I’m not sure what to make of the MTV Movie Awards.

What exactly were the folks who did the selecting -- the categories, the awards, the nominees, the winners -- thinking?

The awards are a disaster. And they’re embarrassing for anyone who loves the movies. The awards happened more than a week ago. I tried to ignore them. However, every time I go scrolling for some news and information before I go to bed, I see a schedule for repeats of the telecast.

They must have broadcast it 10 times.

At least the awful Oscars and Golden Globes don’t try that. Maybe the producers of the MTV show have more ego or are more desperate to fill time slots than the networks that carry the Academy Awards and the Globes.

Before we go deeper, here's some background. In my columns before this year’s Oscar and Golden Globe award shows I fussed a bit about their relevance. Take the Oscars for example. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has been trying to make the telecast more hip. They added five best-flick picks to be more relatable to younger movie goers.

None of them have a prayer of winning anything, but it looks good from a PR point of view.

The additional movies don’t add much. Oscar’s real problem is the choice of hosts. This year it was Anne Hathaway and James Franco. They bombed. She was perky and gave it a real try, but he turned out to be super stiff and the most interesting thing he did was get caught texting on camera.

I like to imagine he was arranging for a quick escape once the telecast ended.

The year before, the sinking ship was piloted by Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin. And the year before that — Hugh Jackman. At the time he was getting raves from younger viewers for razor-fingered Wolverine. Too bad he didn’t bring a razor-sharp sense of humor with him.

Ratings — I guess — are tanking. Meanwhile shows such as the People’s Choice awards and the MTV movie awards are building audiences.

Quick hint to the Academy: think Billy Crystal, Whoppi Goldberg and Ellen Degeneres. Hell, even David Letterman tops the hosts of the last three years. These people are fun and funny. You don’t need to bring them back, but bring someone in with some spark and then let them do their thing.

Jay Leno anyone? Or Conan O’Brien?

And for the Academy there is the shame of not nominating last year’s best documentary Waiting for Superman. The reason? It’s anti-teachers union.

In those columns I talked at length about why the telecasts of the two organizations aren’t relevant to younger viewers and why they don’t even matter to older movie fans. I bragged a bit about programs such as the People’s Choice awards and others.

And then MTV does this. The network thinks The Twilight Saga: Eclipse is last year’s best movie.

Really?

They also nominated Black Swan, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1, Inception and The Social Network. I can’t buy the vegan vampire flick coming close to being the best. Same with the boy wizard’s next to the last hurrah.

Black Swan — as bad as it was — is a decent choice. So is Inception though I didn’t really like either that much.

The Social Network is hands-down the best. Apparently the network goes with what makes its fans go. Quality be damned.

If best movie isn’t bad enough, MTV continues down that path. Best Female Performance — Kristen Stewart for The Twilight Saga: Eclipse.

Gag.

Her competition: Emmas Stone and Watson. The first for the easy Easy A and the second for the final Harry Potter. Jennifer Aniston got a nod for Just Go with It and Oscar and Golden Globe winner Natalie Portman is there too for Black Swan.

This is a no-brainer: Portman.

So MTV goes with the totally talentless Stewart. Speaking of no talent. The best male performance award went to her co-star, Robert Pattinson. It’s not worth the time or space to compare him to his competition.

The program has some unusual awards and admittedly they are kind of fun: best fight, best kiss, best line, best villain. While I wouldn’t recommend the Oscars or the Globes go for best kiss, best line or best fight, the best villain is intriguing.

Stewart and Pattinson got the best kiss and the best fight is from their film.

As long as MTV is intrigued by off-beat categories, how about "best sulking"? No one in recent memory can out-sulk Pattinson. But that would be singling him out in a movie full of actors that can sulk almost as well.

And on it goes.

The MTV awards show did get two things right. It recognized Emma Stone as giving the best comic performance for Easy A. Unlike her Twilight competition, Stone is a superb actress who can claim to be able to actually act. And it named Chloe Grace Moretz as best at kicking ass for Kick-Ass and as the best breakout star.

Movies are part of how I make my living. I love them. Am I being too harsh? Do I expect too much? Should I just give up and admit that anything Twilight is the best Hollywood and the industry can offer and get on the band wagon?

What do you think?