Have you got a case of Oscar fever yet? It would be hard to avoid lately. The annual media frenzy surrounding “Hollywood’s biggest night” has reached a fevered pitch this past week. I suppose I’m contributing to it right now.

Traditionally, tonight’s Oscar telecast is the highest rated program of the year after the Super Bowl. Close to a billion people watch it, or roughly half the number of people who have already seen “Titanic” three or more times.

Luckily, I’ve been able to avoid the fever, because when it comes to the Academy Awards, I really couldn’t care less. I lost all respect for the Oscars years ago. Now I think they’re about as relevant as the Grammy Awards.

My disillusionment with “Hollywood’s highest honor” began over 15 years ago, in 1981 to be exact.

That was the year one of the greatest films of all time, “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” was up for best picture.

Granted, I was young at the time, but I knew a great piece of movie-making when I saw one.

“Raiders” had it all — snappy well-written dialogue, great effects, Harrison Ford as archeologist extraordinaire Indiana Jones, a whole roomful of Nazis getting their faces melted off. It made digging up old relics seem exciting.

I was so sure “Raiders” would win, I was more than a little shocked when “Chariots of Fire” ran off with the prize. What did it have? A bunch of snotty English guys running on the beach, running in a courtyard, running … you get the idea.

Since then, with very few exceptions, anything or anyone I thought deserved to win an Oscar failed to do so. It was like my approval was the kiss of death.

Look at the best picture winners over the last decade and a half. The only ones I’ve liked have been “Silence of the Lambs” and “Schindler’s List.” (Although I haven’t seen “Braveheart” yet, I’ve heard it’s good, so maybe the list will grow to three.)

I tried to sit through “The English Patient.” Unless you are suffering from insomnia, this boorish movie will be no help at all. And how about “Unforgiven,” Clint Eastwood’s epic western? Do you realize that entire film is based on the size of one guy’s “unit?”

Really. If one guy would have been better endowed, he never would have sliced up the woman in the whore house for laughing at the small size of his “unit” which means the whole vengeance plot never would have started.

But the final insult came in 1994. That’s the last time I watched the Oscars. “Pulp Fiction” was up for top honors that night. One of the most original, well-written and brilliant movies of my lifetime.

Of course, by that time, I knew the movie I wanted to win wouldn’t. And it didn’t. “Pulp Fiction” lost to “Forrest Gump.” Why award originality when you can encourage a lame, feel-good, two-hour collection of clich‚s? Stupid is as stupid does, indeed.

This year, “Titanic” seems to be the front runner in the race. Technically and visually, it is a masterpiece of film making.

It certainly deserves to sweep the categories like art direction, visual effects and costume design. But 14 nominations? Forgive the pun, but doesn’t that seem a bit overboard? I mean, it was good, but it wasn’t that good.

I guess it’s now time to do my personal picks for tonight’s awards. I’m not going to pick what I think the winner will be in each category, but what I want the winner to be. In other words, if I picked the Oscar winners …

Best Actor

First off, a lot of people have been complaining about Leonardo DiCaprio not being nominated for his work in “Titanic” in this category. Do you want to know why he didn’t get a nomination? Because he didn’t deserve one.

DiCaprio did an adequate job in an under-written role. His character’s name might have well have been “male romantic interest.” All the people in “Titanic” were secondary to the grandeur of the setting and the special effects.

As for the actual nominees, the front runner appears to be Jack Nicholson in “As Good As It Gets.” While I don’t normally like Nicholson, I think he did an excellent job as the cantankerous novelist in the film. Dustin Hoffman also turned in a great performance as the sleazy Hollywood producer in “Wag the Dog.”

My favorite, however, is Matt Damon in “Good Will Hunting.”

It was a raw and honest portrayal of Will Hunting in the best written movie of the year. Plus, his math genius comes closest to a mental disability of any of the best actor nominees.

The Academy loves a good mental or physical disability. Just ask Dustin Hoffman (“Rainman”), Daniel Day Lewis (“My Left Foot”) or Tom Hanks (“Forrest Gump”). So maybe Damon has a chance, even though I picked him.

