The Social Network being compared to Citizen Kane & Godfather

[Fatal9]

and Rashomon...

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the-social-network/

This movie is being reviewed as being one of the greatest ever and already a pick to "sweep the Oscars". Has a 100% rating on rotten tomatoes and an average rating of 9.9/10 (unheard of, almost feels like a mistake).

This is way out of left field, didn't think I would ever even end up watching this movie :wtf:

[Bano114]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the-social-network/

This movie is being reviewed as being one of the greatest ever and already a pick to "sweep the Oscars". Has a 100% rating on rotten tomatoes and an average rating of 9.9/10 (unheard of, almost feels like a mistake).

This is way out of left field :wtf:

Not really...this movie was being hyped up for a while, even by posters on here. I look forward to seeing it now though.

[Fatal9]

must have missed on the hype, I thought it was a movie being marketed to make a quick buck off teens (laughed when I saw the trailer a couple of months ago). A movie about facebook being one of the greatest ever though? Don't think anyone expected that...

[Bano114]

must have missed on the hype, I thought it was a movie being marketed to make a quick buck off teens (laughed when I saw the trailer a couple of months ago). A movie about facebook being one of the greatest ever though? Don't think anyone expected that...

I see your point. Its more about friendship, betrayal and the rise to the top if you take a closer look. Thats what the Godfather was about when you think about it...but these 2 movies are very different still. It's hard to compare them in any other way.

[the GIBBET]

you know, i hardly even use facebook/social networking, and when i first heard of the movie figured it wouldnt be anything i'd be interested in. however i have to say, when i saw the trailer i thought that it looked like it could be pretty damn good.

[Randy]

must have missed on the hype, I thought it was a movie being marketed to make a quick buck off teens (laughed when I saw the trailer a couple of months ago). A movie about facebook being one of the greatest ever though? Don't think anyone expected that...

Movie nerds like myself had high hopes because of the creative talent attached to the project, specifically the writer, Aaron Sorkin, and the director, David Fincher. With those two on the same project, it was bound to be pretty high quality. I have to admit though, this mass adoration has surprised me quite a bit. Although, if you check that Rotten Tomatoes link there is only 13 reviews so far, by the time it reaches 100+ reviews I'm sure the score will drop from 100%.

[niko]

i see no buzz about the movie being this fantastic film at all. It's about Facebook. It is not going to win Oscars. I think that's pretty obvious.

[the GIBBET]

i see no buzz about the movie being this fantastic film at all. It's about Facebook. It is not going to win Oscars. I think that's pretty obvious.


:banghead:

[DRoseOwnsACamry]

i see no buzz about the movie being this fantastic film at all. It's about Facebook. It is not going to win Oscars. I think that's pretty obvious.
:facepalm

[Fatal9]

Although, if you check that Rotten Tomatoes link there is only 13 reviews so far, by the time it reaches 100+ reviews I'm sure the score will drop from 100%.
It's the 9.9 average rating I'm amazed by (has to be a mistake?), not the 100%.

[Jailblazers7]

I thought thiss looked good from the trailers but definitely didn't expect this level of rave reviews.

[bballer]

I thought thiss looked good from the trailers but definitely didn't expect this level of rave reviews.

["Jesus"]

I read yesterday that the structure of the movie was like Citizen Kane.

[bagelred]

i see no buzz about the movie being this fantastic film at all. It's about Facebook. It is not going to win Oscars. I think that's pretty obvious.

Every review so far on Metacritic is a 100/100. This movie will be one of the defining movies of the era, from what everyone says.

[sawyersauce]

It's the 9.9 average rating I'm amazed by (has to be a mistake?), not the 100%.

Yeah that's insane. It's not that uncommon for good films to have an 100% approval rating for the first 10 or so reviews, that just means nobody has written a negative review yet. But a 9.9 average is amazing, even for only 13 reviews.

I like Fincher, but I wouldn't put him in the same tier as Scorsese, Lynch and the Coens. He's always been innovative, i guess something must have clicked for him, or he's added an extra coat of polish to his repertoire, or the script and cast are just something else.

[SinJackal]

I don't much understand the hype behind the movie. The actors in the trailer seemed sort of annoying, like ones you'd see on some new flop ABC series.

I also agree with niko. A movie about facebook and some dorks making money doesn't sound very interesting. The trailer didn't interest me at all either.

[bagelred]

I don't much understand the hype behind the movie. The actors in the trailer seemed sort of annoying, like ones you'd see on some new flop ABC series.

I also agree with niko. A movie about facebook and some dorks making money doesn't sound very interesting. The trailer didn't interest me at all either.

Get on the social networking bandwagon. yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeah..........dancing...........tweet ing to a gazillion people

[Abd El-Krim]

The first trailer I saw was 75% a montage of random pictures and people clicking on accent friend request buttons. It wasn't until recently I saw some scenes and realized it was an actual film.

I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being decent but still, the scenes I did see seemed really cheesy. "2200 hits in an hour?" "No, 22,000." How dramatic. I guess that's supposed to be its "I'll make him an offer he can't refuse."

[SinJackal]

The first trailer I saw was 75% a montage of random pictures and people clicking on accent friend request buttons. It wasn't until recently I saw some scenes and realized it was an actual film.

I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up being decent but still, the scenes I did see seemed really cheesy. "2200 hits in an hour?" "No, 22,000." How dramatic. I guess that's supposed to be its "I'll make him an offer he can't refuse."

:roll:

[BRabbiT]

this movie could be good.

personally, i'm not on FB anymore, but in a few years we'll see how big a phenomenon this was/is.

dude didn't just make a huge profit...this is bigger than some "geek" making a fortune. what he's done is amazing.

