July 15th, 2010 / 1:32 pm
Film
Nick Antosca
Film
-
Archives
- January 2023
- February 2022
- September 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- August 2017
- July 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
-
Meta
tron looks better
Tron looks great, too.
Jesse Eisenberg gets it done in everything he’s in. I think he’ll be great here. I still love Roger Dodger.
Oh jesus.
So transparent in its intent. Every FB kook will feel compelled to see it, which I guess is the marketing point.
(Where’s the unlike button/switch on htmlgiant?)
I guess that should have been ‘dislike’ button/switch.
WHO. GIVES. A. FUCK.
whatever. it’s written by aaron sorkin and directed by david fincher. i like the work they have done. i’m glad a preview that shows the movie is online now.
Pretty amazing how they’ve squeezed some drama out of a pretty innocuous story.
I’m with Puke here.
someone should have put david fincher in a cage in 1999. what a goober he turned out to be.
Chinless wonder Mark Zuckerberg always makes me vomit in my mouth a little.
Choral versions of Radiohead’s Creep always make me vomit in my mouth a little.
The idea of a movie about Facebook, as soon as it was announced, made me vomit in my mouth a little.
Watching that trailer left me covered in diced carrot.
I think I’ll pass on this film and carry on waiting for LiveJournal: The Musical, starring Catherine Zeta Jones and Alan Cumming.
the game was so good. SO GOOD.
i like seven also and fight club is good enough, but after that jesus if he hasn’t been farting on america one after another.
I’m dying to see this and the similarly themed We Live in Public which I still haven’t managed to track down. Like it or not, Facebook is one of the most important pieces of software communication of the last half-decade. This movie might suck, but I’m still interested in the effects of Facebook and how it’s changing the way people communicate with one another. Anybody read The Facebook Effect?
We Live in Public trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XSTwfdFwIY
zodiac was not that great. panic room was ok but not great. did not see benjamin button.
I am in favor of Aaron Sorkin and also the version of “Creep” that was playing throughout.
But an episode of West Wing and followed by listening to Kid A sounds more like my kind of Friday night than spending 13 bucks on this.
This Sorkin fandom is surprising. I thought the The West Wing was a completely unrealistic, didactic take on American power. With a lot of bad acting, dialogue. Maybe I missed something.
I’d rather watch this Facebook movie. On a loop.
the game is an amazing movie. need to buy that one. “on the morrow.”
I think yours is a pretty good consumer alert.
it is on netflix instant; not free but it is there
That’s exactly what the person who recommended this to me said, but unfortunately, I’m way low on the technology totem pole and haven’t quite climbed my way up to Netflix yet. I’m hoping for a Hulu release maybe. Beverly Hills Cop II is on there. Come on.
that movie looks as exciting as spending time with an effeminate grandfather.
this one will change the way you masturbate:
http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810127943/video/20847032
sort of wondering why you aren’t promoting it.
YA is not an htmlg friend i guess.
All the Zatoichi’s are on Hulu.
tron looks better
Tron looks great, too.
Jesse Eisenberg gets it done in everything he’s in. I think he’ll be great here. I still love Roger Dodger.
Oh jesus.
So transparent in its intent. Every FB kook will feel compelled to see it, which I guess is the marketing point.
(Where’s the unlike button/switch on htmlgiant?)
I guess that should have been ‘dislike’ button/switch.
WHO. GIVES. A. FUCK.
whatever. it’s written by aaron sorkin and directed by david fincher. i like the work they have done. i’m glad a preview that shows the movie is online now.
Pretty amazing how they’ve squeezed some drama out of a pretty innocuous story.
I’m with Puke here.
someone should have put david fincher in a cage in 1999. what a goober he turned out to be.
Being a filmmaker. I gotta say, this looks good.
Although I wonder if it’ll mention the, ahem, ‘theories’ behind facebook’s funding, its connection to the government ‘person information fault’, or why you are unable to delete your profile, why it only deactivates it. Maybe JT is giving the middle finger in the trailer because he’s thinking, “I WANT YOU TO DELETE MY PROFILE MOTHERFUCKER, NOT DEACTIVATE IT, IF I WANTED TO DEACTIVATE, I WOULD CLICK A DEACTIVATE BUTTON, I WANT A DELETE BUTTON, WHERE’S THE DELETE BUTTON!”
Or maybe he’s thinking, press the any key….
Chinless wonder Mark Zuckerberg always makes me vomit in my mouth a little.
Choral versions of Radiohead’s Creep always make me vomit in my mouth a little.
The idea of a movie about Facebook, as soon as it was announced, made me vomit in my mouth a little.
Watching that trailer left me covered in diced carrot.
