Kristin Reviews The Social Network
Aaron Sorkin based his screenplay, documenting Zuckerberg’s journey from Harvard student to world’s youngest billionaire, on interviews with involved parties, research conducted by The Accidental Billionaires author, Ben Mezrich, and actual deposition transcripts from the two lawsuits used to frame the drama. Much of the dialog is reported to be a word-for-word recounting of these depositions.
Given the way said reenactments blend seamlessly with the fictionalized accounts of those scenes undocumented for posterity by legal counsel, Aaron Sorkin deserves all the Oscars.
Honestly, I don’t particularly care which parts are true and which aren’t. If Sorkin added a few things here and there to develop character, or illuminate motivation, or heighten drama, he did it right.
The Social Network could have been a tacky tabloid tell-all, vilifying the young, wealthy Zuckerberg, and inviting the audience to cheer when he gets his comeuppance from the little people he may or may not have stomped on to get to the top: “The Rise and Fall of the Brilliant A-hole.”
Instead, Sorkin gives us a film about one social network, of which Zuckerberg is a member, that is hampered continuously, whether deliberately or inadvertently, by breakdowns in communication.
In both flashbacks and ‘present day’ deposition scenes, every individual directly involved in Zuckerberg’s life struggles to interact effectively with him and others.
Zuckerberg’s attorneys are dismayed by his lack of cooperation; opposing counsel can’t get a clear, or a civil, response from him; and pleas from his longtime friend and former CFO, Eduardo Saverin, to recognize the harm he’s done to their friendship go unacknowledged.
Even the otherwise consistently in tandem twin brothers, Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss (played almost too deftly to believe by Armie Hammer), find themselves arguing over the best way to handle their perceived grievance against Zuckerberg.
Thus, when a single member of Zuckerberg’s legal team finally breaks through the verbal clutter and communicates simply, eloquently, and accurately, it is as if we, the audience, have been released from a set of constraints in which we weren’t even aware we were bound.
If only Zuckerberg could feel the same relief.
And there lies the brilliance of the screenplay. Whether it is true in real life or not, Sorkin’s (and Jesse Eisenberg’s, whom I’ll get to in a moment) Zuckerberg, as brilliant as he is, doesn’t ever actually understand the complexities of social human interaction.
The Zuckerberg of the film remains always on the outside, whether he’s blogging in his dorm room while those he claims to admire participate in wild, decidedly uncerebral partying, or remaining alone at the office while his staff celebrates a membership milestone.
If Zuckerberg were simply a jerk, we could write him off and hope he gets what’s coming to him. But he’s not. And, in the end, even after witnessing all his stupid, hurtful, and irresponsible social mistakes, we can’t hate him, no matter how much we wish we could.
Of course, Sorkin didn’t do all that alone.
In addition to fine directing by David Fincher, much of the credit must be given to Jesse Eisenberg for his performance.
After several recent ‘awkward geek with a heart of gold’ roles in such films as Adventureland and Zombieland, Eisenberg has been referred to as “the poor man’s Michael Cera.” With this role, he breaks out of that mold and demonstrates that he is hardly a second choice substitute.
Eisenberg successfully embodies both the intensity and the social awkwardness that make up the core of Sorkin’s version of Zuckerberg, leaving the audience conflicted – unsure whether we should despise the man . . . or feel sympathy for him.
Ultimately, The Social Network is not simply a tale of one man’s rise to the top. It is a complex examination of social interaction between friends – and enemies – and the difficulties in successfully navigating both avenues for all of us.
-Kristin
11.27.2010
Comments
Post a Comment