[the GIBBET]

this movie could be good.

personally, i'm not on FB anymore, but in a few years we'll see how big a phenomenon this was/is.

dude didn't just make a huge profit...this is bigger than some "geek" making a fortune. what he's done is amazing.


Yeah. Inevitably though some people will play the "hah, a movie about facebook? i bet teenage girls will like that, so obviously i'm way too cool and smart to take it seriously" card.

[soadrules]

"2200 hits in an hour?" "No, 22,000." How dramatic. I guess that's supposed to be its "I'll make him an offer he can't refuse."

That's hilarious. Had me on the floor laughing for a good minute.

I had a couple of friends to go advanced screenings and saying it was fantastic. I have high hopes after reading all the previews though.

[chazzy]

I thought the score in the trailer made it seem more dramatic than it really is, didn't expect it to get such good reviews. Guess I'll check it out.. comes out next week?

[Hibachi!]

what's the normal release date for it?

[KeylessEntry]

I am not watching this movie. I am more of a myspace guy so I am going to watch the movie about the rise and fall of Tom.

[ZeN]

It has an 8.2 on iMDB right now. And new movies almost always start off high(er) then drop. So you can probably expect something along the lines of a 7.8-8 after the dust settles, which is probably a bit more realistic.
an 8 would still make it good.. which would come as a surprise to me, seeing that its a 'facebook' movie.. :oldlol:

But once I saw that Sorkin and Lynch were involved.. I felt like I had to see it no matter what..

[pete's montreux]

I thought the same thing fatal. I saw the trailer and it was garbage. Maybe that's a good thing, though? Too often you see a trailer that sucks you in to the hype and the movie ends up being terrible. I thought the trailer was awful and the movie doesn't appeal to me at all, but hey, it could be one of the all-time greats. You never know.

[SCdac]

I love David Fincher's work, and am definitely excited to see this.

Facebook, TO ME, is an intriguing story and subject, will be interesting to see Fincher's take on it's development.

Heard Zuckerberg isn't too happy with the way he's portrayed, yet that only makes me want to see it more.

Knowing Fincher's propensity for darker material, touching on the "greed" within the founding of facebook (a tool that itself kind of influences self-centered-ness and egotism) ought to make for a good story IMO.

[SCdac]

This movie kind of reminds me of Fincher's "The Game" in that it's an excellent movie, maybe even underrated, exceptional performance by Micheal Douglas, but nothing as memorable/significant as "Fight Club", nothing as dark as "Se7en", and nothing as Oscar-friendly as "Benjamin Button.

[the GIBBET]

This movie kind of reminds me of Fincher's "The Game" in that it's an excellent movie, maybe even underrated, exceptional performance by Micheal Douglas, but nothing as memorable/significant as "Fight Club", nothing as dark as "Se7en", and nothing as Oscar-friendly as "Benjamin Button.



not sure if serious?

[niko]

Every review so far on Metacritic is a 100/100. This movie will be one of the defining movies of the era, from what everyone says.
i'll bet this movie gets no oscar nods at all. Just for bragging rights. You in?

Note: the good but not fantastic reviews are floating in already. I'm not sure what reviews you are all seeing where this is citizen Kane. You've all seen the trailer and know the story, how the hell could this be life altering?

[niko]

Have any of you seen it? WHen does it open? If a few of you rave about it, despite by doubts, i'll definitely go see it. Post when you do.

Note: I'm not arguing it will be bad film. I just doubt it's one of the great films of our time.

[PowerGlove]

The movie equivalent of calling a basketball player the next Jordan. Lets wait a decade or so before saying stuff like this.

[niko]

The movie equivalent of calling a basketball player the next Jordan. Lets wait a decade or so before saying stuff like this.

It's just (for me) not a topic to me that could inspire the type of emotion to carry a movie to being a classic. It's why i'm so doubtful. It's facebook.

Then again, a Beautiful Mind is about math. But who is doing the Rusell Crowe performance here.

[branslowski]

I must admit, when I first saw the commercial for this....I thought it was going to be some kind of parody movie mocking the social networks..:lol

[knickmybockers]

when i first saw the trailer i thought this movie would be great. i'm surprised it's getting these types of reviews, but from the previews it looks like it was shot very well.

[niko]

I must admit, when I first saw the commercial for this....I thought it was going to be some kind of parody movie mocking the social networks..:lol

i saw one of the girls from those inane disney shows my niece watches and thought "teeny bopper film". If this is a great film, whoever made the trailer, commercials, etc. really messed up.

[Fatal9]

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lB95KLmpLR4

Still looks like garbage that would be better if it was made for TV. The topic just doesn't seem interesting at all. Going to watch it now though with what's being written.

[branslowski]

i saw one of the girls from those inane disney shows my niece watches and thought "teeny bopper film". If this is a great film, whoever made the trailer, commercials, etc. really messed up.

You talkin bout Brenda Song:lol ....She has a nice ass though...

[JayGuevara]

This movie kind of reminds me of Fincher's "The Game" in that it's an excellent movie, maybe even underrated, exceptional performance by Micheal Douglas, but nothing as memorable/significant as "Fight Club", nothing as dark as "Se7en", and nothing as Oscar-friendly as "Benjamin Button.

I'm not saying he hasn't made some good movies, but I find it funny how everyone forgets he also made Alien 3. And didn't Panic Room suck too? I feel like I watched it once, but at the same time I don't know if I did cuz I don't remember anything about it.

Seriously, before anyone says how awesome David Fincher is at everything, please just think about Alien 3.

[nolebball]

i saw one of the girls from those inane disney shows my niece watches and thought "teeny bopper film". If this is a great film, whoever made the trailer, commercials, etc. really messed up.

