01. Fight Club
02. Se7en
03. Zodiac
04. The Social Network
05. The Game
06. Panic Room
07. Alien 3
08. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

The first film I saw in the theater since July 2008. I liked it, but I think I agree with Malcolm's list.

This movie is pretty amazing stuff. Like others experienced, the two hours completely flew by and I just wanted more. David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin are a match made in heaven: The Social Network is awesomely directed and the screenplay is absolutely outstanding. It's also impeccably acted, from top to bottom. Jesse Eisenberg deserves heaps of recognition for this film: Mark Zuckerberg is a jerk, to be sure, but Eisenberg's surprisingly subtle and humanized performance allows us to see to really seem him through to the core. Andrew Garfield is equally as good as Eduardo Saverin, who serves as the film's emotional center. Whoever has doubted Justin Timberlake in the past should stop now...his role is more showy than Eisenberg and Garfield put together, but his acting is slimy perfection. Also worthy of notice is Armie Hammer, who I was shocked to discover actually played both Winklevoss twins. And yes, I LOVED the opening scene of this film (Rooney Mara has very little screen time but what she had was quite promising). The cinematography is fabulous (the rowing scene!) and Trent Reznor's unusual musical score is dynamo. This is one of those "ah, THAT'S why I love movies" cases. A

Finally saw this last Saturday. This joins Inception as the only two films this year that have fully worked for me. I could nitpick a few things, as I could with Inception, but it gets the main thing right - it just feels like a "real" movie in the way that few others these days do. This is one of those few times where I agree almost word for word with a Libs review.

I'm a little peeved by some of the inaccuracies, after reading up on it. Like how Zuckerberg's had the same girlfriend since his 2nd year in college to present day... or how Dustin Moskovitz had as big as role in facebook in Eduardo and is a present billionaire, yet he's hardly in the film. Eduardo's shares weren't diluted to .03%, it was more under 10% and eventually to the 5% he currently has

It doesn't change my enjoyment of the film and I don't mind creating drama, but for a format that seems like a historical retelling, blatently shifting facts like the girlfriend and the shares is sloppy

I do find it fascinating that the script is based on a book Eduardo is the primary source for and the settlement actually came after he started spilling for this book

Saw the movie again. Still fantastic.

I didn't know about the Zuckerberg G/F thing. That's interesting.

There's something perversely satisfying about seeing the guy who says the age of privacy is over given a mythical roast. When the hit is perpetrated by some of the industry's most talented, the results are sublime. Those who accuse the film of being inaccurate should rewatch the final scene. It doesn't matter if the movie is fact-based or not, it plants ideas in the head of the jury by twisting what's surely a more complex tale (Dusty and some of the other co-founders of Facebook are window dressing) into a prosecution of Zuckerberg and everything he represents. As to those who complain the film is full of assholes, well yeah, that's the point. This is a virulently anti-Facebook movie, with an acidic creation myth that emphasizes how big the gap is between Facebook and real friends.

If The Social Network shows a more mature, restrained David Fincher (praise the lord that he had the good sense to finally make a movie less than two hours long!) I've still got to give Fight Club the edge. This movie has incredibly witty dialogue, but even if it bears superficial similarities to Citizen Kane, the structure is weaker than even Se7en. There really isn't much of a climax, which I suppose is only fitting for a biopic of a 26 year-old.

.... ?

I'm in the "liked it, didn't love it" camp. It has a lot of problems - none of which involve Fincher being "uncreative and boring", I should add.

You should probably stop trying to guess makeshift's reactions to films, Shack. You're not very good at it.

Shack is an expert on everything (movies, literature, politics, music, e-people, I could go on...) but he hates snobs !

9/10 -> A-

It's not the best Fincher movie for me (it's third or fourth) but it's excellent nonetheless.

Great (funny and witty) script superbly brought to life by a perfect ensemble. I loved the directing and the editing (the rowing scene!).

The only thing that lacks is the source material itself. The movie does a great job of turning this into quite a thrillerish-like setting, but I had only bare minimum knowledge of all Facebook controversy, law-suits and all and I did expect juicer scenes, thus a slightly more interesting movie.

But they did the smartest thing and used Facebook as a template setting for the usual human trades of being social, selfish, generous, jealous, smart, stupid, etc... and they basically facemashed those things together. The result is a wonderful section of the way people treat each other - the good way or the bad way...

I won't pretend to know what Sorkin/Fincher were 'trying to do' but it does seem appropriate for a movie about the creation of Facebook to blatantly lie about the details (see Catfish.)

Nothing they changed had any impact on the point of the movie.

Makeshift, yoshue, and trixster are actually 3 of my favorite posters. And I wouldn't call those 3 snobs except in jest

His relationship with women had nothing to do with his social inept-ness, imo.

He could've had the same gf the entire film, and it would not have effected the final outcome.

Most people on here think I'm an ass, yet I am married. Get the point?

Am I the only one that loved everything about him?

I would probably done everything he had done. MAYBE not screwing my friend... but probably.

I'm surprised there haven't been more favorable reactions to Sorkin's Zuckerberg. The acerbic, antisocial nerd who becomes a quick billionaire while giving the finger to athletic, attractive, super-wealthy elitists. Sure, there's the treatment of Eduardo, but I'm still surprised so many print critics, etc. have gone right to declaring him an a-hole beyond redemption.

I probably would have been more shady.

His socially inappropriate comments and ever present conceited nature overrides the positive will he gets for fucking over the elitists. People are not particularly attracted to one conceited ass flipping off other conceited asses with money, looks, and athleticism. The only person to root for in the film, and this is quite intentional on behalf of Sorkin imo, is Eduardo. You're not really supposed to root for Charles Kane either. Except there is no hero whatsoever in that film.

Eduardo, at least as written by Sorkin, made foolish moves as well. Freezing the account is the big one, but there's also a general impetuous, naive quality to him. Zuckerberg, Parker, and the rest in California weren't wrong to question his role in the company and his abilities as a businessman as it went from the dorm to the entire world.

But he is played by a very charismatic and handsome actor, and not acerbic/cold/etc., so I get declaring him a hero.

Am I the only one who thinks that Zuckerberg is not an asshole?

I have no idea if real Zuckerberg is an asshole. I never ever saw a single interview with him and I actually have no idea if he really acts like that. But I don't think Eisenberg's Zuckerberg is an asshole at all.

Thank you bradley. If I was interested I'd go on Youtube myself, but I really didn't care - like at all. I watched only the first video. He was awkward and nerdy in a cute way. Kinda like in the movie. So I'm guessing they did portrait him pretty good.