Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

The Social Network


misswonderly3
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've noticed a number of references to this film on recent threads. They're always favourable about it. Every time I see one of these posts praising it, I want to scream "Whaat?"

 

I  don't  get  it.

 

I hated The Social Network.  I found it boring, unpleasant (no likable or even just sympathetic characters at all), tiresome to watch, and meaningless. But especially boring.

 

It's occurred to me that maybe it's because I'm not interested in Facebook or any kind of "social media" - except I guess this one. But no, it seems lots of people who don't particularly care about Facebook think The Social Network is a Great Movie.  Why?

 

Is it because it's about how a seemingly ordinary guy gets an idea and changes the world through it?  I suppose in theory that's a big story, worth telling and telling well.

But I just find it tedious; the plot becomes more and more complicated, I still don't really know why the Zuckerburg character does the things he does. But more to the point, I don't care.

And I like Jesse Eisenberg, the actor who plays Zuckerberg.

 

What is it with all this love for this completely unremarkable movie?

 

Maybe it's the raw ambition of an average student who turns into a ruthless businessman. And, perhaps because I find the inner workings of big business less than fascinating, I have trouble staying engaged in the story. It's just all about the details of developing the Facebook empire, which includes dumping at least one friend along the way.

 

No one would deny that Facebook has had a huge impact on the entire world, the real one as well as the digital one. But just because it's a true story, and the topic is a very big one, does not automatically mean the film made from this story is great.

 

Also...just thought of something else...it's deadly serious. As far as I can recall, there's no humour or wit in it whatsoever. It takes itself very seriously; this I always see as a flaw in a movie.

 

Actually, I just looked up the director: David Fincher. Now I'm not surprised. I hated two of his biggest films, Fight Club and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.

 

 

Can one of the many fans of  The Social Network please explain to me why they think it's such a great movie?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a fan of Jesse Eisenberg (looking forward to seeing him as Lex Luthor in BATMAN V SUPERMAN) and Andrew Garfield, but I have no desire to see THE SOCIAL NETWORK.

 

And now that I know it was directed by the same person behind FIGHT CLUB and THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON, I really don't want to see it.

 

I know you were asking for a defense of this movie as great, misswonderly, but while I'm not able to provide that I wanted to add my comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the feeling that whatever I might try to say about this film, Miss Wonderly may say "so what" which of course would be her prerogative.

One of the things that intrigued me about the film was it seemed anything but a Social network.  And as we learn this little world was full of intrigue, backstabbing and betrayal.

I too have no interest in Facebook but it hardly mattered to me.  I found its basic themes to be universal.

Its structure reminded me of Kane just a little.  I thought it terribly interesting that it was set in the world of a discovery procedure and therefore you could have the story told from many points of view.

And it was tragic in the end.  The main character is left quite alone.  Grandly ironic considering what he created.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the feeling that whatever I might try to say about this film, Miss Wonderly may say "so what" which of course would be her prerogative.

One of the things that intrigued me about the film was it seemed anything but a Social network.  And as we learn this little world was full of intrigue, backstabbing and betrayal.

I too have no interest in Facebook but it hardly mattered to me.  I found its basic themes to be universal.

Its structure reminded me of Kane just a little.  I thought it terribly interesting that it was set in the world of a discovery procedure and therefore you could have the story told from many points of view.

And it was tragic in the end.  The main character is left quite alone.  Grandly ironic considering what he created.

 

I think it must have been the way it was done. I agree, the basic themes of ambition, intrigue, backstabbing, and betrayal are universal, and there are a myriad of films that I love that deal with those themes. Including Kane, for that matter.

 

The more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to think that it wasn't so much the story of The Social Network, as how that story was told.

Confusing, hard to follow (and I like to think I'm no dummy when it comes to following complex plots), and completely unengaging. 

 

Bogie56, the positive things you speak of with regard to the movie are its ideas. And they are fascinating ideas and well worth exploring.

But a movie, even one that's based on actual events, has to live up to the ideas it's trying to convey by being engaging as well. None of the characters are interesting, sympathetic, or memorable. And as I said before, there's not a hint of humour, wit, or fun in this movie. It's too busy being "intense", I guess.

