With the expanded use of 3D technology, was anyone really that surprised that MTV Films would push a third Jackass movie so that audiences could see their favorite stunts jump off the screen? The Jackass franchise itself has had a particularly intriguing impact on pop culture over the years, building a dedicated fan-base while also generating controversy as teenagers tried to replicate the stunts they had seen performed on television. Luckily, MTV took the appropriate steps to warn viewers against such dangerous behavior and the first two films in the franchise ended up being highly successful with minimal amounts of backlash. Now, it almost seems appropriate that Jackass 3D marks the 10th anniversary of when audiences were first introduced to the antics of Johnny Knoxville, Steve-O, and Bam Margera. While I was not a huge fan of the original television series, I had seen the earlier films and could appreciate their comedic value, and I was curious to see how the newest stunts would look in 3D.
The tone of Jackass 3D is set very quickly as the classic MTV characters Beavis and Butt-head explain the technology behind the movie to the audience and promise plenty of laughs and gross-out antics. With essentially no plot, I was still surprised by the level of nostalgia introduced as a majority of the cast mainstays returned to work together and entertain the audience…I didn’t realize how much I had missed watching Knoxville, Steve-O, or Wee Man hurt themselves in as stupid a way as possible. Admittedly, the Jackass franchise is not for everyone, so if you are expecting any level of sophisticated humor, you will assuredly be disappointed; however, if you would enjoy seeing two guys play tether-ball with a beehive or use superglue to remove chest-hair, sit back and enjoy. Still, even if you like this low-brow humor, be warned, your gag-reflex will be pushed to the limit with some of the grosser stunts. In the end, even though I was slightly disappointed by the lack of stunts actually utilizing the 3D technology, I still thoroughly enjoyed Jackass 3D and declare it an absolute must-see for fans of the franchise.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: High
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Jackass 3D: Full Review
Jackass 3D - (October 15th, 2010): R
Distributor: Paramount Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #1 with $50,353,641
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $86,861,041
Gross Revenue: $90,362,464
Budget: $20 million
Director: Jeff Tremaine
From a marketing standpoint, the promotional tactics used by Paramount for Jackass 3D were surprisingly creative and aggressive, seeking to remind audiences that they actually enjoy the now-historic Jackass franchise. The first official image of this sequel actually surfaced on the Jackass Facebook page in late July, while Paramount and MTV films screened footage at a special event at San Diego’s Comic-Con 2010, allowing fans to meet the crew and start building positive buzz. As can be expected, the trailer premiered on channels frequented by the target audience (MTV, VH1, and Spike TV) and was attached to films like The Other Guys, The Expendables, or Machete, bringing wider recognition to the upcoming release. Individual members of the cast also made separate appearances on WWE Monday Night RAW, Late Night With Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel Live, and even the Howard Stern Show; while MTV aired a marathon of the original series and making-off documentaries, all geared to play-off the nostalgia and fond memories fans of the franchise might hold. Given the franchise’s consistent warnings to audiences not to try and replicate any of the stunts featured, I was a little surprised when Knoxville launched the Jackass 3D Prank Contest with the video guide website WonderHowTo, prompting fans to submit prank ideas for a chance to win a trip to Hollywood to shoot the prank with the cast; yet, there was no negative backlash from this promotion, and audiences seemed primed to see this familiar film series in a new format. Early critical and fan reception was very positive, and though I had been warned that one scene in particular was especially nauseating, I was still excited to purchase my 3D glasses and see what the Jackass crew had cooked up this time around.
At this point in my reviews I usually go over the plot of a given film, but in this case, a plot is nonexistent for Jackass 3D. Suffice to say, audiences simply watch the Jackass crew (Johnny Knoxville, Steve-O, Bam Margera, and Wee Man being the most famous), engage in various rude pranks and utterly idiotic stunts. My personal favorite was “Electric Avenue,” where, dressed as prisoners, the crew navigates down a hallway filled with active Tasers, cattle-prods, and various other stun-guns set to maximum voltage. Over the course of the film, we see Knoxville tackled by buffalo; Steve-O launched a hundred feet into the air while strapped into a full port-a-potty; and Wee Man attached to other cast members with superglue. If you have fond memories of the franchise, I’m sure you will enjoy the nostalgic value of watching this newest set of stunts and be reminded of why you like the franchise in the first place.
