What else can you say about the Oscar snubbings of both Mel Gibson for Passion of the Christ and Michael Moore for Fahrenheit 9/11? Passion did pick up 3 lesser nominations, but was shut out for the major awards. Interesting, in that Gibson didn't campaign for an Oscar nor even send out a copy of the movie, while Moore actively campaigned for the Best Picture nomination.

Mel Gibson's controversial box-office hit "The Passion of the Christ" missed out on a best picture pick, but it earned three nominations: for cinematography, makeup and original score.

However, Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" -- ineligible for a best documentary nomination because the film was not submitted for that category -- was shut out across the board.

Both movies earned millions of dollars at the box office, although Passion's take dwarfed Fahrenheit 9/11 as well as almost every other film out there. I think the snubbings illustrate just how irrelevant award shows have become. (As if George C. Scott's 1970 refusal to accept the award wasn't enough of an indicator.)

That Mel Gibson was snubbed for Best Director in favor of Mike Leigh for "Vera Drake" (some film about abortion) is laughable. How many people have even heard of Vera Drake, much less seen it? (It opened in the USA on 2 screens and peaked at 93.) I realize that monetary success is not the yard stick used for the Oscars, but let's get real. Without the money makers, the other films would never get made. And no matter what you think of the movie, Directing Passion of the Christ in the dead languages of Latin and Aramaic deserves some recognition.

Since he actively campaigned for an Oscar, Moore will no doubt be upset at the snub. As for Gibson, in that his huge $35 Million risk got him $600 Million in return, I'm sure he's crying all the way to the bank.