5 Reasons why The Social Network is the best movie this year

Most movies people love fall into the “very good” category. They’re enjoyable to watch, even re-watch, but are just not essential. Great films are essential. You’d take them on an island if you knew you’d be stranded. They teach us things, entertain us, and make life better. The Social Network, the best movie of the year, is one of these movies. (If you don’t believe me check out Joanna Angel’s review) I was the most skeptical person in the world on how a movie about Facebook’s Creator Mark Zuckerberg could be good. Here is why it is a great, not just good:

• Trent Reznor comes through with the best soundtrack of the year.

I’m gonna buy this soundtrack. If you’re anything like me, you haven’t bought music in years. Trent Reznor is the face of Nine Inch Nails, famous for “I wanna fuck you like an animal”, and his soundtrack is the best of the year.  Albeit, Clint Mansel’s soundtrack for Black Swan is still to be heard, but I’m fairly confident this one’s a keeper. It pulls the movie along, makes us feel uneasy along the way, knows when to be sincere, and knows Fincher’s filmmaking tone in an almost uncanny way. He created an electronic sound that fits the techno babble in Zuckberg’s head, but maintains the dark tone and pop-style which has made Fincher so famous. Just listen to the song below, it fucking jams.

• Fincher nails every single shot.

I’m paraphrasing, but Fincher said this a long time ago: “A scene can be shot two ways, and one of them is probably wrong”. How true. It is so hard for filmmakers to get the shots they need, tell the story they’re trying to tell, keep the mood going. One wrong look from an actor, one misplaced camera angle or movement, one poorly-paced edit, can ruin everything. Fincher nailed everything. The Social Networ solidifies Fincher as a great, modern filmmaker.

• David Fincher, once again, defines a generation.

Fincher’s film Fight Club did the impossible: It defined the nineties. A generation with a massive hangover from the yuppie era of the eighties, but which had an inclination for revolution and change. They had been told what they should want, what the American Dream was, and tried their best to reject it. The nineties knew they had been lied to and wanted to define meaning themselves. The Social Network defines my generation. A generation defined, not by ourselves, but the technology and pop culture that bind us all. Mark Zuckerberg of Fincher’s movie is fictitious. I doubt the real Zuckerberg really had such jealousy toward his business partner Eduardo Saverin regarding the Harvard Clubs. But that’s not the point… Zuckerberg, in the film, is the ultimate product of the tens. Confident, brainy, technologically savvy, but socially impotent. This is not a bad thing. Zuckerberg is merely a product of a generation that he helped create. Maybe he wanted to help people be more social by bringing them together on the internet. But who cares? Is a social savvy person better than Zuckerberg? The world is changing and people can no longer be critiqued by previous social norms or values.

• The acting is some of the best I’ve seen in recent memory

A lot has been said about Andrew Garfield’s performance as Eduardo, he surely deserves a lot of award nominations. A lot has also been said about Eisenberg’s performance as Zuckerberg, it is subtle and quirky. He seems to have the perfect reactions whether it be regret, spite, sadness, or whatever. But I think Timberlake takes the cake for me. He’s proving he can do anything

• The relationship between Zuckerberg and Saverin has the tragedy of great drama

There is something achingly painful about this film. Zuckerberg and Saverin’s relationship, and its falling out, is almost existential. Zuckerberg claims in interviews not to care about money or power. Then why did he destroy the business relationship he had with Saverin? Which is 100% true. What did Zuckerberg want? What do any of us want? Facebook had the exclusivity and simplicity that everyone wanted, but this exclusivity is gone now. Myspace was for white trash when I was in high school. Facebook was for college people. There is nothing white douche bags, like myself, like more than exclusivity. But now Facebook really is just like every other social networking website. So Zuckerberg’s idea wasn’t really anything so revolutionary. What Zuckerberg actually did, which is so genius it is almost painful, is get people in and then change the product when they’re addicted. Saverin wanted something different early on. He wanted to monetize the site and be included more, but was cut out completely and purposefully. If they were friends and if Zuckerberg really didn’t want money or power, than there really must have been something personal. It is too easy to say: it was just good business. That’s what assholes say to justify being asshole businessman. That was the eighties.