In the absence of acting or a plot, the humor of Jackass 3D is the biggest positive for fans of the franchise, but there are still some weak elements worth mentioning. In terms of the 3D technology, Phantom high speed cameras enabled the production crew to produce a number of scenes in hyper-slow motion, though the effects were largely confined to the opening and closing sequences and such pranks like “The Rocky,” where you sneak up behind someone, throw a glass of water in their face with one hand, and hit them as hard as you can with a boxing glove on the other hand. Though these scenes were impressive, I must admit though that I was expecting a few more of the stunts to actually jump out at the audience, so there were times that the technology felt underused. Now, there are considerable laughs in watching these guys hurt themselves, but the Jackass franchise is also known for gross-out humor, so I feel obligated to warn readers that there are scenes that will test your gag-reflex. I’ll put it to you this way, being a Resident Assistant for a year in college made me near-immune to the effects of vomit or nausea, but one scene in particular had me gagging in the theater. Yet, despite some of the grosser scenes and the perceived underuse of the available technology, Jackass 3D still delivered exactly what it promised audiences and did the franchise justice in this latest offering.
From a box-office perspective, Jackass 3D has been absolutely record-setting, bringing in just over $50 million its opening weekend and claiming the title for the most successful Fall opening ever, a distinction originally held by 2003’s Scary Movie 3. It seems that Paramount’s promotional tactics more than paid-off, essentially more-than doubling the production budget in one weekend and taking in an additional $21 million in its second weekend. As it turns out, the Jackass crew shot enough stunts to produce another film (Jackass 3.5) that was planned for a DVD release in January, but given the success of the original, this newest film may be granted a theatrical release. Even though Jackass 3D lost the top spot at the box-office to Paranormal Activity 2, I still expect word-of-mouth and critical reception to translate into a highly lucrative box-office run as audiences look for a humorous alternative during this Halloween season. Still, I must emphasize that this type of humor is not for everyone and that Jackass 3D more than earns its R-rating…if you like this kind of stuff, knock yourself out, but if you’re looking more family-friendly humor, you had better wait for Megamind next weekend.
Overall Recommendation: High
Distributor: Paramount Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #1 with $50,353,641
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $86,861,041
Gross Revenue: $90,362,464
Budget: $20 million
Director: Jeff Tremaine
From a marketing standpoint, the promotional tactics used by Paramount for Jackass 3D were surprisingly creative and aggressive, seeking to remind audiences that they actually enjoy the now-historic Jackass franchise. The first official image of this sequel actually surfaced on the Jackass Facebook page in late July, while Paramount and MTV films screened footage at a special event at San Diego’s Comic-Con 2010, allowing fans to meet the crew and start building positive buzz. As can be expected, the trailer premiered on channels frequented by the target audience (MTV, VH1, and Spike TV) and was attached to films like The Other Guys, The Expendables, or Machete, bringing wider recognition to the upcoming release. Individual members of the cast also made separate appearances on WWE Monday Night RAW, Late Night With Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel Live, and even the Howard Stern Show; while MTV aired a marathon of the original series and making-off documentaries, all geared to play-off the nostalgia and fond memories fans of the franchise might hold. Given the franchise’s consistent warnings to audiences not to try and replicate any of the stunts featured, I was a little surprised when Knoxville launched the Jackass 3D Prank Contest with the video guide website WonderHowTo, prompting fans to submit prank ideas for a chance to win a trip to Hollywood to shoot the prank with the cast; yet, there was no negative backlash from this promotion, and audiences seemed primed to see this familiar film series in a new format. Early critical and fan reception was very positive, and though I had been warned that one scene in particular was especially nauseating, I was still excited to purchase my 3D glasses and see what the Jackass crew had cooked up this time around.