I think I’ll pass on this film and carry on waiting for LiveJournal: The Musical, starring Catherine Zeta Jones and Alan Cumming.
the game was so good. SO GOOD.
i like seven also and fight club is good enough, but after that jesus if he hasn’t been farting on america one after another.
I’m dying to see this and the similarly themed We Live in Public which I still haven’t managed to track down. Like it or not, Facebook is one of the most important pieces of software communication of the last half-decade. This movie might suck, but I’m still interested in the effects of Facebook and how it’s changing the way people communicate with one another. Anybody read The Facebook Effect?
We Live in Public trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XSTwfdFwIY
zodiac was not that great. panic room was ok but not great. did not see benjamin button.
I am in favor of Aaron Sorkin and also the version of “Creep” that was playing throughout.
But an episode of West Wing and followed by listening to Kid A sounds more like my kind of Friday night than spending 13 bucks on this.
This Sorkin fandom is surprising. I thought the The West Wing was a completely unrealistic, didactic take on American power. With a lot of bad acting, dialogue. Maybe I missed something.
I’d rather watch this Facebook movie. On a loop.
the game is an amazing movie. need to buy that one. “on the morrow.”
What, you don’t like Zodiac?
I think yours is a pretty good consumer alert.
I’ve posted several times about YA stuff on html giant. An interview with Ned will be happening before or around the time the movie comes out.
it is on netflix instant; not free but it is there
That’s exactly what the person who recommended this to me said, but unfortunately, I’m way low on the technology totem pole and haven’t quite climbed my way up to Netflix yet. I’m hoping for a Hulu release maybe. Beverly Hills Cop II is on there. Come on.
that movie looks as exciting as spending time with an effeminate grandfather.
this one will change the way you masturbate:
http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1810127943/video/20847032
sort of wondering why you aren’t promoting it.
YA is not an htmlg friend i guess.
All the Zatoichi’s are on Hulu.
Being a filmmaker. I gotta say, this looks good.
Although I wonder if it’ll mention the, ahem, ‘theories’ behind facebook’s funding, its connection to the government ‘person information fault’, or why you are unable to delete your profile, why it only deactivates it. Maybe JT is giving the middle finger in the trailer because he’s thinking, “I WANT YOU TO DELETE MY PROFILE MOTHERFUCKER, NOT DEACTIVATE IT, IF I WANTED TO DEACTIVATE, I WOULD CLICK A DEACTIVATE BUTTON, I WANT A DELETE BUTTON, WHERE’S THE DELETE BUTTON!”
Or maybe he’s thinking, press the any key….
What, you don’t like Zodiac?
I’ve posted several times about YA stuff on html giant. An interview with Ned will be happening before or around the time the movie comes out.
My friend Rima shot me a link to that preview the other day…on facebook.
You’re right; looks like a pretty solid flick. I’m really glad they didn’t post Michael Cera in it, because he’d have been ripe for that role, and I would have wanted to smack someone.
I wonder if there was this much vehemence when Pirates of Silicon Valley came out. I see it as the same vein of story/movie.
I liked Pirates of Silicon Valley well enough, and will probably like The Social Network well enough.
As a filmmaker, what makes you think this looks good?
It’s maybe (maybe) a decent commercial.
Radiohead. Harvard. Nerds – wink, wink – finally getting laid. Two friends. They build something online. Then get into a fight over it when lo and behold it turns out to be worth . . . a lot of clams.
Plus we all know the story.
It’s an ad of a movie. With a built-in consumer base.
There must already be Facebook fan page(s) with people clamoring like ghouls to see this.
Mjm: I dig the CIA ref. Even if there’s a different acronym behind it all. It’s all pretty fucking obvious. “Pop” “culture” is always their ace-up-a-sleeve.
Well, I want to see how it’ll be handled. In the trailer, I noticed how the director was using close ups of various online “networking acts” and combining this with real life — it was showing how life was behind this networking thing, and then showing it integrating into this networking thing, and how it had an affect on both. And this was only within the trailer. And this was only from the camera operation.
Plus, I am interested in the acting. It looks well acted.
And then you have the social commentary. Sure, it could falter, but it seems as if the script will handle it well.
Putting aside the subject, my reaction would be the same. This is pure drivel. These movies Hollywood puts out. Jesus.
There is also something distasteful about the obvious reason it was made: Facebook phenomenon = built-in audience = bad Facebook movie = big opening weekend box office = so what if it’s a piece of crap? Every FB fan who goes to this knows they’re being marketing to and yet they’ll likely go anyway. I just find it foul.
I have no idea if the book was good or not. And I like a good business story. But this is dreck. Guaranteed. I’ll come back and amend my comments if I ever see the movie and think differently.