I don't think so. If the film ends up being very good, it's gonna travel by word of mouth (and the internet of course), so all the serious movie-watchers will find out and go watch it in the later weeks (for example, you waiting for us to tell you it is good). By pushing it as a "teenager" movie, it'll also draw out all the 15 year olds who just want to see a movie about Facebook. It increases revenue without actually taking away from the artistic value of the movie.

[DuMa]

fincher does great work. will watch no matter what people say about it.

[DuMa]

also i dont expect this movie to be about facebook, it just uses facebook as a tool for the main characters. much like the movie i saw today. Catfish.

[Timmy D for MVP]

I mean if everything I've been hearing about it is true this could be the movie of a generation.

Because think about it, when we look back on this time what's prob gonna jump out? That this was the generation where the world got extremely small and social networking is a huge part of that.

BUT that IS only if what I'm hearing so far is true...

[embersyc]

I'm not saying he hasn't made some good movies, but I find it funny how everyone forgets he also made Alien 3. And didn't Panic Room suck too? I feel like I watched it once, but at the same time I don't know if I did cuz I don't remember anything about it.

Seriously, before anyone says how awesome David Fincher is at everything, please just think about Alien 3.

Sorry you're a butt-raped Aliens fanboy, but the Studio destroyed Alien 3 not Fincher, he barely had any control over the film.

Still I think that had Alien 3 not been an Alien sequel, but instead an original movie it would get much more respect than it does.

Also Panic Room while not an entirely deep film is one of the better movies in its genre and has some fantastic performances and wonderful cinematography.

[embersyc]

Also as far the Social Network goes, I admit I was turned off at first, but a Fincher movie with a Trent Reznor/Atticus Ross soundtrack has gotta have more darkness to it than what the previews are showing. I expect it will be Fincher's best film since Fight Club.

[Qwyjibo]

Barely a mention of Zodiac in this thread? Too bad. Underrated movie and it was one of the best of the year it was released. For a procedural movie without much action, I was stunned by how it held my attention for the full 2.5+ hours.

[SCdac]

Barely a mention of Zodiac in this thread? Too bad. Underrated movie and it was one of the best of the year it was released. For a procedural movie without much action, I was stunned by how it held my attention for the full 2.5+ hours.

Good call, sir. I mentioned "The Game" earlier as underrated, but you can probably throw Zodiac in the same boat. Have to think that if it had come out after Iron Man (Downey Jr) or Prince of Persia (Gyllenhaal) it would have maybe gotten more pub but it was a good, well detailed movie none the less. And it was a long one surely, remember putting it together by hand, like all 8 reels, when i was a movie projectionist in 07 (Benj. Button too for that matter)... As far as some of the other posts, yeah Panic Room and Alien 3 were not so great, but successfully adapting Fight Club and 'Benjamin Button to the big screen outweighs it IMO.

[Sterb Hempel]

I thought the same thing fatal. I saw the trailer and it was garbage. Maybe that's a good thing, though? Too often you see a trailer that sucks you in to the hype and the movie ends up being terrible. I thought the trailer was awful and the movie doesn't appeal to me at all, but hey, it could be one of the all-time greats. You never know.

SHOCKER! Fatass taking a quick survey tryin to get in behind popular opinion on this. Guess if I was sloppy overweight with zero confidence I might try to fit in as hard as you do

[blondie]

Sorry you're a butt-raped Aliens fanboy, but the Studio destroyed Alien 3 not Fincher, he barely had any control over the film.

Still I think that had Alien 3 not been an Alien sequel, but instead an original movie it would get much more respect than it does.

Also Panic Room while not an entirely deep film is one of the better movies in its genre and has some fantastic performances and wonderful cinematography.
The Directors Cut of Alien 3 is on par with Aliens and Alien. :applause:

[Fatal9]

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the-social-network/

25 reviews now, 100% and rating of 9.8/10 (highest rating I've ever seen on that many reviews)

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the-social-network/?critic=creamcrop

top critics rating = 10/10

shocking.

[Fatal9]

No but now I have to check it out this weekend. Still can't get myself to be excited by any of the trailers though.

[pete's montreux]

True Grit's trailer was even worse.

[johndeeregreen]

I don't care how well done it might be, there's no way a movie about Facebook is on par with The Godfather or Citizen Kane. It just isn't.

This reminds me a lot of how people shit themselves down both legs when The Dark Knight came out. I doubt I'll see it.

[blondie]

I can compare diarrhea to chocolate mousse, but it's just not the same.
a ton of dumb people criticized godfather 2 when it came out too

[pete's montreux]

I don't care how well done it might be, there's no way a movie about Facebook is on par with The Godfather or Citizen Kane. It just isn't.

This reminds me a lot of how people shit themselves down both legs when The Dark Knight came out. I doubt I'll see it.

You eventually will. If the main character overdoses and dies, you'll make fun of him for a few years on here and then inevitably watch the movie and proclaim it as "not so bad".

[Jackass18]

I was intrigued by the trailer, but didn't expect rave reviews like that. I didn't think it could be that great if someone like Timberlake is in it.

[Zombles]

The Directors Cut of Alien 3 is on par with Aliens and Alien. :applause:

It doesn't touch Aliens but it's a quality flick regardless. Gets hated on too much. No Newt + marine dude because of budget issues sucked though.

[johndeeregreen]

You eventually will. If the main character overdoses and dies, you'll make fun of him for a few years on here and then inevitably watch the movie and proclaim it as "not so bad".
TDK was a good film. A classic, however, it is not, and again, had Ledger not died it would certainly not be viewed in the same light. My initial assumption that it was probably decent/good but wildly overhyped/overblown/overrated was spot on, as I expect it will be with this as well.

[the GIBBET]

I don't care how well done it might be, there's no way a movie about Facebook is on par with The Godfather or Citizen Kane. It just isn't.

This reminds me a lot of how people shit themselves down both legs when The Dark Knight came out. I doubt I'll see it.