At this point in my reviews I usually go over the plot of a given film, but in this case, a plot is nonexistent for Jackass 3D. Suffice to say, audiences simply watch the Jackass crew (Johnny Knoxville, Steve-O, Bam Margera, and Wee Man being the most famous), engage in various rude pranks and utterly idiotic stunts. My personal favorite was “Electric Avenue,” where, dressed as prisoners, the crew navigates down a hallway filled with active Tasers, cattle-prods, and various other stun-guns set to maximum voltage. Over the course of the film, we see Knoxville tackled by buffalo; Steve-O launched a hundred feet into the air while strapped into a full port-a-potty; and Wee Man attached to other cast members with superglue. If you have fond memories of the franchise, I’m sure you will enjoy the nostalgic value of watching this newest set of stunts and be reminded of why you like the franchise in the first place.
In the absence of acting or a plot, the humor of Jackass 3D is the biggest positive for fans of the franchise, but there are still some weak elements worth mentioning. In terms of the 3D technology, Phantom high speed cameras enabled the production crew to produce a number of scenes in hyper-slow motion, though the effects were largely confined to the opening and closing sequences and such pranks like “The Rocky,” where you sneak up behind someone, throw a glass of water in their face with one hand, and hit them as hard as you can with a boxing glove on the other hand. Though these scenes were impressive, I must admit though that I was expecting a few more of the stunts to actually jump out at the audience, so there were times that the technology felt underused. Now, there are considerable laughs in watching these guys hurt themselves, but the Jackass franchise is also known for gross-out humor, so I feel obligated to warn readers that there are scenes that will test your gag-reflex. I’ll put it to you this way, being a Resident Assistant for a year in college made me near-immune to the effects of vomit or nausea, but one scene in particular had me gagging in the theater. Yet, despite some of the grosser scenes and the perceived underuse of the available technology, Jackass 3D still delivered exactly what it promised audiences and did the franchise justice in this latest offering.
From a box-office perspective, Jackass 3D has been absolutely record-setting, bringing in just over $50 million its opening weekend and claiming the title for the most successful Fall opening ever, a distinction originally held by 2003’s Scary Movie 3. It seems that Paramount’s promotional tactics more than paid-off, essentially more-than doubling the production budget in one weekend and taking in an additional $21 million in its second weekend. As it turns out, the Jackass crew shot enough stunts to produce another film (Jackass 3.5) that was planned for a DVD release in January, but given the success of the original, this newest film may be granted a theatrical release. Even though Jackass 3D lost the top spot at the box-office to Paranormal Activity 2, I still expect word-of-mouth and critical reception to translate into a highly lucrative box-office run as audiences look for a humorous alternative during this Halloween season. Still, I must emphasize that this type of humor is not for everyone and that Jackass 3D more than earns its R-rating…if you like this kind of stuff, knock yourself out, but if you’re looking more family-friendly humor, you had better wait for Megamind next weekend.
Overall Recommendation: High
Red: Short and Sweet
Perhaps the most interesting and unknown fact about Red is that it is actually based on a comic book series from DC Comics, and after the unholy failure of Jonah Hex this past summer, it was clear that DC needed Red to be a successful adaptation. While a story about aging superspies may not have the fan appeal of other comic book mainstays like Spider-Man or Batman, what Red lacked in fan-following it more than made up for with strong casting. With audience favorites such as Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, and John Malkovich, Red was sure to generate considerable draw as it showcased these actors with a blend of action and humor. Marketing for the film was fairly straightforward as the first full trailer debuted at July’s Comic-Con and started to build buzz among both comic fans and followers of the ensemble cast. Being a huge comic book fan myself, I confess that I was not familiar with Red’s source material, but regardless, I was still excited to see an action-comedy with some of my favorite actors.
