What program was Howard Rosenberg watching Sunday...

What program was Howard Rosenberg watching Sunday night (“Bizarre and ‘Beautiful’ Moments,” March 22)? There is no way you can categorize Whoopi Goldberg’s hilarious hosting as anything but brilliant, witty and right on the money. If her “language and one-liners” were coarse or cheap, then I’m Queen Elizabeth!

All the adults I know loved her incisive humor (with help, of course, from writer Bruce Vilanch and company) and the way she handled the unexpected (Roberto Benigni’s popping up like a jack-in-the-box every time his name was mentioned) and the expected (the ever-lengthening show).

All in all, the Oscar telecast was well-paced, funny, sweet, moving, ridiculous, educational and memorable in all the right places--just like the movies can be!

JULIE T. BYERS

Temple City

*

Whoopi Goldberg was the crudest, rudest, crassest person to ever host the Oscars. In a town allegedly full of talent, that this woman was chosen is a disgrace. Bring back Billy Crystal with his light touch, please. There were children there in the arena as well as in the viewing audience, and her smutty remarks were simply an indication of what is wrong with us as a people.

PAULINE DOANE

San Diego

*

Art indeed is in the eye of the beholder. But for this beholder, the quality of Whoopi Goldberg’s performance as host was the performance of the evening. Go Whoopi!

CALEB ROSADO

McKinleyville

*

Goldberg’s raunchy remarks were completely out of place at a world-class event. To her statement that she probably will never again be asked to host the Academy Awards, we say “Whoopi!”

JANET SALTER

Beverly Hills

*

As I watched the dancers perform during the show, I couldn’t help but wonder who approved such a bizarre “tribute.”

Yes, the dancing itself was wonderful, but tap dancing for “Private Ryan”? I think I must have missed that frolicking gaiety in the film. A nearly naked ballerina honoring “Elizabeth”? Perhaps her routine was a subliminal tribute to the upcoming “Star Wars” movie. After all, she’d be better suited to the court of Jabba the Hutt.

Why so much spectacle and so little good taste?

NANCY ROCKS

Philadelphia

*

To the academy: Enough! Four hours is too long. The reason for the low ratings is simple: There are more of us than there are of you and we’re bored to tears.

Let Gil Cates hang out with Roberto Benigni for a couple of days. Make the cuts. Pick up the pace. Give us a reason to care.

MICHAEL BELL

Bakersfield

*

As touching as all the “thank-yous” were, did anyone notice that not one winner from “Shakespeare in Love” bothered to thank, acknowledge or indeed even mention the Bard by name? For the producers and (gasp) the writers to omit some passing reference to the sole inspiration of their story is beyond belief.

But then again, that’s Hollywood.

CHARLES FOGARTY

DAVID NICHOLS

Los Angeles