What kind of attitude is this? Seriously.



I was intrigued by the trailer, but didn't expect rave reviews like that. I didn't think it could be that great if someone like Timberlake is in it.

You know Frank Sinatra was in From Here to Eternity, right? One of the most celebrated motion pictures of all time.

But I'm sure "that's different" right?

[TheAnchorman]

A couple of scenes in the movie were filmed @ my university, johns hopkins last year. Apparently our campus kinda looked like harvard lol... didnt get to see timberlake or w/e though.

[Jackass18]

You know Frank Sinatra was in From Here to Eternity, right? One of the most celebrated motion pictures of all time.

He also starred in The Manchurian Candidate which is a great movie. What's your point?

[ThaRegul8r]

A movie about Facebook being compared to The Godfather and Citizen Kane?

:wtf:

Seriously?!???

[the GIBBET]

He also starred in The Manchurian Candidate which is a great movie. What's your point?


Frank Sinatra was a singer who was given movie parts because of his cross-over appeal. It neither means he is incapable of acting nor that a film with him in it cannot be great. How is that any different than Justin Timberlake?


That's my point.

[E_Stamkos]

A movie about Facebook being compared to The Godfather and Citizen Kane?

:wtf:

Seriously?!???

Hard to fathom isnt it. Seems very suspect to me as well

[franchise#3]

When I first the trailer I thought it was a spoof made for MTV movie awards or something.

[Hotlantadude81]

It's only really about Facebook to a point. Really, it seems that it's going to have a critical eye toward the selfish narcissistic generation of today.

[Hotlantadude81]

I'm not saying he hasn't made some good movies, but I find it funny how everyone forgets he also made Alien 3. And didn't Panic Room suck too? I feel like I watched it once, but at the same time I don't know if I did cuz I don't remember anything about it.

Seriously, before anyone says how awesome David Fincher is at everything, please just think about Alien 3.

The best cut of Alien 3 and it's not all that bad. Plus he was basically a director for hire.

[Hotlantadude81]

True Grit's trailer was even worse.

That's silly. It will be more watchable simply because Bridges is a far better actor than John Wayne who is barely a better actor than Arnie or Sly was.

[rufuspaul]

I'm not saying he hasn't made some good movies, but I find it funny how everyone forgets he also made Alien 3. And didn't Panic Room suck too? I feel like I watched it once, but at the same time I don't know if I did cuz I don't remember anything about it.

Seriously, before anyone says how awesome David Fincher is at everything, please just think about Alien 3.

This. His films have been very hit and miss imo. Teaming with Sorkin will surely add some "clever" overly wordy dialogue that critics seem to adore. I'm kinda meh on that because it's so different from the way people normally talk, but I guess all films are like that in a way.

I'll probably go see this film and I hope it's good, but so far a film about facebook that borrows heavily from Citizen Kane doesn't sound too appealing.

[pete's montreux]

That's silly. It will be more watchable simply because Bridges is a far better actor than John Wayne who is barely a better actor than Arnie or Sly was.
Well thank god I said trailer and not premise! :rolleyes:

[niko]

:facepalm
People negged me for saying a movie about Facebook is not going to win oscars. It's NOT. Reality check here people...

[Crystallas]

Wow, the Illuminati are really pulling hard for this.

[Younggrease]

A movie about Facebook being compared to The Godfather and Citizen Kane?

:wtf:

Seriously?!???

A movie following the creator of a billion dollar corporation that has altered how we interact socially cant be a great movie...I fail to see how this movie is about facebook.

[chrisxuk]

A movie following the creator of a billion dollar corporation that has altered how we interact socially cant be a great movie...I fail to see how this movie is about facebook.

It's about how Facebook was created. It has a very interesting history. Have a listen/read to Ben Mezrich's "The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook" as that is the story that the film is based on.

I can't wait to see it, the audiobook of the aforementioned book was excellent.

[Jackass18]

Frank Sinatra was a singer who was given movie parts because of his cross-over appeal. It neither means he is incapable of acting nor that a film with him in it cannot be great. How is that any different than Justin Timberlake?

I've never seen Timberlake in a great movie. I thought Timberlake was kind of like a gimmick to draw viewers. If he's now getting roles in really, really good movies, then good for him.

[niko]

Avatar bet? I'm guessing it will win at least one Oscar, based on the buzz so far. Probably Best Screenplay if I had to guess.

*bookmarks thread*
ill bet if nothing cinematography based (or music). Acting (any) or screenplay. Clearly best film qualifies.

Deal?

[knickmybockers]

some of you need to understand that this film won't be solely about facebook.

[niko]

So now you're going to throw out a bunch of qualifiers? I thought you said it was NOT going to win any Oscars? Pansy.

we are arguing if its a classic movie or not. Best Cinemetography doesn't mean that. i give you screen play, etc. anything related to the acting, writing, directing, etc. - not the fact it had a good costume woman. I don't want to lose cause it won BEST SOUND EDITING.

Wimping out? My bet is very fair. Screenplay doesn't even mean the movie is good and im giving you that.

[niko]

You're absolutely wimping out.



I'm just going by what you said. That it wasn't going to win any Oscars. Now you want to add a bunch of qualifiers? Pfft.

You want to win on a technicality. Real men shit on technicalities. :no:

[brooks_thompson]

hm i thought this was out, i just called a friend to go see it. whoops!

but i am intrigued though. i haven't been to the movie theater since avatar, so i guess the hype is working.

[niko]

Technicality? You're the one who said it wouldn't win ANY Oscars. Real mean don't back down from their word.:no:

I meant REAL oscars. The one's movies have to be good to win. My terms are out there. Real oscars, no technical awards, take it or leave it.

