by Doctor Science
The “Best/Worst Movies of 2010” lists are popping up all over, and “The Social Network” is on a lot of them. Here’s the review I drafted when it came out: dusted off, completed, and edited.
I went to see The Social Network the second weekend it was out — the 10:40AM Saturday show at the googlePlex, because that’s only $6 instead of $10 or more. Afterward, the group who’d gone sat around and talked about it: did you like it, did you not like it. When it came around to my turn, I couldn’t really say “thumbs up” or “thumbs down”. I can only say: “it’s complicated”.
On the one hand, there’s the unmistakable zip of Aaron Sorkin dialogue: snappy, but with the sound of real people actually talking, not just characters expositioning. On the other hand, the story that’s presented isn’t as close to the real events as it’s trying to seem. On the other other hand, there are important aspects to the way historic events were broken apart and re-assembled to make the movie, especially the way women are included (or not). And on the fourth hand, I can see things in the movie — about Facebook, and about the way we live now — that Sorkin and David Fincher (the director) may not have realized they were putting in, but that are there nonetheless.
In a nutshell: The Social Network uses some historical documents, but it’s not a documentary; it references historical events, but it’s not historical fiction. It’s in the genre known as RPF, for Real Person Fic — along with, say, The Beatles’ movies, especially A Hard Day’s Night.
Detailed and comprehensive spoilers behind the cut, along with several embedded videos.
Read more