Best Actress

I only saw the movies for two of the five nominees in this category. I saw Kate Winslet in “Titanic” and Helen Hunt in “As Good As It Gets.”

Winslet was good enough in her role. I think she deserves a special award for looking good in that ridiculously large hat she was forced to wear.

But again, as with DiCaprio, her character name might as well have been “female romantic lead.” She played second fiddle to the setting and the special effects.

My choice for the Oscar is Helen Hunt’s portrayal of “As Good As It Gets'” saucy waitress. She showed real depth and emotion. Plus, maybe if she does win, she’ll be able to leave television’s “Mad About You.”

That show used to be one of my favorites, but it has gotten so lame since the baby was born. Hunt is better than the show, and needs to get out. This could be her ticket to bigger and better things.

Best Supporting Actor

I have one major thing to say about this category: where in the hell is Russell Crowe’s name on the list? His portrayal of “L.A. Confidential’s” hard nosed detective Bud White was the most mesmerizing and brilliant performance I’ve seen in years.

Crowe had an absolutely magnetic screen presence, and the fact he wasn’t nominated is a most egregious oversight of the year.

Also absent from the list is Marc Addy. He was Dave, the “fat bastard” in “The Full Monty.” It was a very funny and touching performance.

Since a write in campaign isn’t likely to get the statue in Crowe’s hands (a write-in winner hasn’t happened since the 1930s, and that was for a cinematographer), of the actual nominees I would like to see either Burt Reynolds or Robin Williams walk away the winner.

Best Supporting Actress

The front runner in this category is Gloria Stuart, the older Rose in “Titanic.” Hers is a nice enough story — an older actress makes a comeback after not working since the silent film era. But an Oscar for 10 minutes of screen time at either end of a three and a half hour epic? C’mon.

Kim Basinger did a great job in “L.A. Confidential,” the only strong woman in a movie full of men. I would like to see her walk away with a statue tonight.

However, my favorite pick for supporting actress, believe it or not, is Joan Cusack’s manic bride-to-be in “In & Out.” She did a wonderful job making the comedy look easy. The supporting categories are where a comedic role has a shot at winning, too.

Cusack’s “In & Out” co-star Kevin Kline won for a comedic turn in “A Fish Called Wanda.” Whoopi Goldberg and Marisa Tomei took home statues for “Ghost” and “My Cousin Vinnie.” So it could happen.

Best Director

This one is easy. James Cameron has to be a shoe-win for his work on “Titanic.” Overseeing a piece of work like that, then actually having it turn out to be decent despite all the problems, is quite an accomplishment. As far as I’m concerned, there are no other best director nominees.

Best Picture

Like the rest of the world, the Academy seems to have caught “Titanic-a-mania,” making it the front runner. Everyone says it is a forgone conclusion that “Titanic” will win. I heard someone on TV say it was also a forgone conclusion the ship would reach New York when it set sail. That sums it up pretty well, I think.

Let’s face a few facts about this movie. It has a weak story line and isn’t very well written. It’s the only best picture nominee not to get a best writing nomination.

Basically, “Titanic” is a cliched love story set on a doomed ocean liner. Rich girl engaged to rich jerk falls in love with poor boy from wrong side of the tracks.

For $200 million, couldn’t we have got something a bit more original? The movie is saved by the technical aspects and the last hour, which was the most spectacular film event I’ve seen in years.

“L.A. Confidential” is the critical fave. It was a fantastic piece of film noir. A dense story full of great performances. “The Full Monty” also had some great performances as well as being funny, touching and poignant.

My favorite movie of the five nominees, in fact my favorite movie of the whole year, is “Good Will Hunting.” Matt Damon and Ben Affleck certainly deserve the best writing award for this inspirational and character driven drama.

I think “L.A. Confidential” deserves to win, I want “Good Will Hunting” to win and would be pleasantly surprised if I heard “The Full Monty” after hearing “… and the envelope please.”

Of course, I won’t hear anything because I probably won’t be watching tonight. I apologize to my picks because I’m sure I’ve now jinxed them all.

But maybe, just maybe, some of my picks will actually win, restoring in me a little bit of respect for the Oscars.