THE US ACADEMY awards have been having a rough time of it for some years now, with their TV audience shrinking and film buffs turning to other awards rites like the Golden Globes for a more engaged affirmation of excellence in the cinematic arts.

Aware of this gradual erosion in its influence and import, the US film Academy has been making a series of adjustments and revisions on the old Oscar franchise, the better to sustain and hopefully even strengthen the awards? importance and distinction.

Popularity

Unfortunately, many of its ploys for renewed pertinence and popularity haven?t worked, so the Academy keeps trying. For this year?s recently concluded awards rites, it took the unprecedented step to choose, not its usual five but 10 nominees for Best Picture. This move was prompted by the realization that there were more than five outstanding movies shows in 2009 that merited detailed scrutiny and recognition.

On hindsight, it now looks like the ?more democratic? gambit has done the Oscars some good. Not only has it showcased a more diverse and substantial range of new motion pictures, but it has also gotten different niche aggrupations of film buffs excited about their unconventional favorites? chances in the annual competition.

This has served to generate greater interest in and commitment to the awards, and has resulted in the most unexpected toppling (by a cinematic mile) of box-office frontrunner, ?Avatar,? by the heretofore unheralded ?The Hurt Locker.?

Traditional packaging

Indeed, the winning film?s title alone is a telling subversion of mainstream US cinema?s traditional packaging of its products. The title?s curt and sullen lack of likeability, clarity and accessibility practically dares viewers to do their worst and not view it at all.

And yet, many of the Academy?s 6,000 voters chose to honor it, because it dealt with the most relevant issue of the Iraq war, specifically a ?crazy? group of soldiers who made it their foolhardy mission to defuse land mines and bombs so that many others may live.

More topical

In truth, there?s nothing more topical than that, and that in-your-face, hot-off-the-headlines pertinence made even the most popular film of all time, ?Avatar,? look like a fey, fantasticating sleight of hand and eye.

But, this year?s Oscars weren?t unrelievely glum, and in fact opted to up the entertainment and comedy ante of its presentation. Its main gambit in this direction was the decision to tap the antic tandem of Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin as the awards rites? comperes. The madcap pair roguishly roasted many of the big stars in attendance, and viewers delighted in the comically flatulent sounds they made as their inflated egos went poof!

It was all in good, convivial fun, of course, and it was just what the awards show doctor ordered to make the long show feel tolerably bright and bracing.

In addition, viewers were excited to realize that many of the evening?s awardees were first-time winners (in fact, all four victors in the acting categories were ??virgins?), and this added to the feeling that this show was fresher and more relevant than most awards rites.

In fact, history was literally being made, especially in the Academy?s decision to honor the first female winner of its prized Best Director trophy (Kathryn Bigelow).

Due to these and other thrilling and totemic highlights, the Oscars? 2009 edition will be remembered as one of the most engaged and engaging shows in recent memory. The movies may now be more than a century old, but their promise of endless vigor and relevance remains ever fresh, ever new.