The song was out of tone with the rest of the movie and the ending could have had a stronger impact without it or with a darker Reznor track like in this scene:
You aren't implying that ending a movie with "Where is My Mind" by the motherfucking Pixies is anything other than a perfect way to end all movies, are you sir?
From what I hear from people on Facebook, Facebook sucks
I don't get it
UnbreakableVow on
0
Options
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
edited October 2010
My news feed post-Friday was nothing but
'Isn't it soooo weird that I'm posting about The Social Network on Facebook omg lol clever clever.'
MalReynolds on
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
0
Options
KoopahTroopahThe koopas, the troopas.Philadelphia, PARegistered Userregular
'Isn't it soooo weird that I'm posting about The Social Network on Facebook omg lol clever clever.'
I, myself, mentioned that if felt weird to do it, but that was an honest statement. I had just gotten done watching the movie, and hadn't fully absorbed it all yet. Also, it is strange that the word Facebook gets flagged as incorrect on Facebook.
And actually, looking at that picture of him above, Justin Timberlake might have been a better fit for Zuck.
The song was out of tone with the rest of the movie and the ending could have had a stronger impact without it or with a darker Reznor track like in this scene:
You aren't implying that ending a movie with "Where is My Mind" by the motherfucking Pixies is anything other than a perfect way to end all movies, are you sir?
Not at all. Just that it kind of clashed with the rest of the music in that movie. Much as you were complaining Baby You're A Rich Man by the motherfucking Beatles does in this movie.
I feel very demoralized after watching this movie:
1) I haven't created anything worth $25 billion or whatever.
2) I see many of movie-Zuckerburg's worst qualities in myself (jealously and spite, mostly)
3) I never want to any parties that cool when I went to Stanford.
A white guy invented Facebook. But in Mark Zuckerberg's real-life world, women did more than give blowjobs, and black people said more than "Is this guy bothering you?" So why does The Social Network so badly want to pretend otherwise?
...
Never mind that no one has shown any evidence that Mark Zuckerberg's sleepless coding was an elaborate form of sexual revenge,* or that in real life, he has had a serious girlfriend since 2003, which includes the time when the movie was set. That would make it hard to show Asian girls blowing him and his friend because Facebook was so cool!
In real life, plenty of members of Zuckerberg's inner circle are and were gay men. And Facebook's current success has also been predicated on the hard work of women Zuckerberg trusts, including COO Sheryl Sandberg (also a Harvard grad, profiled in The Times today) and his sister.
What a dumb article. "Everything the movie tries to say is wrong because I don't like it and I'm a woman" is all the writer is saying. The film isn't saying that it's their way or the highway, they're presenting an idea based on true events. Since people like this woman can't seem to look at it like this, she's making the film about her and instilling how she wants it to be. The point of watching a film, even a biopic, is to receive it's point of view. Judge it based on what it is and why it is what it is, not how it should be based on your criteria.
A white guy invented Facebook. But in Mark Zuckerberg's real-life world, women did more than give blowjobs, and black people said more than "Is this guy bothering you?" So why does The Social Network so badly want to pretend otherwise?
...
Never mind that no one has shown any evidence that Mark Zuckerberg's sleepless coding was an elaborate form of sexual revenge,* or that in real life, he has had a serious girlfriend since 2003, which includes the time when the movie was set. That would make it hard to show Asian girls blowing him and his friend because Facebook was so cool!
In real life, plenty of members of Zuckerberg's inner circle are and were gay men. And Facebook's current success has also been predicated on the hard work of women Zuckerberg trusts, including COO Sheryl Sandberg (also a Harvard grad, profiled in The Times today) and his sister.
Hmm... shenanigans. Unless someone can make the case to me that screenwriter Aaron Sorkin has some sort of pattern of portraying women in a weak way, I gotta go with it was just more convenient for the story. Although if someone does want to make that case I'm all ears.
I have now seen two articles on this very thing, and Colbert has even mentioned it in his interview with Sorkin.
Im pretty sure that Sorkin didnt even take these people (the asian girls were apparently fictitious) into account because they werent part of the message the movie was trying to deliver.
People seem to be confused as to whether this is a documentary or not.
What a dumb article. "Everything the movie tries to say is wrong because I don't like it and I'm a woman" is all the writer is saying. The film isn't saying that it's their way or the highway, they're presenting an idea based on true events. Since people like this woman can't seem to look at it like this, she's making the film about her and instilling how she wants it to be. The point of watching a film, even a biopic, is to receive it's point of view. Judge it based on what it is and why it is what it is, not how it should be based on your criteria.
...Except, as the article notes, the movie leaves out key elements that go against the attitude the movie tries to paint. I think it's kind of significant that Zuckerberg has had a girlfriend since 2003, and didn't apparently care about joining the final clubs.
