The opening scene in “The Social Network” sets the tone for a film capturing the dawn of Facebook Nation.
It’s a breakup in a bar, but the tart dialogue tells us to expect plenty more fireworks ahead.
Screenwriter Aaron Sorkin of ‘The West Wing” fame uses the Facebook empire as a template for arguably the most enthralling film of 2010.
Yes, the facts of Mark Zuckerberg’s social media experiment may be askew, but there’s little doubt the movie behind its creation is the sort you don’t see every day. It’s a tale of socially awkward nerds and the computer code that made them famous beyond their geekiest dreams.
Jesse Eisenberg is Mark, a Harvard University student with a ferocious intellect – and a short fuse. He teams up with a pair of preppy entrepreneurs to create an online social website but quickly loses interest in the project.
Mark, along with his best bud Eduardo (Andrew Garfied), go ahead with the idea on their own, creating a rough outline of the Facebook platform so many people today can’t live without.
Thefacebook.com is an instant smash, but Mark’s old partners contend he stole their concept to create it.
“The Social Network” uses a tricky narrative structure which flips back and forth between past and present – and several stops in between – to tell the full story. Director David Fincher (“Zodiac”) conducts the time shifts with absolute clarity, juggling the different perspectives like a circus clown. And no ball ever comes close to hitting the ground.
Sorkin does the rest, creating a universe where every has a killer quip waiting to be let loose on a friend or enemy. But Sorkin’s script isn’t all about humor. He uses tired story elements, like revenge, greed and insecurity, to construct a layered narrative that propels the film forward at a blistering pace. It’s also routinely hilarious, the laughter coming both from the characters and the situations they find themselves in. A confrontation between the preppy brothers and the President of Harvard University is an instant classic, an example of screenwriter and director working as one.
Eisenberg glowers through much of the movie, all but daring audiences to find something within him worth our sympathy. You can feel the anger and resentment seeping through his droopy eyes. He’s as anti-heroic as a character can be in mainstream Hollywood.
Even roles that feel rote end up being anything but, including Justin Timberlake as the founder of Napster. Timberlake long ago proved he could act. Here, he brings a nervous energy to the role, the kind of fire that makes us see how his character could change the music industry.
Audiences will deduct a few points for Eduardo’s crazy Asian girlfriend, one of the few parts in the movie that deserve a re-write.
“The Social Network” ends abruptly, and it doesn’t evoke the kind of emotions that great art any medium typically does. The film itself may seem hopelessly dated in a decade, possibly less, and yet it’s doubtful any film this year will match “The Social Network” for raw entertainment value.
(Photo: Andrew Garfield and Jesse Eisenberg play Harvard University chums who create a game-changing social media site in “The Social Network.”/Columbia Pictures)
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Eisenberg glowers through much of the movie, all but daring audiences to find something within him worth our sympathy. You can feel the anger and resentment seeping through his droopy eyes. He’s as anti-heroic as a character can be in mainstream Hollywood.
I guess those old days of heroes we could care about were pretty droll.
Likewise plots we could care about…themes we could care about…stories we could care about…
Agreed. Honestly this film feels like it’s trying too hard to get us to like it. As if it can’t stand on it’s own merits. From the raving reviews it’s gotten from pretty much everywhere, that’s not the case, and yet it feels that way.
In ten years time, people will remember Facebook as an icon of the 2000’s, and perhaps look back with a degree of nostaliga.
Frankly, I didn’t care about Zukerberg and Co. before, why should I care now?
(full disclosure: I use Facebook frequently, but that doesn’t mean I can’t bash it.)
I know Hollywood sometimes makes movies with heroes who aren’t heroic, or characters who we find either difficult to love or easy to hate. But “The Social Network” is still a rigorously entertaining film – thought provoking, funny and quickly paced. The dialogue is so very sharp … and it’s rare to say that about any film these days.
Drewster – have you seen the film yet? Please let me know your thoughts on it here if you can.
I did see it. I must say that I found it to be an interesting character study. I wouldn’t say that I found it to be as great as you did. I left the theater rather indifferent to what I saw. But that’s just me.
I’ve found character studies rather interesting in the past, like, for example, Shattered Glass. But, to me, this one seemed a little forced. Like I said, I thought it was altogether interesting, but I was left indifferent.
However, I’m almost always interested in seeing people play roles outside of their comfort zone. I would say that Eisenberg did the part as good as anyone could and I was quite pleased to see Timberlake playing a role and playing it as well as he did. One of the best performances in the film.
As crazy as the scene with Saverin’s girlfriend may have seemed, something very similar actually happened a few years back, including the girlfriend remaining on-site:
http://tech.mit.edu/V127/N49/stabbing.html
My favorite line (from ‘Erica’ to ‘Mark’): “Dating you is like dating a stairmaster.” That kind of sums up my entire impression of the movie. I had to work to keep up, but in the end I felt invigorated.
I have a question: When someone says a movie leaves him/her indifferent, does it mean that they go for emotional connection or what? I love the movie for the technical aspects and how much I actually got out of it the more I saw it. It’s a really well-made movie, but do all movies require an emotional aspect?