So we’re sitting here watching the 2008 Academy Awards and an interesting debate has arisen. We started off watching the show in standard definition because one of our Oscar party goers didn’t know to put the broadcast on the high definition channel. It was just a few minutes in when we switched it over to the hi def feed. That’s when the debate began. There’s a small group in the room that really wants to watch the broadcast in SD. The argument for this line of thinking is that when watching something like the Academy Awards in high definition you see cosmetic blemishes and beauty flaws in your favorite larger-than-life entertainers and movie stars that you never knew they had. Of course they are human and have these flaws (except when they have had surgery remove them) but the idea being that you don’t want to see these flaws on movie stars as you want to maintain the idea that movie stars are perfect in every way.

The other side of the room really wants to see the show in hi def and see these flaws in all their glory. Moles, wrinkles, veins and “back fat” are things that all of us have, even movie stars (except when they have had surgery remove them) so seeing these things on our favorite movie stars brings them all back down to our level; scars, crows feet, bald spots and all. Maybe we’ll take the debate up again when the Tony’s roll around!

What do you think? Should movie stars exist as other-worldly-beings in our eyes or as normal humans like the rest of us?