Oh, and I hated The West Wing. Even if Sorkin wrote the dialogue all in iambicpentameter, for the entire run of the show, which is fucking impressive, yes, the show still sucked a nut that had not yet descended from a dude’s stomach after being kicked all the way up there, you know?
Hmmm. There are a half dozen – probably more, maybe a dozen, mostly women – exceptional Hollywood film actors around. None are in this movie. I saw screaming into a cellphone(?) one-hour-TV-drama-style and a rather halfhearted flipping-off, i.e. not much evidence of good acting. But maybe you’re right.
The website was better.
Agreed. The kid, Keir Gilchrist, is great.
Huh? So content rather than craft is determinative of quality? What on earth is an “FB fan”? There are FB users, and I am one of them as are most people I know, but I don’t think any of us are “fans” of the website, nor would I likely be interested in this if it weren’t from Fincher, and if it didn’t have an unexpectedly excellent trailer.
Ha, nice.
during the entire trailer i was trying to figure out whether that kid was michael cera or jesse eisenberg.
There is no craft here.
A fan is a user who is part of the cult (the crowd) of FB. There are a lot of them. Almost as many as there are users.
If you think that’s an excellent trailer, that’s fine by me.
Interesting. It feels like you hate this because you have larger issues with facebook or something, which is fair enough. My feeling is that while I hated Benjamin Button, I like or love almost everything else Fincher has done, and certainly I think a great piece of art can be created from a story I wouldn’t otherwise be particularly interested in. To say there’s “no craft” involved seems kind of mulish, since that’s prima facie untrue. I do think it’s an excellent trailer, both uniquely conceived and elegantly designed. I don’t know that the movie will be excellent, but while I was curious before because of Fincher, I’m now strongly interested in seeing it.
I see what you’re saying; perhaps my objections are larger than this movie. But I think it has less to do with Facebook – or the cult surrounding it – than with mainstream movies made today in general, for all the reasons I’ve mentioned. This churning out of bad movie after bad movie.
I find (yes, making a general statement) that mainstream Hollywood movies will have a truly fantastic performance here or there, or a certain film will be shot beautifully, or there will be a exceptional technological innovation, but on the whole viewers are left with very little. As the late Sydney Pollack used to say: there is no middle in movie-making anymore.
So when I say ‘no craft’, I mean – overall not done well. Sure: someone wrote it, there was a lighting director, a cinematographer, sound, actors etc. These are crafts. Skilled professionals; they might even be artists. But the craft of making a film is a director’s, and that means the whole of it. We’re all making comments and suppositions here based on a trailer, and from what I see it just seems very run of the mill, another dud, but we’ll all get to watch it eventually, and we’ll be able to judge if your man Fincher pulls it off.
My friend Rima shot me a link to that preview the other day…on facebook.
You’re right; looks like a pretty solid flick. I’m really glad they didn’t post Michael Cera in it, because he’d have been ripe for that role, and I would have wanted to smack someone.
I wonder if there was this much vehemence when Pirates of Silicon Valley came out. I see it as the same vein of story/movie.
I liked Pirates of Silicon Valley well enough, and will probably like The Social Network well enough.
As a filmmaker, what makes you think this looks good?
It’s maybe (maybe) a decent commercial.
Radiohead. Harvard. Nerds – wink, wink – finally getting laid. Two friends. They build something online. Then get into a fight over it when lo and behold it turns out to be worth . . . a lot of clams.
Plus we all know the story.
It’s an ad of a movie. With a built-in consumer base.
There must already be Facebook fan page(s) with people clamoring like ghouls to see this.
Poor kid. I bet he gets that a lot…
I’ve never seen him in anything before. I’m guessing this movie won’t show anywhere here in Indy except the Keystone Arts Cinema, so I’ll have to keep my eyes out for it.
You make the point that we’re all pre-judging this movie based on its trailer, and then continue to treat the movie with disdain, to the point of saying it is without craft.
It seems more telling of self-fulfilling prophecy than social commentary on your part. Pessimism or pretense or both.
Mjm: I dig the CIA ref. Even if there’s a different acronym behind it all. It’s all pretty fucking obvious. “Pop” “culture” is always their ace-up-a-sleeve.
Well, I want to see how it’ll be handled. In the trailer, I noticed how the director was using close ups of various online “networking acts” and combining this with real life — it was showing how life was behind this networking thing, and then showing it integrating into this networking thing, and how it had an affect on both. And this was only within the trailer. And this was only from the camera operation.
Plus, I am interested in the acting. It looks well acted.
And then you have the social commentary. Sure, it could falter, but it seems as if the script will handle it well.
Putting aside the subject, my reaction would be the same. This is pure drivel. These movies Hollywood puts out. Jesus.
