Also, by the looks of the photos linked by Blonde Almond, Fincher hasn't so much re-interpreted the character of Lisbeth as he has just copied and pasted how she looks in the Oplev version. Good one Dave.

Hearty criticism for a film that hasn't even been released yet.



I never said you were wrong, I said I found your stance to be misthought and extreme to a fault. That is my opinion that I am entitled to, opinions are wonderful.

Wanna talk about something we agree on?

Well I'm sure we can all agree that Fincher is a good director; Seven and Fight Club were good movies. I also felt that Alien 3 is deserving of more credit than it is given. It just feels to me that his past two movies have been more like some guy pretending to be Fincher...

Anyone else think that Jesse Eisenberg sort of looks like Mike Cera?

I just caught up with this on Blu-Ray. Although none of the protagonists are particularly likeable (as portrayed in the film at any rate), I found it inspiring. I like Zuckerberg and people like him. I'm a geek, I guess. I'm reading The Accidental Billionaires now, which is pretty identical to the film so far, but without Sorkin's smart dialogue.

He seems more likeable in real life than he does in the movie, I'll give him that. A second viewing has caused it to grow on me ever so slightly however I just don't particularly like watching a movie about a guy who is already more accomplished than myself, overcoming the odds and becoming massively rich as a result... part of the reason I also hate Sports movies; the 'underdog' is already better than YOU, the viewer so how can you possibly relate to them? It's a similar problem I have to some, not all, super hero movies.

Okay I kind of didn't really explain that very well... I don't really mean I hate people who are better than myself, I just mean that if a movie intends for it's protagonist to be an 'underdog' then they should actually BE an 'underdog'; an impression I've never really felt from Zuckerberg, fictional interpretation or real life figure.

I don't think The Social Network fits into the underdog type of film you're referring to. Not even a little bit, actually. Zuckerberg may fit the mold of an underdog (debatable that anyone at Harvard is, in fact, an underdog), but the story presented in the movie isn't meant to be about overcoming the odds or even the slightest bit inspirational. It's about a guy who chased what he envied and ended up becoming exactly what he hated about those people.

In other words, you're faulting the movie for intending to do something it never intended to do.

No that's exactly my point, he isn't an underdog but I just got that impression in places. As for becoming what he hated? Baww, he can quit anytime he wants and live off the interest. I've no sympathy for the guy really. Not to be confused with disliking him of course, I think he did great and obviously anyone would want to 'accidentally' their life in a good way.

I wasn't saying he became what he hated to insinuate you should feel sympathy for him. The movie doesn't paint him as a sympathetic figure and doesn't ask the audience to feel sympathy for him. That doesn't change that he became the exact kind of exclusive, pretentious jerk he hated in the first place.

As for the underdog, sorry, I just disagree. The movie doesn't paint him as the underdog and isn't interested at all in that sort of story. This isn't an underdog movie, so why would they intend to paint him as an underdog in the first place? I don't understand how not doing something they didn't intend to do is something the movie did wrong.

Mark is an underdog in the social world of Eduardo and the Winklevii, but in the the world of computers and the Internet, he is the master of the universe. One of the themes of the story is that he doesn't need anyone else to achieve his goals. Except Eduardo for his money, of course.

He might be an outcast, but not an underdog. An underdog requires there to be some kind of fight or competition. The underdog is the one not expected to win. Zuckerberg wants to be a part of their world, but isn't accepted. Outcast is a more appropriate term.

Either way, this is semantical and ignores that the film isn't about his fight or competition as an underdog. He succeeds, we are aware of that the whole time. There's no tension in the story about whether or not the underdog/outcast wins. That is not what the film is about.

In no way is The Social Network an underdog story, nor does it attempt to be.

Just bought the Social Network today and am re-watching it for the first time in a while. As I watch, I stand by my assesment of it as 2010's best film.

Boil it down to its bare essence and you realize that The Social Network is less a movie about Facebook or even about how a generation degenerated into a grotesque yuppie version of itself. It's more the story of a young man who's so desperate for status that he's willing to go to any level to get it. And saddest of all, at the end he realizes he's a schmuck and doesn't want to do anything to change it.

***1/2 which I round up to ****.