The Social Network

The film doesn't rely on the future success of Facebook. Zuckerbergs rise to riches happened, that isn't going to change.

__________________
If I had a dollar for every existential crisis I've ever had, does money really even matter?

Yeah, Fiscal's right; I dunno what you're talking about. I'm guessing you didn't see the movie, because Facebook didn't "make" it; it's just a movie about the tumultuous founding of Facebook. It's a business and legal drama more than anything else. Replace Facebook with any other company and it works about as well.

I'm talking about the whole idea of making a movie about a website. Like if they made a movie about the nostalgia critic, or this site even. In the future of how people saw the influence of a website can generate enough success. I understand what the movie is trying to do, tell the story of how it became of what it is, less on the site itself. But if no one knew what facebook was, I'm sure they wouldn't think of making a movie.

__________________
More on that later...

This:

----

Everyone DOES know what facebook is, so why the hypothetical?

Microsoft has been around longer than Facebook & Pirates of Silicon Valley was just a TV Movie.
Facebook's success is one of the reason the movie happened, but also because it was a good story to tell.

I guess what he/she is saying is that it might seem a little odd in a couple of decades if/when people don't really know what Facebook is any more, which I can kinda see. But the main thing, to me, is that the nature of Facebook is rather incidental, and that the haggling over a company (and not this specific company) is the important thing, and what gives the story thrust. But if Puddin's just saying that it might seem a little dated in 20 years, I guess that's plausible. I don't think the movie will become bad as a result, however.

I was being hypothetical because I was asking a question. What would people think in the future about the movie?

I think when facebook dies the movie would be forgetful, but it was popular at the time. If I say "Facebook" what is the first thing that pop's inside your head? Is it the website or the movie?

What yoda said, I don't think the movie will be bad, just overlooked.

I gotcha now, I thought you were saying something along the lines of "What if facebook wasn't popular, I bet there wouldnt be a movie". I'm tracking now, forgive me.

I doubt Facebook itself will ever really be forgotten, Facebook is wildly successful, just check out the statistics. It's monumental really.

Yea I don't see it dieing soon, but you never know whats going to come up next. I think it was genius to capitalize on the success. 500 million active users and 700 billion minutes per month on Facebook... well I have to say this man is filthy rich.

I think of the website, not the film. The site is genius is a way (not mofo genius, but close), making connecting to others so much easier.

I was never a fan of MySpace.

__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews

Hollywoods running out of ideas..
I Thought this movie was going to be ****.
it was really good.

__________________

such a good movie

There's been a lot of hype about this movie lately & it's been making me want to see this movie, I think it sounds really interesting.

I think the movie was fine. Jesse Eisenberg did a great job.

To me, the character Zuckerberg did not come off as a bad person. Only a person, who believed in what he did. He had an idea and wanted to protect it. No matter what. You can judge that as a bad thing only if the motives for it were immoral.

The character had some distinct antisocial habbits in his behaviour, yet those all are just who he is. Noone has the right to judge or criticize other's behaviour, as long as it does no harm to anyone. Sure, he did some immoral things which obviously affected other people, but everyone has their weak moments. It makes us human. And clearly he regretted making people feel bad.

This movie´s message was roughly: "Is this where we've come?". What if a muse for a great song started demanding compensation. Think about it..

"Zuckerbergs" motives were clearly pure and honest: to make a billion dollars. (note the sarcasm)
Reasons for not co-operating with other people were that he felt he was being used or that the "magical idea", facebook was being used for selfish means (just forget the thing about the billion dollars).

A fictional story about an idealist, who only wanted <b>the</b> idea to get big, not in cash but in enormous diffusion.

A nice sympathy growing sidekick was that in the middle of everything he was still obsessed with a girl he had a crush on.

over and out.

This is not showed in the film, he only feels bad about what people think of him... That's why he tries to justify himself saying he isn't a bad person.

If he has done immoral things to others as you say, then why why steal the right of criticism... everyone has the right to criticise something or someone that affects them.

I have no idea what you mean by this.

What sarcasm? He felt he was being used? I don't remember seeing this.

Great movie, loved it..

Can't wait to see it again, Fincher is so damn talented.

Saw this last night and had a few thoughts. I thought Jesse Eisenberg played a better part in Zombieland. Didn't really think much of the rest of the cast. Justin Timberlake was pretty good in a limited role.

As for the actual thrust of the film, eh, it was alright I guess. I don't know if I even care if Zuckerburg is a "bad guy" or if he's just a common thief. I sort of lean towards the latter by what was in the film. But, films can be easily construed to anyone's cause and for all I know, the Winklevoss twins financed the film with the rather large settlement they received from Zuckerburg just to get their side of the story out.

My question is, is it an important story? No, not really. It's nothing new to me to see or hear about somebody taking another persons idea and making it their own and even profiting greatly from it. In fact, it's a mainstay in humanity's way of life.

As for Fincher and the work he's done here, I'd say it rates in the lower half of his repertoire and as one poster said I think there's a very good chance that this film gets utterly forgotten in several years time. That being said though, now that there's ten Best Picture noms every year, it wouldn't surprise me to see it get a nod. I think that would be a shame, but whatever, the Oscars seem to be on a mission to try to recognize mediocrity instead of the truly great and I guess that's their call. Definitely agree with the Adapted screenplay nod that TUS was talking about too.

So, in short. The Social Network .

__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...

yesterday i saw a preview here in Italy of "The Social Netwotk". I think that D.Fincher succeeded in making a potentially commonplace film in a movie absolutely non-trivial..
A security : Aaron Sorkin,one of the best living writers (the West Wings).
The film does not warrant anyone, is not popular and is not consoling.Is not Facebook. Is Facebook filtered by sorkinfincheriano's eye, so indifferent and modern.
Is an action that involves money, friendship, betrayal, invention, genius, ideas for future and more, all in front of a PC screen. I mean us.

Sorry for my English

Oh, Powdered Water, I want you to know I'll powder your water anytime. We are on the same level in regards to this movie -- thank god -- I was getting sick of all of the praise I was reading.