The Social Network

[cronopio 2]

i read the script a couple of months ago, this is going to be massive. very excited about fincher directing it, because this story has the kind of grit he excels at.

[modage]

Teaser #2: http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=32902

Extra Tidbit: THE SOCIAL NETWORK is a whopping 3 hours and 10 minutes long.

from an Anonymous Playlist commenter:

Anonymous said...

    I've seen the rough first cut (which is pretty complete)
    this is Fincher's best film.

[©brad]

I'm very curious to see how well this movie does. Rave reviews and inevitable repeat viewings from Fincher fanboys aside, most non-movie freak people I've talked to have been like "A movie about facebook? WTF?"

[Pubrick]

i wanted to post the following thoughts back when no one gave a shit about the poster.. now crono has shown that at least one person is taking this movie seriously, so i think i better just put it out there before i end up being the 500millionth instead of the 2nd:

ok i don't think ppl are appreciating how good this movie is gonna be. (i haven't read the script)

the only reason for not giving this the attention it deserves would be if you happen to be stuck on on the simple fact that it's about facebook and your perception could be masked by your experience with that site. i think a lot of ppl are feeling like that and it's not hard to see why. this film is going to be amazing for reasons that ppl are still to even get used to. it's not simply capitulating on a fad, it's not simply making money from something that is wildly popular among stupid little children, it's not the hannah montana movie. by extension, it's not simply a rushed-to-the-presses biopic based on a similarly worthless figure behind something that "only the kids" care about. it's not about a bunch of people in suits sitting in a conference room talking about ways to "Rasta-fy" their product by 10% and getting perfectly predictable results and a nice return on their investment -- well, at least that's why it concentrates on the beginnings of facebook and not whatever it may/will become (myspace who?).

all those are intuitions ppl will need to be re-programmed to overcome if the film is going to be truly successful. obviously a lot of kids will see it cos to them the idea of a film about facebook IS just a hannah montana movie, it's brand recognition, mark zuckerberg being played by a smarter version of michael cera makes it a perfect sell. that is of course part of the business strategy of the film, but it's not aimed at children and i don't think they will like it any more than they liked a three hour investigative procedural where the serial killer is never found.. which they knew as "that jake gyllenhaal movie with the puzzles".

any dismissive attitude to this film is actually representative of an OLD point of view. the social network is about young people, it's about the power a young person can have, it's about the new emperors of the new world.. the premise and actual details of the film provide a fresh setting to investigate something that is  in fact not new at all, something that is not bound by technology or fashion, something that in fact is of relevance and importance to people at any time..

let me refer firstly to the site that modage linked to earlier wherein some dude goes into a little analysis about why the film might be better than anyone expects. he's SPOT ON. below are the relevant paragraphs:

The tag line for the film, "You can't make 500 million friends without making a few enemies" seems to sum up some of those early days, and the film (or at least the version of the script that I read) is as much an exploration of young people coming to terms with creating something bigger than themselves as much as it is about loyalty, jealousy and money.

Some have questioned why Facebook and its story was worthy of a film, let alone a film from A-level writers and directors. Well, think about just how much Facebook dominates the online communication space today. Think about how much bigger it is than it was even a year ago. Now consider that it was started only six years ago. Its overwhelming success and the fact that it has become important enough to drive ongoing discussions regarding privacy and data ownership is indicative that it is a force.

Plus, think about it: Movies are an inherently social experience. A movie about a social network and the social factors, stories and melodramas that went into the founding of that network makes sense on a weird meta level.

this guy, whoever he is, covers a lot of ground. he appears to be even doubtful of his own insights as you can see in the final line where he softens his accute observation by calling it "a weird meta level". that aspect of the film is indeed a bit heavy to get into and not exactly the kind of thing that will make anyone interested in a movie unless they love filmmakers as much as they love entertainment. it's just one thing that marks the film as ambitious but to address it here is extremely premature so instead i'll return to what makes the film truly relevant,. the passages i've bolded are most important because they succinctly distill the weight of the story, at least part of it, that i've been referring to.

the social network is thus not a website that you log in and out of at your own choosing, it's not something that we have such total control over (the idea of privacy is not the main concern but it may have its place as a sub-sub-extension of the main themes of the film.. to be addressed later i'm sure). no, the social network being the title of the film, sets the tone for the GRAND scope of the story's concerns.. it's at once a reference to the small circle around the main protagonist and the story directly formed by the explosive events marked by his relation to them, alluded to succinctly in teaser #2.. so in this sense it is an individual at the centre of an emotional whirlpool.. and it is also at the same time referent to the rules that affect any and all social interactions, the things that bring people together and the things that tear them apart.

