After wading through my inbox and the morning papers, five Oscar afterthoughts to last night’s review:

— If you are obsessing over who was or wasn’t included in the annual necrology package, you probably have too much time on your hands.

— I agree with those who have suggested that there’s a level of pomposity to the “Actors paying tribute to master thespians” part of the best actor and actress presentations. But this is the Oscars, for crissakes; a certain level of puffery about the movies and those in them is a given. It’s kind of like complaining that the Super Bowl overstates and unduly hypes the importance of football. Well, duh.

— The ratings are predictably up, based on preliminary estimates, which is likely more an endorsement of the 10-picture format and “Avatar” effect than the telecast itself.

— Favorite tidbit in all the pre-Oscar build-up coverage: Lakers forward Ron Artest’s favorite movie of 2009 was “2012,” according to the Los Angeles Times. I’m only surprised that the Times didn’t feature this news with an ad exploding out of its front page, a la “Alice in Wonderland.”

— On further reflection, the “best score as interpretive dance” segment was even worse than I originally thought, especially the “do the robot to represent ‘Up'” part. Whoever came up with that idea should be forced to watch “2012” with Ron Artest.