So, all this talk of "snubbing." Look, everybody can't be nominated. Do I feel The Iron Claw was "snubbed." No. Snub implies "disdain." As though people were purposely left out due to some sort of animosity on the part of the people doing the nominating. The Iron Claw was released really late in the game and it seems to me, with almost no marketing; let alone a political campaign to get it nominated for Oscars. And let's face it, these things are pretty much entirely political. If anyone does the snubbing, I would say it's the studios that make the movies. My thinking is that the entity that made The Iron Claw said to itself (themselves?); well, a movie about wrestling, even though The Wrestler got all kinds of nominations, doesn't have much of a chance, particularly because it stars an actor that nobody really takes seriously because of things like High School Musical, Baywatch, Dirty Grandpa and a remake of Firestarter that nobody really wanted. Not even fire. The element. And the only reason The Wrestler got any Big Time Award Attention was because it was directed by Darren Aronofsky who could direct the phone book and get Big Time Award Noms. Something like that.
But. A Big But here.
Did you see Firestarter? I did. At the movies. Yes; I paid money to see Firestarter (2022) at the cinema. At AMC, where they supposedly make movies better (and Nicole Kidman, I have a bone to pick with you about this; particularly the Salem Valley 8 in Salem, Virginia; which most decidedly does not make a movie "better." I'll see you in another blog, lady!). Yes, I saw it. And what I saw in it, was Zac Efron's eyes.
My therory, which is mine is as follows: "A theory, by Christopher Reidy, brackets "Mr." brackets"
I think the lighter a persons eyes are, the younger their soul is.
That is all. That is my theory. It seems to me that people with brown eyes are more laid back. Give off a kind of: been there, done that vibe. You know, have tasted life, sowed some oats, dipped some toes and then, fine, I'm kind of done. Then you go through green and hazel and when you get into the lighter shades of blue, I think you find the youngest souls. Doesn't it seem that most of the crazy people you know; the ones who never seem to learn life lessons; the ones who keep getting into trouble; the ones who keep making the same mistakes over and over; tend to have blue eyes?
But then you get people like Mr. Efron, who have startlingly clear blue eyes and it seems as though they might be the oldest (and perhaps the youngest, simultaneously). That you can see the whole of God's creation in them. And the unbearable pain of being. I think Mr. Efron has that; and the first place I noticed it, was in Firestarter. That movie got roundly trashed. Why? I mean, it wasn't that bad. The little pyro girl got nominated for a Razzie. Why? She was fine. The latest version was certainly better than the first one, which had no less than George C. Scott in it. Maybe Firestarter, the novel, is simply unfilmable. And by that, I mean, it doesn't lend itself to the filmic medium. Some things simply read better than they film. I would argue a lot of Stephen King's work is that way. There is nothing scarier than what your own mind can concoct whilst reading. When you film something, you literalize it. For example, The Langoliers. That story features bizarre creatures that literally eat past time. It describes them sparingly. When they filmed it for television, yes, the creatures were more or less as described; but in rendering them as "real" they came across as laughable.
I guess this is a long about way of saying that I think Mr. Efron deserved to be nominated for an Oscar in a leading role. Watching him in The Iron Claw, he didn't do a lot of "acting." But he said volumes with just his eyes. He doesn't even have to move his face very much. It's like his spirit projects through his face. This is not often the case with stunningly beautiful people. Sometimes we can't get past the beauty. But sometimes, we can. Paul Newman, for example. Or yes, Margot Robbie. (Both blue eyed!). Margot was nominated for playing Tonya Harding in 2018, a role for which, I think she was not just justly nominated for; but should have won. But everybody can't all win, either. And not to diss Barbie, but that wasn't really much of an acting challenge. Margot could've done that part in a wet paper bag. Besides, Barbie won the Golden Globe for "Cinematic and Box Office Achievment." So what is that? Besides a new category. An award for making the most money? An award for being that year's Zeitgeist Phenom? Both? And isn't that just the sort of Award Barbie should receive? Is that not the sort of Award Barbie deserves? I mean, isn't making ONE AND HALF BILLION DOLLARS what Barbie was all about. I mean, those Dream Houses and Dream Cars and Dream Clothes and Dream Lives don't pay for themselves.
I sure hope Margot and Greta signed on for percentage points. Now that's taking home the GOLD. No snub there!