The Social Network

What you get with The Social Network is the most fascinating character study since The Conversation. The Social Network is about the creators of Facebook, specifically a young man named Mark Zuckerberg, as portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg, who's successes only amplify his guarded insecurity and social ineptitude. Many proponents and critical champions of the film have had the gaul to herald The Social Network as my generation's Citizen Kane. Well... I think that's a completely accurate statement to make. Even I agree with them. It actually is my generation's Citizen Kane. The themes and nods are all there. Hearst as Zuckerberg, right down to the sled. Refresh, refresh, refresh. The Social Network is a very touching and revealing character study about a troubled young man who will become wholly emblematic of his time and place."You have part of my attention - you have the minimum amount."The film opens with a lengthy scene of dialogue between Mark and his girlfriend. What's so unique about it is that you have to listen closely because the scene is jumbled with the chatter of a murmuring pub. And you can hear the background noise louder than you would like to have it or have been used to hearing it in other films. It's almost like we're right there with them, listening in. It's hard to hear comfortably at parts but I find that decision enthralling. Director David Fincher is trying to tell us something here, he's trying to prepare his audience. He's telling them to listen up and pay attention because this movie demands it. He uses this same tool later on in the film at a night club where Mark is being taken under the wing of a character with questionable motives. Fincher says once again, listen closely. This is a scene that demands concentration. Read between the lines, Mark is. Why aren't you?Let's talk about the star of the film, Jesse Eisenberg as Mark, for he is going to be the reason why this film will never be forgotten. Eisenberg was outstanding here, laying down the best performance in film since the '70s. Naturalistic and contained, it was an absolutely beautiful portrayal. It harked back to Al Pacino's Michael Corleone from The Godfather Part Two, it was that impressive. What Eisenberg was able to do with Mark was something very precise. He made the character a complex one. One that was guarded, calculated, methodical, and incredibly lonely. A character that can be very cold and sad and unforgivably oblivious.The idea proposed by Fincher and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin is an interesting one, that the creator of a website designed to connect people around the world to all of their friends is not only socially off-putting but is so selfish and vengeful that he has no friends of his own. He has no support system. Eisenberg makes Mark out to be a loveless, wounded, and perpetually hurt person with quiet anger and resentment. The most perplexing aspect of Mark's character is that he is opaque and protective, resentful but there is a dying desire there as well. A want not of fortune but of impulse. I don't think Mark wants to be so cold. Then again, sometimes I think that's exactly how we wants to be perceived. He never really seems to honestly enjoy his successes. He never acts like he wants the money. He never really seems to want much more other than to be seen as someone stronger than he is. He wants to be different. Eisenberg communicates things along the lines of self-punishment and hatred with Mark. It's in his face and the quiver and shake of his voice. It's all in how a person so precise can be so uncomfortable in his own skin.Eisenberg is a very responsive actor and the key to his performance is in his reactions. The little ticks that he does or the facial stretches that are both surprising and full of pathos. Eisenberg did something extraordinary in The Social Network. Truth be told, this was an unsurmountable performance, mammoth in poignancy and tragedy. What Eisenberg was able to communicate with his portrayal of Mark is something for the history books. If this film will be remembered for anything, I hope that it will be because of him. Such a complex delivery! I love that The Social Network is not really a film about Facebook but a complex, intimate, and puzzling character study of the touching from a distance variety. His performance is made of composites, all of which equally compounding and involved. Eisenberg's intricate approach, along with the occasional trip of haywire, is only augmented by Mark's impenetrable and inaccessible frozen heart.Or is it even frozen? Maybe he's a kid who has a whole lot of heart but doesn't know how to use it. He had forgotten how a long time ago. Now he just is. But does he want to be? Does he yearn? In a performance that touches upon both the easily readable and the abstruse, Eisenberg molds a legendary character. A pillar of the actor's cinema. A startlingly perfect performance from an actor who has obviously mastered the craft. He got lost in Mark. I'm sure of it. This role had so many layers and it only gets more astonishing the more of them you peel back. Eisenberg was stunning here. A truly perfect and touching performance. Like I said, one of the best performances I have ever seen.What is this film trying to say about my generation? Honestly, I don't really care much about that aspect of it. With the exception of the actors in participation, the rest of the filmmakers were older men who are most likely out of touch. I mean, my generation is inherently out of touch by nature so how could Aaron Sorkin and David Fincher know any better? This is not to say that Sorkin's script isn't great or that Fincher's vision wasn't coherent, fluid, and interesting to watch. I'm only saying that this film may not be the generation defining film in terms of territory and material, but it is generation defining in terms of acting and character. Eisenberg towers over his contemporaries. I've been waiting for an actor like him to come around for a very long time to kind of show the way for the others. I also hope that this film brings the character study back into popular demand. It's been a few years now since The Social Network was released and films just aren't seeming to catch on. It was a special kind of film and I guess we're not headed toward a new renaissance but at least it existed. A reminder of what the medium can accomplish. It focused on and examined a character who was not only a complicated one but one that shared a great likeness to it's coeval and modern audience. In the idea that Mark as a character is representative of my generation's cold resolve, the film is truly generation defining. It might not be the film my generation claimed but it's the one it deserved. It may not be an exact interpretation of my generation but it makes for a damn good silhouette of it.One of my all-time favorite films.