[brooks_thompson]

I meant REAL oscars. The one's movies have to be good to win. My terms are out there. Real oscars, no technical awards, take it or leave it.

best screenplay is a real award

[niko]

best screenplay is a real award

i said that's acceptable. i mean no sound awards, costume awards, things that a film gets because its not good enough to win a real award but they wanted to give it something. Transformers can win an award for something like best FX, so not that.

[pete's montreux]

Word. How is best screenplay not a "real" award? I'd REALLY love your explanation on that one. :roll:

Anddddd nevermind.

[niko]

I already put my terms out there BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID. Then you got scurred and backed down from your word like a quaking little schoolgirl.

i thought the argument was if this was a classic movie or not. how does best sound editing prove that?

you have my terms, i guess you don't accept. :confusedshrug:

[niko]

Word. How is best screenplay not a "real" award? I'd REALLY love your explanation on that one. :roll:

Anddddd nevermind.

I DIDN"T SAY THAT!!! at least i think i didn't. Didn't i use best sound editing as my example? Screenplay is ok!

[brooks_thompson]

Word. How is best screenplay not a "real" award? I'd REALLY love your explanation on that one. :roll:

Anddddd nevermind.

looks like you already lost the avatar bet for niko

[niko]

Are you dense? I wasn't arguing with you whether or not it would be a classic movie. You said it would not win any Oscars. You even capitalized 'not' to emphasize your confidence in that claim. Then I bet you that it would win at least one. Then you starting backpedaling, adding all sorts of qualifications.

Anyway, I'm sure even if I did win, based on your backpedaling here you'd find some way to reneg. So peace out, homie.

i was arguing with people on if it was a classic movie or not (or could be) based on subject matter, not if it could win on a technicality. When people jump into conversations, you should give some leeway if you missed points. its not like its just you and me talking.

yes, based on semantics im wrong. it could win sound editing and id be wrong. it would have nothing to do with this topic, this conversation, but it would make my one sentence wrong based on semantics. how fun.

sigh...

[pete's montreux]

looks like you already lost the avatar bet for niko

:facepalm

Biggest fantasy football fluke ever.

[Fatal9]

Some trailer scenes from the movie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_NFjQtUPAI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcax1FjbYk0

There's more but didn't want to watch them. You get a good idea of the script from this though.

This is winning best picture, whether I like it or not. I'll bet niko or anyone on that. Not only is it loved by the critics but the subject is very mainstream so it should be popular with the public too.

[niko]

:facepalm

Biggest fantasy football fluke ever.

liar, you just love romo. We all know it.

[SCdac]

something to keep in mind is there's 10 best picture nominees nowadays. I loved District 9 and Inglourious Basterds, but wasn't expecting them to get nominated last year. wouldn't be that much of a shocker if it happened to The Social Network, and it doesn't hurt that Fincher has gotten that kind of nod before... not that I really care one way or the other... I just want to watch it.

[AK47DR91]

something to keep in mind is there's 10 best picture nominees nowadays. I loved District 9 and Inglourious Basterds, but wasn't expecting them to get nominated last year. wouldn't be that much of a shocker if it happened to The Social Network, and it doesn't hurt that Fincher has gotten that kind of nod before... not that I really care one way or the other... I just want to watch it.

Last year's Oscars nominations and winners were very mainstream besides The Hurt Locker, so I would be surprise if Social Network gets a few nods.

This film was unjustly robbed. Zero nomination.
Rockwell should have gotten for lead acting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twuScTcDP_Q

[RedBlackAttack]

I'm not sure how all of this Oscar talk started, but who really cares if this film wins an Academy Award or even if it is nominated? The AAs have lost so much of their luster, imo, that they are almost completely meaningless nowadays.

Usually, my favorite movies of the year go completely unnoticed, because they don't have the money (or they don't care enough) to campaign for an Oscar, which is really what it has become about.

This movie looks good. Citizen Kane and The Godfather? I'm certainly not going to even broach those two films in a comparison until after I've seen it... Multiple times (which I will if it is on that level). I sort of doubt it, though. I'm not sure the subject matter, while uniquely interesting (especially to this generation) is capable of driving the unique themes and mining the depths the way that the absolute classics have.

Then again, I've been wrong before. I just don't want to get my hopes too high.

[Fatal9]

anyone seen this yet or seeing it today?

[Fatal9]

still no reviews on ISH? does it live up to the hype? supposed to watch it tomorrow but too much school work and can only squeeze in time for Redskins/Eagles.

[vapid]

still no reviews on ISH? does it live up to the hype? supposed to watch it tomorrow but too much school work and can only squeeze in time for Redskins/Eagles.
It was very well done. The cinematography was nice, the acting worked, and I couldn't think of it being better for what it was. Sorkin is probably the best "smart people" dialog writer. Having said all that, it isn't some revolutionary "movie of our generation", it's just very good for telling Facebook's story.

[Hibachi!]

I think i'm gonna go check this out next week. all of my friends have said good things about it

[chazzy]

It was very well done. The cinematography was nice, the acting worked, and I couldn't think of it being better for what it was. Sorkin is probably the best "smart people" dialog writer. Having said all that, it isn't some revolutionary "movie of our generation", it's just very good for telling Facebook's story.

This sums it up pretty well. Jesse Eisenberg did a good job.