I think I just figured out what it is about The Social Network that I dislike: it's cold as ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I'm still  not understanding what exactly was "brilliant" about this film.

 

So, it sounds to me as though the main thing that impressed you about The Social Network was its irony; that is, even though theoretically Zuckerberg's idea was to help people connect more often and more easily with one another, he and the other people in the story were the opposite of "social".

 

Am I close?

 

As for "cold", please don't think I prefer gushy sentimental films. But a movie can be cerebral and have heart as well. Or, at the very least, it can be funny, or entertaining, or something.

 

The Social Network was not only cold itself, it left me cold.

 

ps: I wouldn't have started a thread about it just because of that. There are lots of movies I don't like, or that leave me cold, etc.

It's the fact that so many people vaunt The Social Network as a Great Film, one for the ages, etc. etc., that made me decide to start this thread. I'm trying to understand why anyone would put it in the category of Great Film.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I'm still  not understanding what exactly was "brilliant" about this film.

 

So, it sounds to me as though the main thing that impressed you about The Social Network was its irony; that is, even though theoretically Zuckerberg's idea was to help people connect more often and more easily with one another, he and the other people in the story were the opposite of "social".

 

Am I close?

 

As for "cold", please don't think I prefer gushy sentimental films. But a movie can be cerebral and have heart as well. Or, at the very least, it can be funny, or entertaining, or something.

 

The Social Network was not only cold itself, it left me cold.

 

ps: I wouldn't have started a thread about it just because of that. There are lots of movies I don't like, or that leave me cold, etc.

It's the fact that so many people vaunt The Social Network as a Great Film, one for the ages, etc. etc., that made me decide to start this thread. I'm trying to understand why anyone would put it in the category of Great Film.

Well you certainly have a tight grip upon your opinion of it though.  You asked for alternative views after all.

Come to think of it, Othello and MacBeth don't have likeable characters or much humour either.  But not everyone liked those plays either.

One thing is for sure, the film is full of wit.  But I'm not offering to debate you.  Good luck in your quest!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably a close comparison to this movie is the story of Apple Computer where Steve Jobs was fired and came back to re-energize the company. I think what Steve Jobs did was 100 times more difficult than Facebook as Facebook has no real products.

 

However The Social Network does seem to get better press than the Jobs movie.

 

Maybe the Social Network is brilliant because it took a stale doughnut and made a gourmet cresant out of it. While Jobs took the gourmet cresant and turned it into a burned muffin.

 

Anyway, that is my culinary take on this, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE SOCIAL NETWORK is why I still refuse to join Facebook to this day. Let me digress.....

 

Nearly 5 years ago, I spent several weeks with a varying number of friends in Mexico, to celebrate its Bicentennial. During the whole time, everybody kept at me as to why I wasn't on FB.. In Mexico City, when meeting with my family, my Cousins' kids, all teens.and preteens, kept asking me"¿Tío, por que no tiene Facebook?". I gave up, and decided to join it when I got home. Well, the first movie I saw immediately after getting home, was TSN. I came out of it so royally p i s s ed and annoyed at the Zuckerburg character that I said (thought), "F **k Facebook, I'm not patronizing that A....hole.

 

I thought the movie was ok, nothing great, but hated everyone in it. I don't get the raves either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best part of the movie was Trent Reznor's electrifying soundtrack.

The movie itself was kind of creepy and very demeaning to women.  

Jesse Eisenberg was good but Justin Timberlake was dissappointingly bad and I do like him. 

In the club scene where he how he tells how he founded Napster, he sounded very much like he was "acting" a reheared speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you certainly have a tight grip upon your opinion of it though.  You asked for alternative views after all.

Come to think of it, Othello and MacBeth don't have likeable characters or much humour either.  But not everyone liked those plays either.

One thing is for sure, the film is full of wit.  But I'm not offering to debate you.  Good luck in your quest!

 

I did indeed ask for alternative views, and I appreciate your sharing yours' with me here.

 

I'm not sure why you sound vaguely hurt / offended in your responding post (quoted above.) I was simply expressing my opinion of the film, and why I don't like it. I did take into account the comments you made about it.

I did not "get mad" at your differing view, nor at you personally for liking it while I don't.