So it's kind of like an idea that's based on true events, interwoven with fiction that isn't true.
I'm also not sure what the author's being a woman has to do with anything, except for the perspective that she has in regards to the final clubs that Zuckerberg didn't participate it. Maybe you should base your critique of the article on its content rather than the gender of the author?
EDIT: I'm also not sure what's so pretentious about the article you linked to. It seems like it gives some interesting insights to Zuckerberg's actual character.
It's not a documentary Jesus Christ what is wrong with you
...so it's a fictional story about real people and real events...
Is this a biographical work? What is it? How am I supposed to take this movie? Should I take some insight into the Facebook story or Zuckerberg's personality from it?
EDIT: Alternate history, maybe? Like Inglorious Bastards?
You know it's not the 100% true story, and so does anyone who actually takes the time to do a little research
So it's entertaining, fuck off now with everything about it not being factually correct
We know. It doesn't matter in the slightest.
I think it should matter. I think it should bug you that a movie can so casually distort the truth. It's not that it's not the 100% true story, it's that some of it is patently made up, including the motivations and social situations and desires of the people involved. How is this not slander?
Should some meaning be derived from this work? Do the parking lot discussions afterwards involve Mark Zuckerberg the real guy or Aaron Sorkin's Mark Zuckerberg? Do people talk about the actual story of Facebook or the movie's story?
Also, like I said earlier in the thread, I'm sure that even if we did have the real story, Sorkin's version is probably a lot more entertaining and works better as a feature film
And obviously the real story would work well as a documentary, but I don't particularly care about documentaries, and good luck getting non-Michael Moore documentaries in theaters
Isnt the main theme of the film that Facebook has radically changed the social landscape of the average citizen?
That all of the ideas mentioned in the film, the thought processes behind them, were all logical next steps on the social networking platform, and that Sorkin laments this?
Thats what i gleaned from it seeing as he depicted Facebook's creator as ironically having nobody around him but his legal team and a coke addict venture captialist.
I talk about the movie's story, as did the people I saw it with
Namely because not many people know the real story as Zuckerberg is pretty tight-lipped
Do films like JFK bother you as well, I'm curious?
So is it Zuckerberg's fault that people write fiction about him? Is fiction what we turn to when we don't have easy access to facts? Not to mention, again, that the movie got wrong several things that are either on the public record or well known in regards to Zuckerberg.
Again, is this biographical? What is it? Should this movie influence peoples' attitudes and beliefs in regards to Zuckerberg and Facebook?
Thats what i gleaned from it seeing as he depicted Facebook's creator as ironically having nobody around him but his legal team and a coke addict venture captialist.
That's not true. He had a girlfriend since 2003. The movie twists facts to make a point that may not even be valid.
Posts
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
The best part is they can do a sequel in 10 years, and another one ten years after that.
The first ever biopic trilogy!
You aren't implying that ending a movie with "Where is My Mind" by the motherfucking Pixies is anything other than a perfect way to end all movies, are you sir?
Facebook: MeekinOnMovies
Twitter: Twitter.com/MeekinOnMovies
My 10 commandments of game reviewing
7 Great Games Playing Watch_Dogs will remind you of/url]
Far Cry 4: 10 Essential Features it Must Have
10 Videogames Ruined By The Hype
It was pretty good. the only one of the main characters I actually ended up liking was Edwardo
Facebook: MeekinOnMovies
Twitter: Twitter.com/MeekinOnMovies
My 10 commandments of game reviewing
7 Great Games Playing Watch_Dogs will remind you of/url]
Far Cry 4: 10 Essential Features it Must Have
10 Videogames Ruined By The Hype
I completely agree.
I loved the whole thing as well but the ending was brilliant
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
went back a page to see what discussion was going on and I'm really surprised by the topic. oh well.
I was one row back from the front, I wasn't expecting a full house because the general public sees it as that facebook movie. Apparently I was wrong.
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
From what I hear facebook is wildly popular. Thats the word anyway.
I don't get it
'Isn't it soooo weird that I'm posting about The Social Network on Facebook omg lol clever clever.'
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
Twitch: KoopahTroopah - Steam: Koopah
XBLGT:Banzeye SC2: Apollo.394
Because it certainly isn't Funny
I, myself, mentioned that if felt weird to do it, but that was an honest statement. I had just gotten done watching the movie, and hadn't fully absorbed it all yet. Also, it is strange that the word Facebook gets flagged as incorrect on Facebook.
And actually, looking at that picture of him above, Justin Timberlake might have been a better fit for Zuck.
Not at all. Just that it kind of clashed with the rest of the music in that movie. Much as you were complaining Baby You're A Rich Man by the motherfucking Beatles does in this movie.