[bagelred]

OK, representing the average American as I do, this movie just sucked. Here are a bunch of reasons:

1. No superheroes - none of the characters had any super powers. WTF?
2. Not a cartoon - I'll see anything that's animated......ANYTHING
3. Not in 3D - Avatar? Greatest movie history mankind? Hello?
4. Not a sequel - The first movie might suck, but as long as you make a sequel, then I'll see it. Love Guru 2 is gonna be awesome.
5. No gratuitous violence - there's a reason Saw did so well. Look into it, Sorkin.
6. No simple premise - If I can't understand the premise (I had to look the word premise up) by seeing the poster, I'm lost.
7. No zombies - nuff said
8. No pirates - nuff said 2
9. No vampires - nuff said 3
10. No car chases - I kept waiting for one. Nothing.
11. No angels - nuff said 4
12. No Tyler Perry - "Tyler Perry's The Social Network" - BOOM, instant 10% increase ticket sales
13. No ghosts - nuff said 5
14. No weddings - Does Sorkin even realize half the audience are women?
15. No explosions - Unforgivable. "Cool guys don't look at explosions.....they walk away...."
16. Not a remake - Now I KNOW there was no facebook movie from the past. When a new Social Network movie comes out in 2030, I'm there.


I'll think of more, but because of the above, movie is a Huge Fail. I hated it.







Did not see.

[ILLsmak]

People are running out of movie ideas.

Sad thing is that literature is going through the same phase except not with the same topics... it's almost like we lost our original thoughts about 10 years ago. Kind of reminds me of that Idiocracy movie... people are getting dumber and artists are becoming less subtle.

BTW, Citizen Kane definitely did not stand the test of time... for me at least...

ROOOOSEBUD!!!

-Smak

[BRabbiT]

i don't really care how much hype it's getting. this sounds interesting.

the constant flash backs between court cases, inventing, backstabbing & partying seems hard to shoot.

apparently, Fincher nailed it. i'm a see this next week.

[Randy]

People are running out of movie ideas.

Sad thing is that literature is going through the same phase except not with the same topics... it's almost like we lost our original thoughts about 10 years ago. Kind of reminds me of that Idiocracy movie... people are getting dumber and artists are becoming less subtle.

BTW, Citizen Kane definitely did not stand the test of time... for me at least...

ROOOOSEBUD!!!

-Smak

Ideas are not running out, stories have been told for thousands of years and it's not going to stop any time soon. There are plenty of brilliant films being made each year, but they usually lack the PR campaign that a large studio can provide. Hollywood keeps producing garbage because it makes them, literally, billions of dollars. That's why Transformers 3 is getting made and every comic book ever is getting optioned, there is already a built in audience so the studio sees them as a "safe" option, rather than buying and putting in all the money into more risky ideas and screenplays. It sucks for the intelligent audience members, but it's big business.

[leopoldstotch]

yes i have seen the movie.

imo, it does live up to it's hype. labeled as best movie ever by comparing it to movies like "citizen kane"? no i don't think it's that great, yet it holds it's own ground.

the cinematography was superb.
the dialogue was excellent.
the acting was up to par.
justin timberlake did a good job as the role of Sean Parker. yes i said it. Justin timberlake did a good job acting. :eek:

will this win an oscar? most likely. they're going to receive multiple nominations. will it sweep the oscars? i don't think, because there are plenty of good movies coming out in the next 3 months.

would i recommend this movie? yes. everyone needs to watch this movie without the perspective of friend requests, annoying status updates, updating your profile, and other facebook activities. i feel this is a serious movie about how facebook is what it is right at this moment. also, if you're a tech geek, you'd be oozing with joy with the technology lingo is used throughout the movie. :lol

[Ben Jordan]

Saw it yesterday. Really well done. Relevant to my generation and the movie kept me thoroughly interested the entire time.

So many little details that are easy to miss throughout the entire movie. I'd probably go see it again.

side note: saw trent reznor being credited for music in the beginning credits. intriguing music that complimented scenes.

8.3/10

[JimmyConway]

Anyone else catch the scene where Zuck was looking at an album entitled "Tyler Durden's photo's" lol.****in cool.

[sawyersauce]

something to keep in mind is there's 10 best picture nominees nowadays. I loved District 9 and Inglourious Basterds, but wasn't expecting them to get nominated last year. wouldn't be that much of a shocker if it happened to The Social Network, and it doesn't hurt that Fincher has gotten that kind of nod before... not that I really care one way or the other... I just want to watch it.

It almost goes without saying, that with the greater number of noms, we're going to see a wider range of films on the list - including genre flicks like District 9 - rather than the usual narrow range of biographical-histories and crime movies.
But I actually thought Inglorious Basterds should have won best picture last year, or at least best Director for Tarantino.

This has actually got me thinking about a completely random, off-topic point. And I'm going to ramble about it anyway.
Does anyone else think there needs to be more seperation between best picture and best director? To me it seems whoever directed the best picture winner always wins best director - all the nominees are excactly the same between the two awards as well.
There are lots of aspects of film-making that need to come together to create a great film - performance, score, cinematography, production design and, yes, direction. And all those things need to be weighed when considering best picture. But direction itself is a much more specific skill than it is represented as - a great movie isn't always necessarily better directed than a poorer movie if the other aspects of film-making aren't even between the two.

For example, I think Scorsese should get a best director nom for Shutter Island, but the film itself should not get a nom for best picture. While I wouldn't give Nolan a best director nod, but obviously Inception deserves a best picture nom. That's probably going to stir some sh1t, I know everyone loves Nolan in here.

[Waking_Life]

For example, I think Scorsese should get a best director nom for Shutter Island, but the film itself should not get a nom for best picture. While I wouldn't give Nolan a best director nod, but obviously Inception deserves a best picture nom.


I attribute Inceptions greatness specifically on the 'direction' of Nolan. So how could you possibly praise the film as a whole, yet not give due credit to the man that basically conceptualized the whole undertaking?

Nolan was the backbone of the entire presentation by way of his clear and brilliant direction. Inception would not have been as stellar if created by any other director. The film holds all the signature elements that make his fans love him.

If a film is memorable and brilliant usually its due in large part to the resolute direction that drives it. So its fitting that you would recognize the director of a picture that is considered great.

