If you’ve read the script for Aaron Sorkin’s “The Social Network” then you know it’s powerful stuff waiting to be unleashed on the season. Well, Scott Foundas is first out of the gate with an extremely early critique of the film, and it’s all thumbs up from Brett Ratner’s best bud. To wit:
David Fincher’s The Social Network is big and brash and brilliant…It is nominally the story of the founding of Facebook, yes, and how something that began among friends quickly descended into acrimony and litigation once billions of dollars were at stake. But just as All the President’s Men—a seminal film for Fincher and a huge influence on his Zodiac—was less interested by the Watergate case than by its zeitgeist-altering ripples, so too is The Social Network devoted to larger patterns of meaning. It is a movie that sees how any social microcosm, if viewed from the proper angle, is no different from another—thus the seemingly hermetic codes of Harvard University become the foundation for a global online community that is itself but a reflection of the all-encompassing high-school cafeteria from which we can never escape. And it owes something to The Great Gatsby, too, in its portrait of a self-made outsider marking his territory in the WASP jungle.
To sayt he least, in most conversations I’m having leading up to the awards season, Fincher’s film is perhaps the most anticipated. If even half of these sentiments are fair, then I think it’s safe to say a bona fide contender is comin’ round the bend. Read the rest of Foundas’s thoughts at Film Society of Lincoln Center.
“The Social Network” opens the New York Film Festival September 24.
Comments
24 responses to “Foundas on ‘Social Network’: “Big, brash and brilliant.””
Sorry if I missed this bit of information earlier in the year, but I suppose from the way your initial sentence is worded that you have read the film’s script? Do you usually read “Oscar-hopeful” scripts that get unleashed so early, or was this a special case?
I read scripts of interest. Not always, but this one I particularly wanted to check out.
I started reading ther script a while back, it obviously has Sorkins trademark plastered all over, particuarly with the dialogue, but I honestly couldn’t warm up to it that much given how genuinley unsympathetic the characters that we have to follow are. Charactters who likley make interesting roles for actors to inhabit. I’m still excited to the upcoming film none-the-less.
Do you feel like it jeopardizes your experience with the film in any way? I ask because that’s usually the reason why I hold off on reading scripts until I’ve seen the film. Then again, my current philosophy most likely jeopardizes my experience with the script, so I guess there’s not much of a difference.
I am sure that as a film this effort will be perfectly compelling, but, personally, based on what I’ve seen I find the whole thing to be a hugely sensationalized effort.
For one thing, I know well enough that any endeavor of any scale is prone to, pardon the cliche, “drama”. Thus the fact that this story has juice is neither suprising nor that interesting. In this particular case, Sorking, as talented as his, is working of a wook with, shall we say, questionable credentials. I just don’t really believe that Sorkin really has any great specialized knowledge about what REALLY went on, nor do I think he really cares for accuracy this much. Like I said, I’m sure this will be a compelling film but a definitvie statement on Facebook, its beginnings or key players it will not be.
It also doesn’t help (and this is my biggest beef with the whole thing) when the reviews, like the one above, begin to lay it on really thick? “A self-made outsider marking his territory in the WASP jungle.”
If thats not the example of oversensationalism or overdramtism than I don’t know what is? Who isn’t an outsider? Was Mark in Harvard or Nazi Germany circa ’39? I am willing to bet there’s a movie to be made with this same write-up about the founding of Google. Or Oracle. Or Microsoft. Or Apple. All were “outsiders” of sorts.
Why not just present it as a story of a guy and his firends/foes/etc? I am not saying that it doesn’t because I have not read the script. It just seems like a wrong angle. And too be honest, I prefer Sorkin when he’s not being overtly heavy handed (“American President” vs “Charlie Wilson’s War”).
Not to get off topic, but I’ve became completely turned off by what I’ve seen of “Wall Street 2” lately.
Every single time I see another riff on Greed, on, why, Facebook, I cringe.
I have no faith in Stone being able to pull of anything close to the level of the original film. Espeically without the help of his co-writer.
Factual or not, this movie looks very good.
Foundas mentions this runs at about 2 hours, I thought I read it was going to be 3 hours? I guess that was old news.
this, true grit, black swan are what im looking forward to most
Danny: It certainly can, but as a screenwriter, I just enjoy Sorkin’s work and always try to read what’s out there. Call it a special case.
***If thats not the example of oversensationalism or overdramtism than I don’t know what is?***
It’s called a movie. Inherently dramatized and sensationalized, sir.
Foundas’s review is pretty well-written. I’m really, really excited for this.
Christ, are we gonna bash this movie again for accuracy? Please folks, with such modern folktales there are many truths. The only thing that matters is the one that translates best to film.
I’ve never understood people’s complaints about movies not being historically accurate. It’s about entertainment, we’re not watching these movies in history class.
I’m excited to hear this. I’m really excited for The Social Network.
How in this day and age we still refer to Jews as “outsiders in a Wasp world” is really beyond comprehension. It’s 2010 for God’ sake, time to stop playing the victim card over and over again. There are more Jewish Supreme Court Justices right now than Protestant ones.
[…] via: incontention […]
If any of you want to read the script it’s right here: http://wiscreenwritersforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Social-Network-The-by-Aaron-Sorkin-May-28-2009.pdf
I’ve only read the first few pages (don’t want to be to spoiled) but it is great.
In light of today’s news about the Google movie, the comments I made yesterday seem positively ironic.
It was inevitable, I guess.
This is the kind of movie that I can see winning Best Picture.
Here is something interesting; I watched an interview were Zuckerberg said that one of Eisenberg’s cousin’s works at Facebook. Maybe there was insider for the movie?
I saw the German Trailer and it looks more than Sensational! I think Oscar Nominees for Picture, Director, Editing and Screenplay are sure! Andrew Garfield could be nominated for Supporting Actor and Jesse Eisenberg could be nominated for Lead Actor! I think that Justin Timberlake didn’t get nominated and also no Nomination for Supporting Actress!
Go easy on the exclamation mark key! It isn’t a toy! Just some friendly advice!
This review says nothing about the score. Isn’t Trent Reznor scoring this? I would love to hear what it sounds like.