jealousy, loyalty, money.. which of these things could be the plausible reason for the decisions of individuals to form or destroy friendships versus the reasons by which large groups of people make decisions under the collective banner of company or nation. the idea of the social network extends directly to its role as a billion dollar company, businesses and nations all make alliances and break them for some of the same reasons as individuals. this premise lends itself to understanding in a fucking brilliant and amazing way some pervasive aspects of human nature. one of the ways i see the film is thus about the creation of an empire or a superpower and a study about the potential FALL of such, skillfully played against its own formation. the new world is not defined by the conquest of nations by means of invasion.. geographical conquest is no longer the real mark of power, it is in the accumulation of information and wealth. and so the study of individuals in power and their immediate social networks can lead to an understanding of the cogs as they extend to the greater empire.

but what is the greater empire exactly. what is being empowered by the advances (or i would say the unveiling) of the new world.. is it the old world models of wealth clearly clamoring over themselves to absorb the novel permutations and so making this in the end a lamentation on Neo becoming Agent Smith? no, the second way i see the film is as a blue print for the progress of our generation and a meditation on our good fortune. this is clearly the intetion with its focus on young people, and with a timescale that only makes sense to young people --- just think about the fact that facebook and zuckerberg were NOTHING a mere few years ago, it is only in the eyes of young people that such a short amount of time might yield sufficient life changes to understand that it's in fact plenty of time to review who we are.

for a moment let's dissassociate the misfortunes of poor countries and generations in those countries that do not share the possibilities that we all do as inhabitants of THE MODERN AGE. that may be something you don't think about when you are wondering how you're gonna live a MINUTE longer without the latest iphone a whole DAY after its release date.. that is in my mind the only thing that always threatens anything that cares to privilege the young people of developed nations. this too is part of our social network, everything that is excluded from our peripherals is part of the definition of everything inside our zone. the important idea of this film is NOT diminished by everything outside of it, or that a young afghan boy is probably doing heroin right now.. that is because in the same way that Zuckerberg and his small circle of rich enemies exists outside our own world so too do we all exist as privileged and beneficiaries of unforseen good fortune well outside the developing world.

the film is a story about US. any one who still thinks they are yet to achieve something in the world, and have the opportunities to do so. that is the spirit of youth which comes easy to those under 35 but can still be found with anyone who hasn't surrendered to the unchanging nature of the old ways. the role of technology in our daily lives is central to our understanding of the way we are headed.. the idea of facebook in this story is something that reveals itself to carry more weight than any of its creators anticipated. this realization is a necessary step for the maturation of any generation that has any hope in the future. it's the equivalent of the transition we all made from infancy, to realise that things were more serious than we had previously thought. the repetition of these transitions in our life is now augmented by the sheer level of connectivity and immediacy we all feel with others undergoing the same experience. the recognition of our own power is so far the ONLY thing we know about what it means to be part of the new wave of social change.

the immediacy with which we communicate with our entire generation is unprecedented. we take for granted the speed and scale that we exist in. something like this only occurred in the times of global war.. under the opposite of circumstances, opportunities were scarce and individual realisation sacrificed in the name of preserving a collective ideology. now i can be part of the world without representing anything greater than my own self. my ideas can spread without the enforcement of an army. my social network is not just the people i see every day but the people who share my values and beliefs globally.

the last era of global connectivity left us with an unprecedented realisation of the potential for global destruction, something that generations have been coming to terms with since then. the space age gave us the image of our blue planet for the first time as it appears outside our terrestrial viewpoint, and as is well established helped engender a generation's realisation of our planet's singular and fragile place in the greater system of nature. the modern era of connectivity signals something even greater and seems to combine the two previous realisations, with the knowledge that the threat of global destruction grows ever stronger in the form of our effect on nature, as well as the persistent terror of humankind that continues to threaten our ability to come together. the threat of global destruction is now only comparable in scale to our potential for global salvation.

of course, i only think this because i'm young.. i'm just trying to come to terms with something bigger than myself.

[modage]

Movie About Facebook Will Open the New York Film Festival
Source: NYTimes

Here's a bit of news you may want to share on Facebook, Twitter or whatever it is you Web-savvy kids are using these days: "The Social Network," David Fincher's much anticipated movie about the creation of Facebook, has been selected for opening night at the New York Film Festival, the Film Society of Lincoln Center said on Thursday.

"The Social Network," is directed by Mr. Fincher ("Zodiac," "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button") with a screenplay by Aaron Sorkin ("The West Wing") adapted from Ben Mezrich's book "The Accidental Billionaires." Starting in the long-ago year of 2003, it tells the story of how the Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg (played in the film by Jesse Eisenberg) helped hatch an idea that became the wildly popular Facebook Web site – and the complications that its success quickly yielded.

