flawless direction) and is an ambitious piece of filmmaking in that it immersed McDormand in the nomadic lifestyle (she spent a couple of months living out of a van) and included real-life folks from that world. I would argue it’s not a terribly entertaining film; viewing it requires patience and the ability to endure silence. And it helps if you have at least a passing interest in the plight of folks who have gone off the grid for whatever reason (usually poverty). But it is a solid choice as Best Picture. All eight nominees are excellent films. Whether any of them rise to the level of “great” pieces of work that will stand the test of time is debatable. My favorite of the eight is “Minari,” but that was only after I saw it a second time. “The Father” would be in my top three. I also could make a decent argument for any of the other five nominees as the best of the bunch. But even though I wasn’t exactly doing cartwheels leaving the theater after having watched it, “Nomadland” feels like the best choice.