 

As for Shakespeare, I love almost everything he ever wrote. It would never occur to me to talk about his work and The Social Network in the same sentence.

 

 The "villains" in the two plays you mention, while undeniably "bad", are far more interesting characters than Zuckerberg (at least as he is depicted in the movie) or anyone else in TSN.

Macbeth is a fascinating character, full of complex emotions and thoughts. Part of the greatness of this play is its examination of such a conflicted protagonist, a man who at first hesitates to commit evil, suffers tremendous guilt, and finally embraces who he has become because by then he has no choice. (This is quite an over-simplification...)

As for Othello's Iago, he's not likable, but he is completely intriguing as a character who delights in causing pain and confusion for no apparent reason.

 

Both characters, while admittedly "dislikable" (seems too lame a word for them), are "big" characters, and they completely engage the audience's attention.

The people in TSN seem pale and insipid by comparison.

 

Of course, it's not really fair or sensible to pit fictional characaters from great drama against characters who are based not only on real people, but on people who are still living. Of course the Social Network writers were limited perforce by the fact that basically they were working with actual real life events and individuals.

 

And there's always at least some wit in Shakespeare, even in his tragedies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

THE SOCIAL NETWORK is why I still refuse to join Facebook to this day. Let me digress.....

 

Nearly 5 years ago, I spent several weeks with a varying number of friends in Mexico, to celebrate its Bicentennial. During the whole time, everybody kept at me as to why I wasn't on FB.. In Mexico City, when meeting with my family, my Cousins' kids, all teens.and preteens, kept asking me"¿Tío, por que no tiene Facebook?". I gave up, and decided to join it when I got home. Well, the first movie I saw immediately after getting home, was TSN. I came out of it so royally p i s s ed and annoyed at the Zuckerburg character that I said (thought), "F **k Facebook, I'm not patronizing that A....hole.

 

I thought the movie was ok, nothing great, but hated everyone in it. I don't get the raves either.

 

Thanks for that story, Arturo.I guess that's a kind of one-man boycott you're doing. And if, like me, you find you get along perfectly well without Facebook, why should we join it just because others think they can't live without it?

 

As for the movie, again, if people just liked it well enough, I'd shut up about it. There are many films that others like and I don't, and vice versa.

It's when a movie like The Social Network is spoken of as one of the Best Films of All Time, so often by so many, that I get exasperated and have difficulty understanding why anyone would want to elevate it to that kind of status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you tried watching it a second time?

 

I have no opinion to express as I've not gotten around to watching it. I have it in my collection, but haven't felt the urge to put it into the player yet.

 

Good suggestion, db. I suppose in all fairness I should give it another shot.

It's just....it was such a chore to get through it the first time, I'll need to gear myself up to undergo such an ordeal a second time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, what do I care if you don't like the film.  I stand by my first observation that taking you up on your invitation to speak as to why I liked the film was just going to meet with criticism.

And by the way I don't happen to agree with anything you have said about the film.

Onwards and upwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, what do I care if you don't like the film.  I stand by my first observation that taking you up on your invitation to speak as to why I liked the film was just going to meet with criticism.

And by the way I don't happen to agree with anything you have said about the film.

Onwards and upwards.

 

Well, interestingly, you seem to be the one who's "mad" that we disagree on the film, not me.

I'm not sure what you mean by "criticism". I'm certainly not criticizing you.

If you mean I'm "ciriticizing" the film The Social Network, I guess I just wasn't convinced by your defence of it. No reason to get p1ssed off.

 

I'm not sure why you seem to be so offended. If you remember, I said to you::

 

"I did indeed ask for alternative views, and I appreciate your sharing yours' with me here.

 

I'm not sure why you sound vaguely hurt / offended in your responding post ... I was simply expressing my opinion of the film, and why I don't like it. I did take into account the comments you made about it.

I did not "get mad" at your differing view, nor at you personally for liking it while I don't."

 

What I was hoping to get (from anyone who loves this film, not just you) were reasons for me to respect the film, even if I never personally enjoy it.

There are lots of movies and books and works of music that I don't personally like, but can at least understand why others do. But with TSN, I can't see any reasons to feel that way about it. Sorry, I understand what I'm saying must be annoying to you, since you did try to explain why you thought it was a good movie.