[sawyersauce]

I attribute Inceptions greatness specifically on the 'direction' of Nolan. So how could you possibly praise the film as a whole, yet not give due credit to the man that basically conceptualized the whole undertaking?

Nolan was the backbone of the entire presentation by way of his clear and brilliant direction. Inception would not have been as stellar if created by any other director. The film holds all the signature elements that make his fans love him.

Well that's fine. You're entitiled to your opinion.

And I agree he deserves tremendous credit for the concept and script. But what's that got to do with directing? Why should he win a best directors award for his concept?

I thought the camera-work was unimaginative and simply framed the special effects and actors. A few of the anti-gravity sequences were nicely shot, and captured the feeling of floating for the audeince. But I felt for the whole movie, he probably could have played around with point of view a bit more, to create a more dream-like quality. Or at least experimented a little, to build a more palpable atmosphere.

Take for example the scene in which Paris folds in half. He sets the camera about 8-10 feet away and frames DiCaprio and Page stepping from the ground onto the wall 'plane' of gravity. There was an oppurtunity there to use the camera more creatively, I actually think some directors could have created the same effect (the city folding) without using special effects at all, just though camera manipulation.

Still, I can't really be bothered arguing about this, it's just my opinion - and believe me i know that many disagree.

My point was about the need to aknowledge great directing in films that might not have as good a cast or as big a budget as other films, not that I disliked Inception, because I loved it.

[Fatal9]

Ended up watching it today. Great flick, the best of the year for me. Loved the writing, and I generally don't like films who try to force too much wit into the script (especially with young characters), but it worked here. Thought they got a bit lazy with the ending though, didn't even bother finishing up the legal proceedings with the Winkelvoss twins and it all seemed really abrupt. Wasn't as impressed as others with Timberlake's acting either but Garfield and Esienberg were great. 9/10 for me.

[ukplayer4]

Ideas are not running out, stories have been told for thousands of years and it's not going to stop any time soon. There are plenty of brilliant films being made each year, but they usually lack the PR campaign that a large studio can provide. Hollywood keeps producing garbage because it makes them, literally, billions of dollars. That's why Transformers 3 is getting made and every comic book ever is getting optioned, there is already a built in audience so the studio sees them as a "safe" option, rather than buying and putting in all the money into more risky ideas and screenplays. It sucks for the intelligent audience members, but it's big business.



:applause:
spot on, exactly what ive been spouting for 5 years.

[ukplayer4]

It almost goes without saying, that with the greater number of noms, we're going to see a wider range of films on the list - including genre flicks like District 9 - rather than the usual narrow range of biographical-histories and crime movies.
But I actually thought Inglorious Basterds should have won best picture last year, or at least best Director for Tarantino.

This has actually got me thinking about a completely random, off-topic point. And I'm going to ramble about it anyway.
Does anyone else think there needs to be more seperation between best picture and best director? To me it seems whoever directed the best picture winner always wins best director - all the nominees are excactly the same between the two awards as well.
There are lots of aspects of film-making that need to come together to create a great film - performance, score, cinematography, production design and, yes, direction. And all those things need to be weighed when considering best picture. But direction itself is a much more specific skill than it is represented as - a great movie isn't always necessarily better directed than a poorer movie if the other aspects of film-making aren't even between the two.

For example, I think Scorsese should get a best director nom for Shutter Island, but the film itself should not get a nom for best picture. While I wouldn't give Nolan a best director nod, but obviously Inception deserves a best picture nom. That's probably going to stir some sh1t, I know everyone loves Nolan in here.



disagree with most of this- direction is by far the single most significant role in films- that is why film is referred to as the directors medium.b as director you also are responsible for many of the other elements that people often wrongfully detach, for example there are many schools of thought that good acting is actually good direction- i can say from my own experiences this is something i agree with, to a variable degree this also goes for cinematography, editing and many other areas. this varies depending on the size of the project and other factors tho.

if we are talking merit alone(not taking in to account the 10 best film slots) i personally feel inception doesnt warrant a best film nom but possibly best director(although unlikely)- of course it will get both because its mainstream masquerading as challenging cinema(thats win win for the academy). shutter island was imo a more satisfying film emotionally and a more engaging story with the humanism that inception lacked.... the season for great films hasnt come yet so we'll have to weight for the significant stuff, although toy story 3 is obviously a lock for best film, id actually have to throw the town in there, black swan/true grit have masterpiece speculation for good reason, uncle bonmee is gonna be amazing(palm dor) and i hear incredible things about winters bone....

[lefthook00]

Is it just me or was it kind of lame? Nothing really happened. It was like a TV show episode. The commercial was literally the whole movie.

[sawyersauce]

disagree with most of this- direction is by far the single most significant role in films- that is why film is referred to as the directors medium.b as director you also are responsible for many of the other elements that people often wrongfully detach, for example there are many schools of thought that good acting is actually good direction- i can say from my own experiences this is something i agree with, to a variable degree this also goes for cinematography, editing and many other areas. this varies depending on the size of the project and other factors tho.

if we are talking merit alone(not taking in to account the 10 best film slots) i personally feel inception doesnt warrant a best film nom but possibly best director(although unlikely)- of course it will get both because its mainstream masquerading as challenging cinema(thats win win for the academy). shutter island was imo a more satisfying film emotionally and a more engaging story with the humanism that inception lacked.... the season for great films hasnt come yet so we'll have to weight for the significant stuff, although toy story 3 is obviously a lock for best film, id actually have to throw the town in there, black swan/true grit have masterpiece speculation for good reason, uncle bonmee is gonna be amazing(palm dor) and i hear incredible things about winters bone....

I don't think you've understood my argument. Maybe I didn't word it correctly. But I'm not going to defend a view-point that isn't mine. Let me try and make myself more clear...

I'm not trying to diminish the role of the director here, I completely agree it is the most important role in the success of a film.

