"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times."

I remember reading that book in high school. I think. Maybe not. I walked the halls of Ridley Senior High in a pretty thick haze, yet I have come a long way in the last two years.

From the looks of the Academy Award nominations announced Wednesday, the Academy members are still walking around in a hazy cloud of something -- some 40 to 50 years after the majority of them graduated from high school. What's their excuse?

Truthfully, there were some "best of times" nominations in the batch, but also an overwhelming batch of overlooked achievements and undeserved inclusions that also make it "the worst of times."

Looming over the congregation of the overlooked is Spike Lee. How was Malcolm X, the best film of 1992, overlooked by the Academy? It's as easy as black and white, literally.

Simply put, Spike Lee is an African American and his film wasn't clean, romanticized fodder like Lawrence of Arabia or Gandhi, so it didn't go over well with the predominantly white conservative body of the Academy.

Just like his Do the Right Thing, the Academy judged Lee's film on the basis of Lee's public persona rather than the quality of his movie, excluding him from the Best Picture, Screenplay and Director categories. I doubt that any Academy member can say with a straight face that Scent of a Woman and A Few Good Men, both of which were nominated for Best Picture, were better films than Malcolm X.

In their long standing tradition of punishing daring, controversial works, the Academy also left out Harvey Keitel's career defining performance in the NC-17 rated Bad Lieutenant and any kudos for Louis Malle's brilliant Damage. Smaller films, which got a lot of buzz during the year, including One False Move and Reservoir Dogs, were also snubbed, as was Tom Hanks career-rejuvenating performance in A League of Their Own.

But the Academy managed to nominate Martin Brests' uninspired direction for Scent of a Woman, the ponderously dull editing of Basic Instinct and the TV movie-of-the-week look for the art direction in Chaplin.

Speaking of that wretched film, can anyone explain how Robert Downey Jr. got nominated for Best Actor? He reproduced Chaplin's mannerisms but lacked any emotional depth. Too bad they missed out on his indelible performance in Air America two years ago. Hell, why didn't they just go all the way and nominate Emilio Estevez for Freejack!

Admittedly, the Academy did manage to squeak out some well-deserved nominations.

The incredible buzz surrounding Neil Jordan's The Crying Game helped produce six nominations for easily the second best film of 1992. The film came out of nowhere to become the year's most talked about film, proving that big budgets and stars will only get a film so far. It's quality that counts -- quality that earned the film its nominations, including nods to Jordan's intricate script and Stephen Rea's sharp performance. Tears literally came to my eyes when I heard the news . . . just kidding, but I'm an emotional man and I could have. Is that so wrong?

It's also nice to see Clint Eastwood finally get some recognition. Unforgiven, which received nine nominations, brought the western back to the big screen in a bold, revisionist style that proved once and for all that Eastwood can do more than squint. His performance as well as direction both received nominations and seems the sentimental favorite going down the stretch.

It's also a relief that Academy voters, in their contempt for Spike Lee, didn't overlook Denzel Washington's performance in Malcolm X. Washington didn't just portray Malcolm, he was Malcolm in a great performance that showed so many sides of the man in a remarkable way.

Yet the exemption of Lee will leave a very disturbing air over the Academy Awards ceremony Mar. 29. He fought long and hard to make Malcolm X, and the result was his masterpiece. It's a shame the Academy is so unwilling to accept him.

I take it all back. It's the worst of times.