Scott Rudin, a producer of "The Social Network," said that the film is told in an "All About Eve" style from multiple points of view, including the perspectives of other young entrepreneurs who sued Mr. Zuckerberg, saying the site was their idea.

"Everybody believes they're right," Mr. Rudin said in a telephone interview. "But the movie leaves you to make up your own mind about what you feel about how Facebook was founded."

He added: "It's an examination of how hard it is to find out what the truth is about anything."

Though Facebook might seem like an all-too-topical subject for a piece of cinema with high ambitions, Mr. Rudin said the overarching themes of the film would give it dramatic weight, whether or not we're still using Facebook five years from now.

"Movies have a very hard time being current, and this is the rare example of a movie that is about something that is happening at this very moment," he said. "It's about ambition, it's about greed. It's about betrayal. It's about friendship. It's about trying to be on the inside of something when you feel, terminally, on the outside of everything."

The New York Film Festival will show the premiere of "The Social Network" on Sept. 24, before the movie is released on Oct. 1. The full festival runs through Oct. 10 with additional films to be announced.

[©brad]

I'm so forwarding P's post to the next person who bitches about this movie. Great work as usual, my friend.

[Pubrick]

I'm so forwarding P's post to the next person who bitches about this movie. Great work as usual, my friend.

thx. the idea of sharing this outside our small dank pit of freaks prompted me to flesh out my conclusion.. confident that it makes a bit more sense now, so forward away!

[Alexandro]

fuck, great post.

it's been baffling that people don't see the importance of facebook beyond a simple fade. they all sound like an uncle you have to patient with.

[cronopio 2]

you nailed it, p. i've been saying for a while that these computer engineers are the closest we have in contemporary culture to renaissance men.

[Fernando]

yeah good post p. 

just want to say that ive always been in the Fincher bandwagon, I have blind faith in the man.

[modage]

just want to say that ive always been in the Fincher bandwagon, I have blind faith in the man.

I want this to rule as much as the next fool but

[picolas]

i really hope this movie lives up to your post, p. love that second to last sentence.

[Pubrick]

i can't believe this needs to be said:

it's pretty obvious that Fincher's less than great films have been the result of a shitty script. the man has no input as far as we know to the steer the quality of the scripts he works with. Fincher takes blind faith in his scripts to the point that he feels he can make anything work by his sheer technical brilliance. he goes to a film knowing EVERYTHING there is to know about how to shoot it and what it needs to look like.. his films are technically so taut because the time he has saved by not writing the script has been used to absorb the story and its themes so that the style he employs works in total service to them.

faith in this film can be based on Aaron Sorkin as much as Fincher. the man is in his element with this film. it ties in perfectly with his obsession and omniscience in his specialized field of tight knit groups of professionals having to deal with the balance of their jobs and personal lives. it sounds very "thirtysomething" (whatever that means) but he's made an art of the way people deal with responsibilities of their professional lives and the way their humanity comes across precisely in how seriously they take their jobs.

for better or worse the dude has remained consistent to his one obsession. he found his perfect subject in The West Wing, but you can see that Sports Night was almost exactly the same in the way that he respected the weight of his characters professional lives in contrast to their personal qualities.. this same quality is what brought Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip to concede defeat against the much funnier 30 Rock, not that i saw the show but i can imagine that it failed for the same reason that Sports Night never took off: people had trouble believing that anyone could take TV that seriously.. the audience reaction to those two shows is directly comparable to the reaction people are having to the idea of "a movie about facebook".

Sorkin is the reason this film will be Fincher's best. just like the half assed Eric Roth rehash of old material turned CCBB into Forest Gump without the soul.

[socketlevel]

agreed the worst thing about fight club is the script. oh wait... no actually the worst thing about fight club is the script and the male on male love on for the artistic craft. i said this years ago, and when fincher gets in this mode his films age poorly. also the worst thing about panic room is a shot through a coffee cup for the sake of it, very similar character flaw in fincher on that one and after it's no longer visually impressive it serves no purpose. he needs more restraint.  the kind of restraint he had in the game.

[Pas]

you nailed it, p. i've been saying for a while that these computer engineers are the closest we have in contemporary culture to renaissance men.

Especially the guys who did Farmville! That's some Voltaire shit right there.

To say that you guys are giving way too much importance to Facebook is a euphemism.

Facebook is in major expansion because teens and old people are finally getting on it. When 14 year old girls and your grandma is into something you love, please reconsider. Every couple days now I hear people getting off Facebook... All the bullshit wasn't worth the hot friend spying anymore.

Renaissance men lol come on