
As Toronto continues to unveil films, Oscar winning producer Scott Rudin (No Country For Old Men) was busy sending out email invites in NYC and LA to see The Social Network (October 1st), one of the few Fall openers not showing its wares in Canada this week. Instead, it will open the New York Film Festival instead on September 24. It’s a smart strategy but even without a personal invitation from one of the film’s producers this is already the current must-see movie on every Oscar watchers list. As an example of that, one blogger actually got on a plane from Toronto to New York just to see Social Network, then headed immediately back to Toronto. His subsequent review was a rave declaring it the one to beat for Best Picture (a little premature on that I think). That’s just one example of the praise now starting to hit the Internet from Hitfix to Slashfilm to Chud and all cyber points inbetween.
Rudin’s email to me last Tuesday read in part, “I’m incredibly proud of it and promise you I would not waste your time”. Actually having seen the TV ads that already have Rolling Stone declaring it “The Movie Of The Year…,” I was pretty sure I wouldn’t. The day after Rudin’s e-mail, 42 West, the PR firm repping the film, sent a list of possibilities including 7 screenings in New York, and 8 in Los Angeles (all in small rooms on the Sony lot nearly every day, evening and afternoon, this week). I saw it at the first opportunity on Monday and would have to say fairly objectively that The Social Network is Sony’s best shot at Best Picture in years, a lock for Golden Globe and Critics Choice Awards. And most importantly, Oscar nominations in every major category including Director for David Fincher, Writing for Aaron Sorkin, lead actor for Jesse Eisenberg (playing Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg), Supporting Actor for both Andrew Garfield and Justin Timberlake, Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross’ score, editing and so on. It also looks like it will be a major box office hit, hitting a nerve with the young demographic that are on the front lines of moviegoers.
Sony’s strategy of showing it to onliners first before the usual critics seems wholly appropriate considering the subject matter. Whether this story of how Facebook was invented and the resulting legal entanglements that surrounded its beginnings in 2003 has the same level of appeal to the older computer-challenged Academy members is a bigger question, but my guess is everyone should be able to relate to the mesmerizing dramatic conflict on screen. Despite its high-tech bones, what Fincher and Sorkin have managed to do is tell a time-honored very human story, a social document for a generation that has as much relevance now as movies like On The Waterfront, Network, All The President’s Men, and The Graduate did in their time.
Rudin co-produced the film with Michael DeLuca, Cean Chaffin, and Dana Brunetti while Brunetti’s Trigger Street partner Kevin Spacey served as an Executive Producer. Columbia clearly knows what they have here. They have already poached some of its key supporting cast members for high profile projects on the lot. Garfield has been cast as the rebooted Spider-Man while Rooney Mara plays Lisbeth Salander in the Hollywood version of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo which is also being directed by Fincher who will likely be shooting in Sweden at the same time awards campaigning is in high gear. That probably is a blessing for Fincher, who was on the circuit a couple of seasons ago for The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button and had to sit through award ceremony after ceremony before his prized movie lost to that year’s indie darling, Slumdog Millionaire. On the basis of reaction so far, this year could have a much different outcome for the director whose critically acclaimed 2007 Zodiac was also criminally overlooked by Oscar voters because it was released in early March, a dead zone for Academy contenders.
I interviewed Garfield last Thursday for his other new film, Never Let Me Go (September 15). He said he was blown away by Fincher’s technique. If a take wasn’t working, Garfield said, Fincher just deleted it like a spam email. Garfield loved that. The British born actor should be gathering a ton of breakthrough actor awards this year for both films and a supporting actor nod would seem a pretty sure thing. He steals The Social Network.
With great notices coming out of the festival circuit for movies like Black Swan, 127 Hours, and particularly The King’s Speech among others, and now a tsunami of praise forming for Social Network, September is already giving us a pretty good indication that the Oscar race is going to be fierce. And that’s not even counting films yet to come or earlier releases like Inception, Toy Story 3 and The Kids Are All Right. Hang on, this season is just getting started.
Awards Columnist Pete Hammond - tip him here.


Good article Pete, but seriously? A Boomer reference? That’s gonna earn you an honorary, “You’re with me, leather.”
Expected it to be groan inducing. Saw it, was completly blown away by it. Intense, eloquent, sharply edited, poignant, the future template for drama 2.0.
Mara’s three scenes shine bright, she’s that good. Eisenberg is Oscar worthy, nothing less. Garfield shines. But the real scene stealer for me was Armie Hammer as twin brothers screwed over by Zuckerberg. I’d had only known Hammer by his IMDB profile which I checked when he almost landed the Batman part in Miller’s since abandoned JLA flick. I actually thought he sounded like a joke. Boy, did he surprise me. Charismatic, funny, engaging. That’s a real actor in a leading man’s body.
Congratulations to Mr. Fincher and all involved. One hell of a movie.
As someone who has been looking forward to this film ever since I heard Sorkin was adapting the book, I’m confused by all of the skepticism. I’m thrilled that you enjoyed the film despite your hesitance, but simply wonder what made you hesitant? All of the talent behind this film (Sorkin, Fincher, Rudin, etc.) are proven entities who have created quality films before…was the hesitancy simply because “it’s a Facebook movie?”
I can’t speak for Edward, but I too was very hesitant about this, despite the talent involved. And the reason was exactly what you’d said: “It’s a Facebook movie”
I use Facebook daily, but I couldn’t think of many subjects I’d rather less watch a movie about…
However, everything I’ve read about it so far sounds incredible, so I’ll be checking it out as soon as it’s released.
i saw this last night and while i cant write a review yet it should defiantly be up for major awards
Good thing they increased the number of nominations.
The Social Network has such an amazing underlying story. How much is Facebook now worth? It’s impact on us? The legal disputes. The “I’m CEO bitch” business card? Even before Hollywood gets involved, its quite a story.
Also love the choral cover to Radiohead’s “Creep”. Perfect.
All this praise makes me skeptical.
Fincher looks good, but the material he chooses usually ends up being less than what we end up seeing. If the establishment thinks it’s time he gets an Oscar, then he’ll get his Oscar.
Call me old, but I think it would be something of a shame if this thing caught the zeitgeist as much as is being said. Years from now, this generation will be bugged by their kids with “you saw the Facebook movie when it came out!?”
In any case, I do hope this is strong; a good movie is always welcome.
It’s too bad Scott Pilgrim won’t snag an Oscar b/c the voters are too old — but it was by far the most unique and best movie I’ve seen in a long, loooong time.
Will you “Scott Pilgrim” addicts PLEASE quit already! The movie flopped. It’s gone, well almost — and not soon enough. No Box Office. No Oscar noms. No nothing, except a mere curio for a thin slice of masturbatory young Americana fixated on how hip it thinks it is.
Sigh.
I agree a trillion percent — Scott Pilgrim is amazing.
Scott Pilgrim was an innovative film, but storywise, it was lacking and the premise of fighting the evil exes grew tired very quickly. For such a visually exciting film, it was quite a bore by the third act. I’d even go so far as to say that it was self-indulgent with the references and video game style.
It deserved to do better than it did at the box office but an assertion that it deserves a Best Picture nomination is ludicrous and an assertion that anyone who doesn’t like it is old or somehow square only highlights how juvenile the film really is.
Really??? Given: the film suffers from “Nolan-Third-Act-Syndrome” but so does every Nolan film (or at least Dark Night and Inception) and both were touted as Best Picture candidates.
The film isn’t juevenile in any way. It’s a classic love story disguised behind a super-modern stylistic (and dare I say original) approach. I have a feeling you’re too old to understand why there’s a difference. (Though I hate pulling the age card when discussing SP vs. TW, somehow it’s always accurate.)
You probably thought Inception was a masterpiece, right? (Don’t answer that. It’s rhetorical.)
Inception is a masterpiece… No problems with the third-act at all… it’s fantastic. Nolan will get nominated this year for best director and Inception for best movie… just like it should have been 2 years ago… when he should have won. He’s just one of the best directors working today. “His track record is impeccable”
About Social Network… look like it’s gonna be amazing… Fincher is another great director and it’s good to see he’s back in form after The Curious Case of Benjamin Button – below average for him… good movie.
PLANT!! Anyone who calls “Inception” a masterpiece outside of the two week window before anyone actually saw it is obviously receiving kickbacks (or are you Nolan himself?). For 1) It’s a complete rip-off of a Scrooge McDuck comic strip (wtf!) 2) It’s a tonal rip-off of all things Matrix and 3)It’s a clusterfuck of story with holes the size of craters.
Pete, you are such a tool. This is the last post I will read from you because you are such a Hollywood shill!
Awesome! Can’t wait.
sounds boring as hell to me. There are so many good films either out or coming out , this won’t win best pic but with ten noms it could get one.
I’ve watched several trailers for this film and after each one I felt as if I’d seen this before. Why would I want to pay $15.00 to see movie about creating a website on the internet? I have no interest in seeing this film and I imagine I am not alone. Otherwise, the studio and their PR/marketing departments wouldn’t be working overtime to convince me (et al) to see it.
Good luck……
Studios don’t market their movies anymore? They only market movies now if they’re bad? That’s new.
Maybe people are genuinely interested in seeing this. Maybe those who have seen it really did love it. Maybe certain people aren’t immature enough to dismiss an entire film, and refuse to accept the possibility that it might be good, because a bunch of kiddies on the internet say things like, “a facebook movie? Why not twitter?”
Grow up.
Great piece, although you forgot to mention the movie is adapted from my bestseller The Accidental Billionaires. Otherwise, very interesting. Sorkin and Fincher and Rudin and Spacey and Brunetti and Deluca did a great job.
To Ben. …. Really? Are you some stark, raving egomaniac that you need to point out that you were the source material? Talk about being small-pecker minded….
It’s like in Busting Vega$ when he talked about how he used a prostitute like it was some sort of major accomplishment…
Even though it was “adapted” they wrote book and the screenplay at the same time. Don’t be an idiot.
Benny!!!! Come on, we all know you wrote the book, chill!
Although I wasn’t initially blown away by Sorkin’s screenplay, seeing it come alive on screen is truly exciting and I am certain the film will deserve its expected accolades.
I wasn’t as impressed. Timberlake turns a memorable performance – but overall not impressed rather leaving me thinking this is a pic that will succeed based on the performed coolness you have by viewing it. Overrated.
And the backlash begins.
What “backlash” would that be? There is no backlash. Is that what the haters are telling themselves now? That all these stellar reviews will create a “backlash?” It’s time for people to stop pretending that this movie won’t do well. They adopted a position early on from the announcements that a movie about facebook would be “stupid.”
These are a small, but vocal, minority of people on the internets who then feel this need to tell everyone how “uninterested” they are in this film by going from website to website writing several times over how they “aren’t interested in this movie AT ALL.”
You know what movie I have absolutely NO INTEREST in? RESIDENT EVIL. You want to know how many times i’ve travelled to various websites to post about this movie I have “no interest” in? ZERO.
I’m pretty sure that Amy/Amanda will be at a screening of THE SOCIAL NETWORK at some point after it opens, then — like a petulant child — she’ll explain how terrible it is because she’ll refuse to admit that she was maybe wrong about it.
But remember, being stubborn isn’t a sign of intelligence, it’s a sign of intellectual immaturity.
Not as obvious as you think, Captain. Amy was suggesting that Jeffw’s “overrated” was backlash, not that she was onboard with hating The Social Network. Are you intellectually mature enough to admit you’re wrong?
I saw the film and was blown away by Sorkin’s dialogue.
He is the star of the film. I didn’t even notice Fincher’s direction.
kudos to Jesse Eisenberg for his almost sociopathic Mark Zuckerberg. Great chilling performance.
Justin Timberlake surprised the hell out of me with his acting.
He is so natural and charismatic on the screen. His sean Parker seemed more human than all the Harvard boys combined.
Andrew Garfield bored me with his whiney act. Innocuous actor.
I don’t know what the fuss is about.
Mara only has one expresion. Poor choice for Girl with the Dragon tattoo. What the hell was Sony and Fincher thinking? She has no edge.
Armie Hammer? Is that his name? Comic foil. Good looking dude.
I would give the film an 9 for Sorkin, Jesse, and Timberlake.
Facebook has never been so interesting.
Jeff
This is a great movie and your comments are dead on.
Just finished reading the screenplay last night. Awesome. The poster above was right — Aaron Sorkin’s dialogue soars, and his structural architecture for the tale was deft, allowing the reader to get a solid idea of who Zuckerberg is in the first 8 pages, in addition to laying with precision the subtextual agita about class wars/social hierarchies at Harvard.
Sorkin, who showed such a nice touch with the peacock’s “West Wing”, is on his A-game here.
This movie is a safe bet for Box Office AND critical acclaim, with solid cinematic storytelling (the screenplay improves exponentially on its source material, “The Accidental Billionaires” book)
I, too, feel Eisenberg is terrificly cast as Zuckerberg. He’s such an intriguing and likable actor, able to emote wrenchingly awkward vulnerability in one moment and runaway arrogance, with a streak of insecurity, in another. (Do you think if he’d been cast as “Scott Pilgrim” — over Michael Cera — that that movie might have survived its Third Act implosion ????? I’m thinking he’d have given Pilgrim, at least, a fighting chance, evil ex-lovers be damned!)
“…director whose critically acclaimed 2007 Zodiac was also criminally overlooked by Oscar voters because it was released in early March, a dead zone for Academy contenders.”
If Zodiac was released in the fall would it really have fared better in awards season?? NO. Fincher is great but that was a big miss for his career.
Fincher’s misses are Alien 3, The Game and Panic Room
Scott Rudin saying he wouldn’t waste anyone’s time is absolutely gospel. He would never leave word inexplicably and evasively, costing you hours of stress and confusion.
Saw it and was not impressed. Comes off like PET ROCK: THE MOVIE, much ado about nothing of lasting value. But given Facebook’s logic-defying popularity, I have no doubt that others will flock to see it.
Just saw this film and it is a classic! Loved it and it will definitely be there come award season!!!
I watched the film the other day and it is the best film I have seen in a long tim.
A classic story telling, character and dialogue driven, wholly topical film that we rarely see these days in cinema. TSN is a bonafide Oscar frontrunner.
Sorkins script is superb and all the actors cast are great in delivering rapid fire dialogue and inhabiting their characters. Jesse E. Should be a Best Actor contender and as for Supporting Actor II would give the edgy to Timberlake. His performance was mesmerizing and surprisingly good. He is the rare singer who can also act.
Is there any doubt Sorkin will get an Oscar for Adapted Screenplay?
Again, I have to stress what a brilliant wordsmith he is.
Why are so many people astonished about Justin Timberlake’s stunning performance in ” Social Network”. Previously, he has given good performances in “Black Snake Moan”, “Alpha Dog” and every appearance on SNL. Plus, Timberlake and Ryan Gosling starred in that cheesy “The Mickey Mouse Club” where they honed their acting craft. Justin is just a natural performer- acting , singing, and dancing comes easy to him. Justin is one of the few young artists that will have career longevity.
Maybe because people have not seen Justin’s films before.
Social network was the first film I have ever seen him in, besides his appearances on SNL.
I agree about him being a natural. After the initial, there is Justin Timberlake on the screen moment when he first appeared, I quickly forgot he was JT the pop superstar.
I loved the film. I left the theater almost aimlessly because there were so many thoughts going through my head. Great film.
I must be a real idiot, but I found this movie to be quite boring and I hated Eisenberg in it. I am definitely of the Facebook generation and was really looking forward to this, but I was (one of the few?) disappointed. Inception is a much better movie, if we are going to talk Oscars…