 

 

Usually in these types of discussions, neither side is convinced, neither side changes their mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are lots of movies and books and works of music that I don't personally like, but can at least understand why others do.

 

This one must've really struck you alternately if you can't do it in this case. It was on many a 'best picture of the year' list.

 

I'm really gonna have to check it out one of these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it must have been the way it was done. I agree, the basic themes of ambition, intrigue, backstabbing, and betrayal are universal, and there are a myriad of films that I love that deal with those themes. Including Kane, for that matter.

 

The more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to think that it wasn't so much the story of The Social Network, as how that story was told.

Confusing, hard to follow (and I like to think I'm no dummy when it comes to following complex plots), and completely unengaging. 

 

Bogie56, the positive things you speak of with regard to the movie are its ideas. And they are fascinating ideas and well worth exploring.

But a movie, even one that's based on actual events, has to live up to the ideas it's trying to convey by being engaging as well. None of the characters are interesting, sympathetic, or memorable. And as I said before, there's not a hint of humour, wit, or fun in this movie. It's too busy being "intense", I guess.

I think I just figured out what it is about The Social Network that I dislike: it's cold as ice.

Just to be clear and I'm for dropping this.  You asked for one's opinion and then you wade in with the little lecture on what a movie has to be.

We all knew the opinion of the film that you had already formed.  Why didn't you just sit back and listen to the views that you solicited instead of trying to argue your own point of view when someone responded to you?  

My feelings aren't hurt at all.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Macbeth is a fascinating character, full of complex emotions and thoughts. Part of the greatness of this play is its examination of such a conflicted protagonist, a man who at first hesitates to commit evil, suffers tremendous guilt, and finally embraces who he has become because by then he has no choice. (This is quite an over-simplification...)

As for Othello's Iago, he's not likable, but he is completely intriguing as a character who delights in causing pain and confusion for no apparent reason.

 

Both characters, while admittedly "dislikable" (seems too lame a word for them), are "big" characters, and they completely engage the audience's attention.

The people in TSN seem pale and insipid by comparison.

 

Just one more thing before closing. You took me on about my first point with the comeback that the film had to be more than ideas and that it was cold.  I came back with two examples from Shakespeare where the lead characters were cold and the stories without much humour.  But that wasn't good enough for you either (see above).

Like it or not, this little snaut nosed, backstabbing s.o.b. in TSN is the William Randolph Hearst of our generation.  The fact that he is a dislikable little nerd is a plus not a minus in my view.  Just shows you how our world is now topsy turvy.

I'm not up for a debate.  I can live with the fact you don't like the film.  Just don't ask again why I happen to like it if you are just going to tell me why I am wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought is just as well could have been a made for TV flick. A French director I know loved it "a 9/10 to me, and slowly but surely becoming a 10/10. Deserves several viewings to forget the (very few) weaknesses (mainly: the girl in the office and most of her lines), but it brings me everything a film can bring: emotion, sensation, adventure, dream, intelligence and it changes me. It probably sounds a little excessive, but the thematic of the movie (generations, what to do with your life, being good at what you do and especially entrepreneurs) connects with me on a very deep level. The personal drama, not so much, but it connects with many other viewers"

 

It could just as well have been a made for TV film,  but the thematic of the movie (generations, what to do with your life, being good at what you do and especially entrepreneurs) connects with me on a very deep level but that is not cinematic enough for me, why see that on a big screen, its what I expect from TV

 

 

"That's where we disagree. The pitch isn't cinematic AT ALL but the execution is extremely cinematic IMHO. That is why other film scripted by Sorkin look like made for TV with great dialogues but this one doesn't.
 
Some of the "trial" scenes and a few of the Winkelvoss only sequences could be made for TV. Same for the ending, I'll give you that. However: the opening break up scene is only topped by Year Of The Dragon break up scene. The first coding scene (creation of Facematch) is unrivaled and features Peckinpah level parallel montage. The "seanathon" sequence is cinema at its best. Of course the rowing scene is already cult (not sure how this one will age). And I could go on and on. To make it simple: the level of perfection and control of most of the film has nothing to do with TV and has rarely been witnessed in theater. Technical perfection (which includes acting) isn't sufficient to make a great film, but it's far more that enough to be pretty far from any made for TV flicks"
 
.I think we have two definitions of cinematic, maybe I'm using the wrong word. I want to see beautiful scenery or  intricate cityscapes, cool camera angles and perspectives, interesting action I didn't see that, I saw mostly talking heads sitting around uninteresting sets. The sculling scene was the closest. 
 
