Le réseau social

I'd put off watching THE SOCIAL NETWORK for a time, suspecting it to be a dry and slow-moving film. After all, it was about the guy who founded Facebook, so how much fun could it be? I didn't much like the idea of watching a film based around people sitting on computers, so I was in no hurry to see it.

Now I've watched it, and things have changed. Because THE SOCIAL NETWORK turns out to be one of David Fincher's best films, and that's from a director whose filmography is littered with gems. This is a hugely entertaining and thoroughly gripping story of success, defeat, lies and deceit, and I was so caught up in the narrative that the two hour running time flew past.

The joy of THE SOCIAL NETWORK is that it focuses on the conflict between the various parties involved with the founding of one of the world's most popular websites. It's bam, bam, bam, with barely time to breathe, let alone get bored. Good performances are given across the board, particularly from Jesse Eisenberg and Andrew Garfield, two actors I'm normally disposed to dislike, both of whom are excellent. Technical values are, unsurprisingly, absolutely spectacular, and it's clear that Fincher is in his element, making a mini-masterpiece out of the premise. Splendid stuff.

...and that's "The Social Network".

It joins the ranks of his best, and just like many of his his previous works, has been reviled before it was properly understood.

For months before it came out, it was the laughing stock of people who were off-put by the idea of a "movie about Facebook" (even though it's easy to look and see that it's about the founding of Facebook and the people behind it), just like "Fight Club" is dismissed as a violent film about people fighting, or that "Se7en" is just a serial killer movie.

Not to get sidetracked, though.

"The Social Network" is filmmaking and storytelling of a high order, that shows the grand irony of a socially inept Harvard student named Mark Zuckerberg who ended up creating one of the largest social phenomena of the twenty-first century (and love Facebook or hate it, it most certainly is that). The story works as an engaging, fascinating character study; at the beginning of the story, Mark is a socially maladjusted reject, and even after several million 'friends' and a few billion dollars later, he remains pretty much the same.

The outstanding acting, style and direction, as well as the great script armed to the teeth with sharp dialogue is what people are likely to miss by dismissing it as a mere 'Facebook movie'.

Even if it were just a "movie about Facebook", why is such subject matter off-limits? Things that have become a large part of our culture shouldn't be reflected in our art? Or, is it because of that? That technology is such a scary thing and needs to be dismissed? The indisputable fact is that everything that's going on with social networking and the world of the Internet is incorporated into the ideas of a certain corner of history, this one, which will be remembered as such, and "The Social Network" may very well be remembered as a film to define that era.

So please, this is one of the films to see this year. Don't get hung up on the idea that it's just a silly "Facebook movie", or else you'll be missing out on an excellent picture.

Fast paced and interesting, this movie tries too hard to portray Zuckenberg in a better light than he deserves. He was not a good coder. He was much more exploitative than movie suggest, as his later love affair with CIA and selling personal data of facebook users for nefarious purposes proved. This guy is far less charismatic than portrayed (and he isn't portrayed as particularly charismatic to begin with) and far more calculating, menacing and Machiavelian than described. The only thing the movie did show worse than it was was Zuckenberg incel situation. Zuckenberg was dating a Chinese golddigger/smartdigger/Harvarddigger the whole time and they got married.

But despite being more positive towards its subject than they would warrant, the movie manages to capture part of the psychopathic nature of facebook and its founding. Artistic liberties were taken in order to humanize these monsters, to make us care and for plot not to be boring. In that it succeeded, but humanizing monsters like Zuckenberg or Hitttlerr is never a good idea in a movie. However, you at least get an idea about the depths of the cutthrooat depravity that was only confirmed by the fact that facebook abuses the trust of its sheeple all the time, and a movie is fun to watch, and deserves a praise even if it is an idealised/sanitized/overseksed version of the sorry reality this movie is based on, and as a movie is well worth a watch, but keep in mind the reality was much darker and more boring at the same time.

As Quentin Tarantino said.....this is one of the best movies of the 21st Century.

I believe that for the sole reason of the foundinh story and the captivating storytelling of the pioneers that forged a completely new age for the new generation.

...or the evil behavior of Mark Zuckerberg, part one. This film really needs a sequel to cover everything that's happened since 2010. It's very well made but I have to say, it's hard to like anyone as they're all so flawed, including the Harvard elitists who came up with (much of) the original concept, the CFO who was a nice enough guy but deeply unqualified for his position, and Sean Parker, at least in the portrayal here, with his narcissism and partying. They're all multibillionaires today, so it's hard to feel too sorry for any of them. And then of course there's Zuckerberg, whose moral failings are apparent throughout, from his misogyny and arrogance in college to backstabbing people along the way. He is a complete a$$hole, and I liked how David Fincher didn't hold anything back while telling the story. I wish it had been truthful about Zuckerberg's personal life, as Priscilla Chan is nowhere to be seen, but the gist of the film seems right, particularly given what would happen in the decade which followed. Seriously, let's have a part two.