There is also something distasteful about the obvious reason it was made: Facebook phenomenon = built-in audience = bad Facebook movie = big opening weekend box office = so what if it’s a piece of crap? Every FB fan who goes to this knows they’re being marketing to and yet they’ll likely go anyway. I just find it foul.
I have no idea if the book was good or not. And I like a good business story. But this is dreck. Guaranteed. I’ll come back and amend my comments if I ever see the movie and think differently.
Oh, and I hated The West Wing. Even if Sorkin wrote the dialogue all in iambicpentameter, for the entire run of the show, which is fucking impressive, yes, the show still sucked a nut that had not yet descended from a dude’s stomach after being kicked all the way up there, you know?
I’m saying the movie is likely bad; others are saying it might be good. Yes, based on the trailer, which is the only thing we have to judge re this particular film at the moment. My view might be pessimistic but it’s based on viewer experience these last number of years. Nick Antosca’s admiration of the work of this movie’s director informs his opinion. Yes. We’re doing the same thing, from different perspectives and perhaps a different tone. It might be pessimism. It’s not pretense. It might be exasperation.
Wait, it was in iambic pentameter?
That’s a joke, right?
(I did not like the show.)
Hmmm. There are a half dozen – probably more, maybe a dozen, mostly women – exceptional Hollywood film actors around. None are in this movie. I saw screaming into a cellphone(?) one-hour-TV-drama-style and a rather halfhearted flipping-off, i.e. not much evidence of good acting. But maybe you’re right.
please, they’re so easy to differentiate. jesse is no george michael.
The website was better.
Agreed. The kid, Keir Gilchrist, is great.
Huh? So content rather than craft is determinative of quality? What on earth is an “FB fan”? There are FB users, and I am one of them as are most people I know, but I don’t think any of us are “fans” of the website, nor would I likely be interested in this if it weren’t from Fincher, and if it didn’t have an unexpectedly excellent trailer.
Ha, nice.
during the entire trailer i was trying to figure out whether that kid was michael cera or jesse eisenberg.
There is no craft here.
A fan is a user who is part of the cult (the crowd) of FB. There are a lot of them. Almost as many as there are users.
If you think that’s an excellent trailer, that’s fine by me.
Interesting. It feels like you hate this because you have larger issues with facebook or something, which is fair enough. My feeling is that while I hated Benjamin Button, I like or love almost everything else Fincher has done, and certainly I think a great piece of art can be created from a story I wouldn’t otherwise be particularly interested in. To say there’s “no craft” involved seems kind of mulish, since that’s prima facie untrue. I do think it’s an excellent trailer, both uniquely conceived and elegantly designed. I don’t know that the movie will be excellent, but while I was curious before because of Fincher, I’m now strongly interested in seeing it.
I see what you’re saying; perhaps my objections are larger than this movie. But I think it has less to do with Facebook – or the cult surrounding it – than with mainstream movies made today in general, for all the reasons I’ve mentioned. This churning out of bad movie after bad movie.
I find (yes, making a general statement) that mainstream Hollywood movies will have a truly fantastic performance here or there, or a certain film will be shot beautifully, or there will be a exceptional technological innovation, but on the whole viewers are left with very little. As the late Sydney Pollack used to say: there is no middle in movie-making anymore.
So when I say ‘no craft’, I mean – overall not done well. Sure: someone wrote it, there was a lighting director, a cinematographer, sound, actors etc. These are crafts. Skilled professionals; they might even be artists. But the craft of making a film is a director’s, and that means the whole of it. We’re all making comments and suppositions here based on a trailer, and from what I see it just seems very run of the mill, another dud, but we’ll all get to watch it eventually, and we’ll be able to judge if your man Fincher pulls it off.
Poor kid. I bet he gets that a lot…
I’ve never seen him in anything before. I’m guessing this movie won’t show anywhere here in Indy except the Keystone Arts Cinema, so I’ll have to keep my eyes out for it.
You make the point that we’re all pre-judging this movie based on its trailer, and then continue to treat the movie with disdain, to the point of saying it is without craft.
It seems more telling of self-fulfilling prophecy than social commentary on your part. Pessimism or pretense or both.
I’m saying the movie is likely bad; others are saying it might be good. Yes, based on the trailer, which is the only thing we have to judge re this particular film at the moment. My view might be pessimistic but it’s based on viewer experience these last number of years. Nick Antosca’s admiration of the work of this movie’s director informs his opinion. Yes. We’re doing the same thing, from different perspectives and perhaps a different tone. It might be pessimism. It’s not pretense. It might be exasperation.
Wait, it was in iambic pentameter?
That’s a joke, right?
(I did not like the show.)
please, they’re so easy to differentiate. jesse is no george michael.