So, the 2011 Oscar nominees have been announced.

I am very happy that "Hugo," which was my favorite film of 2011, is leading the nominations with 11.

And also happy that my other two favorite movies last year, "The Artist" and "The Descendants," are vying for best picture.

Of course, competitions like the Oscars are ridiculous. How do you compare those three films and say that one was the best?

They all have different stories to tell, different purposes for existing and they evoke different emotions. And still, they are in competition.

Was Meryl Streep's spot-on imitation of Margaret Thatcher in "The Iron Lady" somehow more worthy than Viola Davis' wonderful but subtle performance as a black maid in Jackson, Miss., at the dawn of the Civil Rights movement in "The Help"?

And what about Michelle Williams in "My Week with Marilyn," in which she captures Marilyn Monroe's effervescence?

The Academy loves it when actors play real people, so this one might be tough for them.

What does George Clooney's wonderfully quiet, thoughtful performance as a father trying to keep his breaking family together in "The Descendants" have to do with Jean Dujardin's dazzling, star-making turn as a silent film actor on the skids in "The Artist?"

Not much. Yet they are competing against each other.

Some of the Academy's choices puzzled me this year.

Should a movie that failed financially be left out of the mix?

Charlize Theron and Patton Oswalt were wonderful in "Young Adult," but the movie came and went pretty quickly and didn't get any nominations.

Theron plays a very unlikeable woman, but she did it so well. And Oswalt gave a beautifully funny, heartfelt performance.

But nobody saw them.

Then there is the technology conundrum.

Andy Serkis was riveting and heartbreaking as Caesar, the leader of the rebellious apes in "Rise of the Planet of the Apes."

But his performance involves the computer technique of motion capture and, yes, he is playing an ape, not a person.

Still, he gave a tremendously complex, terrific performance.

"Apes" should have gotten more nominations. (It has only one for visual effects). It was a terrific movie.

I also loved the little gem, "Crazy Stupid Love," which came and went quickly in the summer, but had knockout performances by Steve Carell and Ryan Gosling. Why do comedies and comedy performances get ignored by the Academy so often? Do they think comedy is easy?

I am not sure I would have nominated either "The Help" or "Moneyball" as best picture.

They are both good movies, but not great. I haven't seen "Extremely Close & Incredibly Loud" yet, but a lot of the reviews have been pretty stinky.

Jonah Hill was fine in "Moneyball," but it's pretty much the same performance he always gives. I'd like to have seen Ben Kingsley nominated for his fine supporting work in "Hugo."

And while I know Melissa McCarthy had to be nominated for "Bridesmaids," because her performance resonated so much, I would rather have seen Shailene Woodley get the nod for her strong work in "The Descendants."

Jessica Chastain was just fine in "The Help," but her best performance this year, in my opinion, was in "Tree of Life."

 And it's too bad that the academy didn't see fit to give the Harry Potter series a better send off. All "Deathly Hallows Part 2" got was nominations for visual effects, art direction and makeup.

OK, enough griping. Next column I will give my predictions about who will win on the big night, Feb. 26.

jholahan@lnpnews.com