When `The Social Network' sweeps the Oscars (which it, inevitably, is going to do) it will be the first time since 1984 when Oscars Best Picture winner will match up with the film I deem to be the best of the given year (for those interested, 1984 was when `Amadeus' took the gold; and if you haven't seen it then you MUST IMMEDIATELY). The fact remains that `The Social Network' is not only the best reviewed film of the year, it is the best reviewed film of the past decade, and while I don't think it deserves that title (I am completely in `Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind's camp for `Film of the Aughts') it would certainly be the Academy's best choice in YEARS.Like I've said to nearly every single person I've talked to; BELIEVE THE HYPE!I have a strange feeling there is going to be lots of YELLING in this review...In determining the best way to go about attempting to write a review for this film, I basically decided that it was best to just do it in pieces, master `pieces'. In other words; I'm just going to throw out my current thoughts in random order and hope it all fits together nicely. Contemplating a decisive and cohesive review for this film just seems wrong to me. My extreme excitement for this film has me all sorts of giddy and so that seems like the perfect template for dissecting the films utter greatness.The first master `piece' comes at the film's outset; a masterfully crafted opening sequence that utilizes cold stares and quick witted dialog to establish character persona and eventual developments. It is the single best opening sequence I've seen on film in a long time (I think I mentioned this fact while highlighting the brilliance that was `Inglorious Basterds' opening moments). The sparring between Rooney Mara and Jesse Eisenberg was FLAWLESS and really set the perfect tone for Fincher's finest film.SPEAKING ON TONE; what Fincher does here is just incredible. The way he creates something so dark and complex and fascinatingly enticing out of what could have been nothing more than a conventional `teen flick' is beyond commendable.HAND HIM THE OSCAR!Seriously, there is not a false note here. The film moves at the desired pace, never lagging but knowing not to move too quickly so as to skip over necessary plot points and character arcs. By breaking moments down with ease, Fincher elaborates on his character's inner monologue with keen insight and a sharpness that keeps the film very `cool' and `likable'; which is a feat to accomplish when your main protagonist is not very likable or cool.But then again, who needs to be cool when you are Jesse Eisenberg or Andrew Garfield or Armie Hammer or Justin Timberlake...or really anyone in the cast?Yes, a major master `piece' here is the flawless cast, all of whom handle their respective roles with enough concentrated naturalism to balance out the youthful arrogance and otherworldly naivety to create honest portraits of American youth. With a smug sense of arrogance that never once betrays his peering honesty; Eisenberg understands how to carry this film, making Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg nearly sympathetic. He is never fully justified in his naivety, but he is (in a way) forgiven thanks to the self-loathing with which Eisenberg layers his character's shell. He is pathetically jealous and painstakingly ambitious, but his actions never feel evil or malicious because Eisenberg breathes a very real life into his eyes and makes this man less a monster and more a human being. Justin Timberlake reeks of charisma, which is expected, and it is more than enough to establish his take on Sean Parker to be noteworthy and effective. Armie Hammer takes on two characters, twins, and evokes separate when complementary personalities to each; which is a marvelous feat (I honestly thought he was played by TWO actors, he was that detailed in each approach). For me though, the star of the show is easily Andrew Garfield. The way he layers Eduardo Saverin, Zuckerberg's (former) best friend, is stunningly effective and poignant. He always decidedly supporting, giving heft to Eisenberg as the true start, but he makes the most of his moments and underscores the films more central themes.Which brings me back to Fincher. Like I said; I'm shooting this off as it pops into my head. When considering the directorial masterclass that Fincher showed up with here, I'm just astonished (and his Oscar win will be my absolute FAVORITE of the evening). Creating a mood and setting a tone is one thing, but the most important thing a director can do is add texture to that mood, and Fincher does that in spades. The way he uses imagery to propel the central themes of the film is also another astonishing trick that further imbeds the films core into the mind of the audience without browbeating us with a `message'. It creates an air of simplicity within a world of complexities.It feels effortless.One of my friends even likened the films `rowing' sequence, which almost feels like a scene from a different film (cut, paste, celebrate), to Spielberg's opening sequence in `Saving Private Ryan', and while I'm not quick to personally make the connection; I can see the reasoning behind his comparison. Fincher understood how to parallel the films central themes of power, ambition, loyalty, failure and vengeance with the actual `goings on' surrounding the film without making them so obvious they feel manipulated.EFFORTLESS.And now my mind is racing over to the films brilliant use of cinematography; which also causes me to think about the effective use of (or non-use of) lighting; all of which added layers to the films tone.And that score; O.M.G.Knowing that I really need to start wrapping this up is killing me. SO MUCH TO SAY SO MUCH TO SAY, but alas, I will try and close this up like so; this movie is far more than you'd expect. Yes, this a movie about Facebook and how it was launched and how it took a devastating toll on a friendship and, in effect, on a person, but understanding how easily it would have been to completely mess this thing up is something to keep close in mind, and something that will help elevate appreciation for what Fincher (and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin) did here.GREEDPOWERAMBITIONLUSTJEALOUSYPASSIONFAILURESUCCESSIt's all there, bursting through the surface.