I'm questioning the criteria used to give out the Academy Award for best director. I think it needs to be stripped back to a set of skills that can be attributed soley to the director. Rather than basing it on collarbaration and communication with cinematographers, cast, designers ect, ect. That joint effort is what best picture should be for.

Maybe it's impossible. Maybe it's only practible if they split the best director award into two different awards. But right now, I feel many great feats are direction go unrewarded due to their films other limitations.

EDIT: Take Jame's Cameron's nomination last year. I personally feel he was getting credit as the director for what his budget and spec-effect team did. What did he actually do when behind the camera apart from frame what those people had created? Direction is like story-telling, you choose what the audience sees and doesn't see and how they see it.

How does a director employ that control to create effects, atmosphere and emotion. How do they use that control to heighten performance?

Those are the things I am interested in. Not the fact that they supervised over an extremely talented group of people.

[baseketball4life]

thought it was ok, 3 of 4 stars i suppose solid B. definitely not "movie of the year" as I've heard from some people. solid flick, worth going to easy to watch but not THAT great.

[bagelred]

Just saw it. This movie is definitely overrated, and not just saying that to be contrarian.

I'd give it 3 out of 4 stars, it's more fascinating than a great movie. But 2/3 of the way in, I'm thinking "This is exhausting." It was TOO chatty and maybe trying to be too smart for its own good. I think the last 1/2 hour saved it for me, because I found the ending scenes compelling but still not AMAZING.

I don't know.....I think this would make a better book than movie, where you can really dig deep into characters. I never really felt invested in what was going on.....you know?

The way I know its good and not great, is I have absolutely no desire to see it ever again. Meaning, the great movies you love to experience over and over. Not this. I don't feel I'd get anything else out of it.

I think this movie is a little "group think" for the critics. I get the feeling critics think its SUPPOSED to be great, and are getting on board.

Anyway, worth seeing, but you can wait for DVD or HBO or something. Nothing there you need to see on the big screen and nothing that's "must see" that you couldn't wait a few months or so.

[bada bing]

Just saw it. This movie is definitely overrated, and not just saying that to be contrarian.

I'd give it 3 out of 4 stars, it's more fascinating than a great movie. But 2/3 of the way in, I'm thinking "This is exhausting." It was TOO chatty and maybe trying to be too smart for its own good. I think the last 1/2 hour saved it for me, because I found the ending scenes compelling but still not AMAZING.

I don't know.....I think this would make a better book than movie, where you can really dig deep into characters. I never really felt invested in what was going on.....you know?

The way I know its good and not great, is I have absolutely no desire to see it ever again. Meaning, the great movies you love to experience over and over. Not this. I don't feel I'd get anything else out of it.

I think this movie is a little "group think" for the critics. I get the feeling critics think its SUPPOSED to be great, and are getting on board.

Anyway, worth seeing, but you can wait for DVD or HBO or something. Nothing there you need to see on the big screen and nothing that's "must see" that you couldn't wait a few months or so.

i haven't seen it nor am i planning to watch it until it comes out on dvd but do you think you are saying all this because it was soo over-hyped by everyone? i mean, even without watching it i kinda expect it to be too chatty and trying to be very 'smart'. Its just what i am expecting from this movie. Thats why i am not sure whats soo good about this movie. I'll just wait...i restrict my threatre watching experience to a few movies...

[vapid]

I guess Bagelred and bada bing don't know who Sorkin is.

[bagelred]

I guess Bagelred and bada bing don't know who Sorkin is.

Yes I know exactly who Sorkin is and it was very obvious he was the writer. He even made a cameo in the movie as one of the venture capital guys.

I remember watching his "Studio 60" show with Matthew Perry. That was also too smart for its own good. Very smart dialogue....dialogue no one would ever use backstage at a freakin' sketch comedy show.

Same thing here. But the smart dialogue does make more sense considering they are Harvard undergrads and its a world of smart, sharp people. But still..........

[bagelred]

i haven't seen it nor am i planning to watch it until it comes out on dvd but do you think you are saying all this because it was soo over-hyped by everyone?..

I guess. I was being objective going in. I realized it got incredible reviews but I was trying to be openminded about it. I mean, If I didn't hear any reviews, I think I'd have the same reaction. Good movie, interesting to watch, very smart dialogue, but not great.

[Rake2204]

No but now I have to check it out this weekend. Still can't get myself to be excited by any of the trailers though.
The trailers couldn't really get me going either. I went to watch this movie this weekend only based on what I'd heard. I'd put it off for a while just because I really couldn't convince myself of a reason to actually see it.

When I finally broke down and went though, I was definitely satisfied. I won't get into the award debate but I have to go opposite on bagelred on this one. It was the rare movie where at the 2/3 point I didn't say "Okay, how much longer?" It was just a lot of good things coming together. I liked the script, I liked the ambience, I liked characters, I liked the score, I liked nearly all of it. I actually wouldn't mind seeing it again.

[JustinJDW]

Still haven't seen the movie yet, but it must be good because its clearly getting a shitload of praise. I'm interested because I just recently joined Facebook like just this Summer. Its cool.

[Toni]

It was pretty good. Nowhere near those flicks but a solid 7.5-8/10. Ending was kind of weak and came out of nowhere I thought.

[Hawker]

Ending could've been better but overall a great movie. I've already read 50 pages of the book and I want to read the book even more now after watching the movie. Mark Zuckerberg is one sly mother ****er.

[JtotheIzzo]

I am feeling a bit of what the Rauce is saying above, but to me it was just a well made bio-pic.

[goldenryan]

not to change the subject but 8 1/2 and breathless are just as good as the godfather and Cane.

http://www.moviepostershop.com/breathless-movie-poster-1020238047.jpg

epic film :applause: