The Social Network Review

Every time a film comes out that purports to be “based on a true story” (or more worryingly, “inspired by true events” by which you can interpret “bearing zero relation to anything that has ever happened. Anywhere. Ever”) out come the sayers of nae protesting as to the factual inaccuracy of the project. This didn’t happen this way, that didn’t happen that way blah blah blah. Unless the errors are particularly egregious (“Hey, have you seen that new movie about 9/11? It’s great, the planes miss the buildings.”) I usually have little time for these complaints. Timelines are ALWAYS truncated in films, characters merged for the sake of dramatic expedience and events changed for dramatic purposes. Nine times out of ten, the film makers know what they are doing and the changes made are necessary to tell the story for the cinema. David Fincher is a director renowned for meticulous attention to detail so the idea that he has got as much of the story of the founding of Facebook wrong as is being claimed is surprising to say the least. Yet it does seem to be the case. The thing is, The Social Network is a really good film, intelligent, gripping, funny, superbly written, directed and acted. So what impact do these alleged inaccuracies have on one’s enjoyment of it? For me, pretty much none. Colour me callous!

Jessie Eisenberg is Mark Zuckerberg, a computer genius studying at Harvard who finds himself ostracised from the University’s most prestigious private clubs, clubs that he thinks hold the key to his future. Zuckerberg, at least the Zuckerberg depicted here, is abrupt, difficult and in no way constrained by society’s norms and conventions. He is also conniving and manipulative. The fact that the real Mark Zuckerberg declined to be involved isn’t massively surprising… Anyway two twin brothers, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, come to Zuckerberg with an idea for a Harvard based social networking website. Zuckerberg sees something in their idea and, also taking the opportunity to stick it to the kinds of people who have excluded him up to now, strings them along while he takes the best of what their concept has to offer and creates what would eventually become Facebook. His only friend Eduardo (new Spider-Man Andrew Garfield) becomes the fledgling company’s business manager but as Zuckerberg is wowed by Napster founder Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake) Eduardo finds himself increasingly sidelined and, in the end, utterly shafted by his friend and he, along with everyone else, attempts to sue Zuckerberg for their piece of the pie.

The film depicts the depositions given by everyone involved in the two lawsuits and we flash back and forth between their testimony and the events being described in the past. This lends the film a great ambiguity as we only ever receive subjective accounts of events from the Winklevoss brothers, Eduardo or Zuckerberg himself and can believe or disbelieve things as we see fit. This is something of a get out of jail free card but the exact events are completely shrouded in mystery so it makes sense that writer Aaron Sorkin (working from the novel The Accidental Millionaires by Ben Mezrich) should structure the film this way. But Sorkin and Fincher have taken the subject of the founding of Facebook and used it as a springboard for the things that interest them, the nature of the creative process, the implications of sites like Facebook and their notion of who the film’s central character is. There is always that nagging feeling that much of how Zuckerberg is depicted isn’t true such as his ineptitude with women for example; he apparently had a girlfriend at the time. This is no small thing when the final moments of the film tie this character beat into the story to wrap everything up. Don’t misunderstand, it’s a great moment and a great ending, but some may struggle to find its dramatic satisfaction in the midst of factual inaccuracies. Sorkin’s trademark snappy dialogue is present and accounted for but, one or two clunky moments aside (Zuckerberg moves to L.A. and happily ends up on the same street as Justin Timberlake. Seriously? The same street? That’s like in Star Trek movies where the character beams down to a planet the size of Pluto but happen to land in the exact spot where another character lives) it’s a fantastic script. David Fincher remains one of the most interesting directors working in Hollywood and with this and Zodiac, the demonic Benjamin Button has now been completely exorcised. The cast is uniformly excellent with Jesse Eisenberg finding great humour and surprising moments of pathos in the inscrutable Zuckerberg.

The Social Network is a great film, a fascinating story very well told. The biggest problem with it being factually inaccurate is that the story is so recent, beginning as it did merely seven years ago. What isn't in doubt is that something unsavoury happened and Zuckerberg was slap bang in the middle of it. My suspicion is that, while the actual events depicted may be incorrect or even made up, the point they are making is pretty close to the truth, or at least, the truth the film makers believe to be the case. A subjective point of view is the best thing a writer or director can offer a film and this should be true of so called true stories as it is of works of fiction. And ultimately the truth is always subjective anyway. Two people can offer "the truth" of a situation and end up giving wildly differing accounts which is, in part, what The Social Network is about. At the end of the day intelligent, thoughtful, gripping films are very thin on the ground and, if it’s literal truth you want, the cinema never has been and never should be the place to seek it out. Cinema is about drama. And The Social Network has that in spades.

8/10.