Oh, sweet Hollywood irony! Just two years after the Oscars gave "Dreamgirls" one of the most insulting slaps in its history, academy chiefs asked its producer Laurence Mark and director, Bill Condon, to oversee their struggling show.

Continually bringing back Gil Cates and the other usual suspects wasn't working. Why not try some new blood?

Condon is an interesting pick in so many ways. Not only is he an Oscar champ (best screenplay, "Gods and Monsters," 1998), he is a learned student of the mighty kudosfest. In fact, Bill is one of the most fanatic Oscar nuts I know. Whenever we've spoken, I've been impressed by his intimate knowledge of Academy Awards lore — 30, 40, even 70 years ago.

But he's also perfect in the sense that he's a kind-hearted gent who isn't the type of person to hold a grudge against the academy, which, frankly, he has every right to do.

Just before the announcement of Oscar noms two years ago, it seemed inevitable that "Dreamgirls" would receive a best picture nomination. It was an obvious hit. "This baby dazzles like nothing else anywhere!" cheered Rolling Stone. "'Dreamgirls' is the rare movie musical with real rapture in it!" cried Entertainment Weekly. Similar raves came from Variety, Newsweek, The New Yorker, the Los Angeles Times, etc.

When "Dreamgirls" was released to theaters, it earned roaring standing ovations and an impressive $103 million in tix sales.

At the Golden Globes, it won best picture. Among the industry kudos, it reaped the equivalent of best-picture nominations from the producers', directors' and screen actors' guilds.

Then, on Oscar nominations morn, it ended up nabbing more bids than any other pic — eight. But none, shockingly, for best picture. The snub was unprecedented. Never before in Oscar history had the film with the most bids in a given year failed to reap one in the top race.

What happened? I think New York Times carpetbagger David Carr summed things up best, saying, "The movie, with its gorgeous songs and amazing costumes, was a tough sell to begin with among white males, a demographic that describes the majority of the academy’s 5,800 voting members."

Yes, Carr dared to suggest that Oscar voters themselves might be to blame — that they, given who they are, just didn't connect with it emotionally — and I believe he was right. Although academy members could appreciate the various individual aspects of this fine film — its costumes, sound mixing, etc., which all received nominations — the old white guys just couldn't empathize with the central quest of the hip young black chicks on screen. That failure ended up hurting "Dreamgirls" enormously. By failing to be nominated for best picture, it was thereafter widely pegged as a disappointment of a film, which is nonsense.

Golden Boy has ultimately admitted as much by turning to the dream team when it came time to save his thick skin. Ah, all wrapped up in one: the ultimate Hollywood revenge for the dream team and the ultimate Hollywood Happy Ending too.

Hey, memo to my fellow Oscar nut, Bill Condon: Hire Will Smith as host. He's the biggest, sexiest, coolest star in Hollywood and he'd pull in the most eyeballs from all over the world. Sure, it's possible that he might be nominated for "Seven Pounds," but, as you know being a trivia nut, he wouldn't be the only nominee who has hosted. The last: Paul Hogan (nominee for best original screenplay, "Crocodile Dundee") in 1986.