For those who love the Academy Awards and all of its star-filled splendor, there's plenty to watch this year.

Critics are divided on who will take the most-coveted prizes when the gold statues are handed out Sunday, and those who seemed locked-in as win ners just a couple of months ago have been warned that early predictions may not hold up.

Will Academy voters keep up the trend of honoring ambitious and brilliant careers and make an Oscar-winner out of sweet Reese Witherspoon? Could `` Crash'' really leave `` Broke back Mountain'' an Oscar loser and, for those romantics, could real-life couple and new par ents Heath Ledger and Michelle Williams take home matching statues?

And then, of course, there are the dresses, the red-carpet specials and the tear-jerker speeches.

Ratings for Hollywood's big night have, however, been less than spectacular in recent years, and hardly a weekend goes by without a report on the industry's continued box-office slump. The question then seems to be, are the Oscars even relevant to the common movie-goer who spends hard-earned money on movie tickets and DVD rentals?

`` I'm just not interested,'' said Dale Clark, an older man who said he can't remember the name of the last film he saw in a movie theater.

Clark also couldn't name a single film nominated for best picture this year.

`` I'm just not a movie person,'' he said.

He's not alone.

In February 2005, 5 percent fewer Americans tuned into the Oscars than had the year before, and media research has shown a steady drop since 1998.

Some have attributed the success of that year's awards to the blow-out box office hit `` Titanic,'' which took home best picture as one of its 11 Oscars.

The Oscars' problem may just be that most Americans who go to the movies don't go to see the films the Academy honors.

`` It's way too far out to the left; the thinking on the left coast,'' said Rick Guseman of Norton, who said he will occasionally watch the telecast if he can't find anything else on television. `` They're going to go for `Brokeback Mountain.' That's the last thing we should be giving an award to.''

Like Clark, Guseman had troubling recalling the last movie he's seen in a theater, but finally remembered it was the new thriller `` Firewall.'' He saw it on a trip because he was bored. `` It was good,'' he said. `` But, if I wait (for movies), I can get them for a third of the price. It's not that I'm cheap, but the popcorn prices!''

Some of his friends agreed.

It's not really the ticket prices they mind, but the expensive snacks and soft drinks.

With cable television delivering movies to their home, on occasion even before they hit rental shelves, it's just convenient, and much cheaper to enjoy a movie and a home-made bowl of popcorn on the couch.

`` It's just too easy,'' said Debbie Weiss, who goes to the movies about once a year. `` And, if I fall asleep in the middle, you have it for 24 hours.''

Then, there are those on the other end of the Oscar spectrum.

Weiss' friend, Michelle Reid, said she does watch the Oscars. She also watches the red-carpet telecast, and keeps up with the usual barrage of pre-Oscar specials.

She liked a recent one that featured clips of stars, including best supporting actor nominee Jake Gyllenhall, before they were really famous.

`` I like all the stars, the dresses; it's fun,'' Reid said, though she has seen only one nominated film, `` Crash.''

`` We go to see the big production (movies), but other than that, we watch at home,'' she said. `` It's like 40 bucks to go the movies.''