...People who watched Alpha Dog, Black Snake Moan, or Southland Tales.
Or any of the episodes of Saturday Night Live he's hosted.
Seriously, the guy has been building a very nice little resume as an actor for a few years now.
1) I haven't created anything worth $25 billion or whatever.
2) I see many of movie-Zuckerburg's worst qualities in myself (jealously and spite, mostly)
3) I never want to any parties that cool when I went to Stanford.
I could very well see him getting a Supporting Actor nom for this
The Social Network, Where Women Never Have Ideas
A white guy invented Facebook. But in Mark Zuckerberg's real-life world, women did more than give blowjobs, and black people said more than "Is this guy bothering you?" So why does The Social Network so badly want to pretend otherwise?
...
Never mind that no one has shown any evidence that Mark Zuckerberg's sleepless coding was an elaborate form of sexual revenge,* or that in real life, he has had a serious girlfriend since 2003, which includes the time when the movie was set. That would make it hard to show Asian girls blowing him and his friend because Facebook was so cool!
In real life, plenty of members of Zuckerberg's inner circle are and were gay men. And Facebook's current success has also been predicated on the hard work of women Zuckerberg trusts, including COO Sheryl Sandberg (also a Harvard grad, profiled in The Times today) and his sister.
Hmm... shenanigans. Unless someone can make the case to me that screenwriter Aaron Sorkin has some sort of pattern of portraying women in a weak way, I gotta go with it was just more convenient for the story. Although if someone does want to make that case I'm all ears.
--LeVar Burton
They also set things on fire
I guess Slate really is run by a bunch of over literate self centered assholes.
I have now seen two articles on this very thing, and Colbert has even mentioned it in his interview with Sorkin.
Im pretty sure that Sorkin didnt even take these people (the asian girls were apparently fictitious) into account because they werent part of the message the movie was trying to deliver.
People seem to be confused as to whether this is a documentary or not.
XBLGT:Banzeye SC2: Apollo.394
...Except, as the article notes, the movie leaves out key elements that go against the attitude the movie tries to paint. I think it's kind of significant that Zuckerberg has had a girlfriend since 2003, and didn't apparently care about joining the final clubs.
So it's kind of like an idea that's based on true events, interwoven with fiction that isn't true.
I'm also not sure what the author's being a woman has to do with anything, except for the perspective that she has in regards to the final clubs that Zuckerberg didn't participate it. Maybe you should base your critique of the article on its content rather than the gender of the author?
EDIT: I'm also not sure what's so pretentious about the article you linked to. It seems like it gives some interesting insights to Zuckerberg's actual character.
It made no promises to include them
It's not a documentary Jesus Christ what is wrong with you
...so it's a fictional story about real people and real events...
Is this a biographical work? What is it? How am I supposed to take this movie? Should I take some insight into the Facebook story or Zuckerberg's personality from it?
EDIT: Alternate history, maybe? Like Inglorious Bastards?
Which it is
And if you want to read into the character of Zuckerberg, feel free, as he's an interesting character
But that's what he is in this film. A character.
You know it's not the 100% true story, and so does anyone who actually takes the time to do a little research
So it's entertaining, fuck off now with everything about it not being factually correct
We know. It doesn't matter in the slightest.
I think it should matter. I think it should bug you that a movie can so casually distort the truth. It's not that it's not the 100% true story, it's that some of it is patently made up, including the motivations and social situations and desires of the people involved. How is this not slander?
Should some meaning be derived from this work? Do the parking lot discussions afterwards involve Mark Zuckerberg the real guy or Aaron Sorkin's Mark Zuckerberg? Do people talk about the actual story of Facebook or the movie's story?
Namely because not many people know the real story as Zuckerberg is pretty tight-lipped
Do films like JFK bother you as well, I'm curious?
And obviously the real story would work well as a documentary, but I don't particularly care about documentaries, and good luck getting non-Michael Moore documentaries in theaters
Entertainment
That all of the ideas mentioned in the film, the thought processes behind them, were all logical next steps on the social networking platform, and that Sorkin laments this?
Thats what i gleaned from it seeing as he depicted Facebook's creator as ironically having nobody around him but his legal team and a coke addict venture captialist.
XBLGT:Banzeye SC2: Apollo.394
So is it Zuckerberg's fault that people write fiction about him? Is fiction what we turn to when we don't have easy access to facts? Not to mention, again, that the movie got wrong several things that are either on the public record or well known in regards to Zuckerberg.
Again, is this biographical? What is it? Should this movie influence peoples' attitudes and beliefs in regards to Zuckerberg and Facebook?
That's not true. He had a girlfriend since 2003. The movie twists facts to make a point that may not even be valid.
...but it will.
EDIT: And Sorkin, IIRC, wants it to.