It's kinda cool to see O'Hehir and Zacharek sitting there chatting, after spending the past year reading their reviews. It's funny because you can see how their personalities are a reflection of their writing (or vice-versa). Andrew seems a little more reserved but there's a well of underlying wit there (that rarely pops out, but when it does, it's potent). Stephanie seems to be the more emotions-on-her-sleeve person. If a movie were a flower, Andrew would walk up, politely sniff the flower and take notes. Stephanie would be the one who walks up, closes her eyes, tilts her head up a bit and takes a deep, bosom-heaving breath, with arms thrown back as if by an invisible wind. Yeah, that's it. The unfortunate thing for her is, Stephanie tends to review more of the films that smell like poo.

So while Andrew is the Sherlock Holmes of movie reviewing (and his cranium seems designed to hold that hat), Stephanie Zacharek is like a character inspecting the smell machine or Henry Moore-ish sculpture in "Harold & Maude."

One other thing: If these two are the Siskel & Ebert of Salon, O'Hehir is the Siskel, but Zacharek is not the Ebert -- she's the woman who is trapped in Ebert's body.

I don't feel all that invested in this year's Oscars--I haven't seen most of the films, and I'm just not wiling to pay $10 to see most of them. However, I have seen The Visitor and Frozen River, and Richard Jenkins' and Melisssa Leo's performances are so effective because, as character actors, both are able to be subtle and unglamorous. Jenkins in particular--his character doesn't have any grand, emotional scene (even the scene at the detention center is understated compared to other "Oscar moments"), but it is such a delicate, nuanced depiction of a man jolted out of stasis that it lingers for a long time. And Leo's performance is dignified and natural as well.