James Absolon explains how this Pope-themed film, despite its risky premise, works
Alex Pollard reviews Hollywood's biopic of the controversial Margaret Thatcher
The Social Network is a strange film. Strangeness, as the name implies, is a strange quality – it doesn’t necessarily make a film bad, or good, or even unique. It’s just slightly weird. I will admit to entering into the experience with a raft of prejudices. Perhaps worryingly, checking Facebook has become as much a part of my daily routine as showering. What’s more, I’m a huge fan of screenwriter Aaron Sorkin (the man behind The West Wing, amongst others) and director David Fincher’s output (which includes Seven and Fight Club). These people are the real deal when it comes to enjoyable, intelligent cinema. With ingredients like these, I reasoned, The Social Network should be an addictive beast of a film. As it happens, it’s merely a beast... but in a good way.
The movie opens with Harvard computer science prodigy Mark Zuckerburg (Jesse Eisenberg) getting dumped by his girlfriend for making one socially inept and insulting throwaway remark too many. Predictably, Mark proceeds to get drunk and goes online (never a good idea), creating a viral something-or-other comparison game which crashes the Harvard intranet. The crash and ensuing disciplinary procedure bring him to the attention of the Winklevoss twins (both played to hilarious effect by Armie Hammer), who propose creating an invitation-only social networking site for Harvard students. Mark agrees to help with the project, but soon teams with his best friend Eduardo (Andrew Garfield) to develop the idea himself, which he dubs ‘Thefacebook’. In short order, the site becomes a huge success, the brothers begin contemplating legal action, and Mark and Eduardo’s social stock begins to rise. With new opportunities, however, come new risks, mostly in the form of the charismatic and relentlessly cool Sean Parker (Timberlake), founder of Napster, with whom Mark is enamoured and who quickly sets about usurping Eduardo’s position in the fledgling company.
The historical accuracy of the events depicted is pretty ambiguous, which makes it a good thing that the film is entertainment, not documentary. The plot points about who conceived what and had the right business sense are left decidedly shady: enough so that we can sympathise with all the characters when they feel they’ve been cheated out of something. Oddly enough, though, the person we’re left to sympathise with the least – after Timberlake’s Parker, who is made an obvious force for evil – is Mark himself. He may be a socially inept genius with a feeling of perpetual exclusion (get the irony of a complete social non-savant creating a huge social network?) but that makes him neither admirable nor an object of sympathy. In fact, he would be much more so if his condition wasn’t entirely self-imposed – he has real friends, just not of the right stratum of class and popularity. Yet he’s so condescending to all and sundry we’re left wondering how he made friends in the first place, much less that he deserves any, particularly one as loyal as Eduardo; likewise, his much-maligned girlfriend.
The Social Network, then, has all the right ingredients – excellent acting, snappy dialogue, beautiful direction – but at its heart there’s hollowness. In part, that’s because of the moral ambiguity of the protagonist, who is caught between an immoral business genius and a fiercely loyal, if slow to catch on, partner. (There’s nothing wrong with making your central character ethically confused, but making them also ruthless and outwardly obnoxious soon starts to wear thin.) It’s also due to the fact that a film about the creation of Facebook just isn’t that compelling. It certainly isn’t inconsequential, but the world could exist happily without it; and beyond the enrichment of the central characters, there’s not much at stake (alas, the multi-millionaire could have been a billionaire). That’s not to say it isn’t a great movie – it is – but you’re left with an impression that, beyond the elegance of its own existence, it doesn’t really do anything. A bit like Facebook, actually.
You must log in to submit a comment.