I thing you are using cinematic in a technical sense.
 
"No we're talking about the same thing. That's why that film directed by anyone else than Fincher and a few others (PTA, Scorsese...) would have been utterly uncinematic. But the way they did it made it incredibly cinematic. It's like Fight Club: when you read the book you think it's uncinematic, impossible to adapt. When you watch the film it's hard to believe it was a book first.
Fincher and his team did an incredible work in the Social Network to transform offices into beautiful scenery (also, they get out of the offices and university rooms as much as they can) and edit dialogue and CODING scenes like action sequences. Once again, the creation of Facematch, which consist of a night of coding, is an incredible 100% cinematic sequence. Although that's hard to believe 
Now that's a matter of opinion but to me the camera angles are among the best of the decade even if they're not there for people to notice (unlike, say, Fight Club and other early Fincher work).
 
I get your point though. It's exactly what I feared BEFORE I watched the movie."
 
Different strokes for different folks, I don't get thrills out of offices transformed into beautiful scenery or coding as action, or most CGI for that matter.
 
 

 

 

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing that dialogue with the French director, cigarjoe. Guess you can't tell us his name.

 

Wow, whoever he is, he loves  The Social Network. Everything he said about it is the kind of thing one says about a film that really connects with a person.

It's beyond all understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I'm still  not understanding what exactly was "brilliant" about this film.

 

So, it sounds to me as though the main thing that impressed you about The Social Network was its irony; that is, even though theoretically Zuckerberg's idea was to help people connect more often and more easily with one another, he and the other people in the story were the opposite of "social".

 

Am I close?

I was not loving it much either.  I watched, and now I can claim I've seen it.   I think part of what makes this story brilliant is the amount of energy without resorting to the reading Facebook's posts.  HAHA.   But it seemed for me to accomplish this feat of being simultaneously scenes too clipped for understanding and yet too mundane to keep interesting in moving the story forward.  I just couldn't connect with the characters on an emotional level.  Couldn't invest caring about them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was not loving it much either.  I watched, and now I can claim I've seen it.   I think part of what makes this story brilliant is the amount of energy without resorting to the reading Facebook's posts.  HAHA.   But it seemed for me to accomplish this feat of being simultaneously scenes too clipped for understanding and yet too mundane to keep interesting in moving the story forward.  I just couldn't connect with the characters on an emotional level.  Couldn't invest caring about them. 

 

Joy ! Someone who feels the same way as I do about it !   You said it ! Thanks, Casablancalover !

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best part of the movie was Trent Reznor's electrifying soundtrack.

The movie itself was kind of creepy and very demeaning to women.  

Jesse Eisenberg was good but Justin Timberlake was dissappointingly bad and I do like him. 

In the club scene where he how he tells how he founded Napster, he sounded very much like he was "acting" a reheared speech.

Isn't that exactly what movie dialogue IS???

 

 

Anyway..I didn't think the movie was THAT bad, however, i thought ...IF they were trying to make Zuckerberg look like a first class A-hole, they did a BANG UP job!

 

Having had my own bad experiences with "fakebook"( there's really nothing ELSE to call it!), I really also couldn't care less about the man.   The film was fairly good, as far as movies go, but if you look for cental characters to be sympathetic instead of pathetic, then this is not the film for you.  Some people I've met ADMIRE the man for how he handled things and for the things he did. I personally don't find that sort of back stepping and self serving admirable, but some people are like that.

 

One day, when I was leaving a visit with my Grandfather, back when the TV mini series "The Holocaust" was all the rage, it was coming on as we were leaving, and my Grandfather blurted out, "Boy, that Hitler had the right idea!"  He then questioned why I was laughing.  "You're JOKING, of course.  Right?"  He said he wasn't.  That HE thought getting rid of all those "filthy jewish buggers" was a GREAT idea!  I didn't lay eyes on him again until his funeral.

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...