Unfortunately, for all the appeal that Red had as a possible blockbuster, the actual film was thoroughly disappointing, with weak character development and a surprisingly confusing plot coming together to produce a boring action-comedy. With the combined acting talent of award-winners like Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich, and Helen Mirren, the reality is that Red should have been much better, but tragically, their efforts were hampered by predictable and clichéd characters. In fact, it feels like Bruce Willis was the only one whose character was given any kind of background or development that the audience could relate to or sympathize with as the film progressed. I was also expecting a high level of action and comedy, but tragically, the funniest jokes and coolest action scenes had already been revealed in the previews, so there wasn’t much that other plot elements could add to keep audiences engaged without the efforts coming across as forced. Don’t get me wrong, Red is not a bad film, but given all of its potential, the mediocre nature of the end result is pretty hard to forgive.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Unfortunately, for all the appeal that Red had as a possible blockbuster, the actual film was thoroughly disappointing, with weak character development and a surprisingly confusing plot coming together to produce a boring action-comedy. With the combined acting talent of award-winners like Bruce Willis, Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich, and Helen Mirren, the reality is that Red should have been much better, but tragically, their efforts were hampered by predictable and clichéd characters. In fact, it feels like Bruce Willis was the only one whose character was given any kind of background or development that the audience could relate to or sympathize with as the film progressed. I was also expecting a high level of action and comedy, but tragically, the funniest jokes and coolest action scenes had already been revealed in the previews, so there wasn’t much that other plot elements could add to keep audiences engaged without the efforts coming across as forced. Don’t get me wrong, Red is not a bad film, but given all of its potential, the mediocre nature of the end result is pretty hard to forgive.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Red: Full Review
Red - (October 15th, 2010): PG-13
Distributor: Summit Entertainment
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #2 with $21,761,408
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $43,518,185
Gross Revenue: $43,518,185
Budget: $58 million
Director: Robert Schwentke
It has been refreshing to see comic book adaptations branch out from the traditional superhero flick, but after disappointing entries like The Losers and Jonah Hex, DC Comics has had a pretty hard time convincing audiences that they can handle anything beyond the Batman series or Watchmen. The idea of highlighting post-retirement superspies (classified as Retired and Extremely Dangerous) was intriguing enough, but some critics were concerned that audiences had seen these types of characters before in some of the cast’s previous work. Sure, Helen Mirren was stepping out of her comfort zone to play a ruthless assassin, but John Malkovich has definitely played crazy and paranoid before (just think of Con Air and Burn After Reading), while Morgan Freeman proved that he could pull-off an aging assassin when he curved bullets in 2008’s Wanted. Still, if these formulas worked with audiences before, there was little reason to believe that Red wouldn’t be able to replicate a similar level of success by playing to the actor’s strengths. Either way, trailers and promotional materials clearly tried to evoke positive feelings by highlighting the popularity of the individual cast members and pointing out the appeal that they would have appearing together in a film filled with humor and violence. Regardless of having never read the original comic, I was still excited to see some of my favorite actors in Red.
Red begins by introducing the audience to Frank Moses (Willis) a retired black ops CIA agent who fights boredom by speaking with a lonely representative from his pension office, the sassy yet naive Sarah (Mary-Louise Parker from Showtime’s Weeds). After an unexpected attempt on his life, Frank realizes he is being hunted and takes measures to protect Sarah by bringing her along, as the assassins would be aware that she and Frank are in regular contact and therefore target her as well. With the help of his former black ops team, which includes Frank’s mentor Joe (Freeman), thoroughly insane conspiracy theorist Marvin (Malkovich), and ruthless wetwork agent Victoria (Mirren), Frank tries to identify those who are trying to kill him. As it turns out, Frank and his team stumble across a conspiracy that not only involves the CIA, but also reaches all the way up to the White House. In the end, these retired agents end up fighting for survival with both style and humor, fully illustrating why they are still the best in the business.
While Red was nowhere near as good as it could have been, there were still some pretty enjoyable elements. Among the star-studded cast, Bruce Willis’ character stood out as the deepest and most sympathetic, as the audience is quickly able to empathize with the loneliness and boredom that Frank experiences as a retired agent. There is also a considerable amount of chemistry between Willis and Parker, with the offbeat romance shared by these characters coming across as surprisingly sweet. And though his presence in the cast was slightly overshadowed by his costars, Karl Urban is pretty convincing as conflicted CIA agent William Cooper, who is assigned to hunt Frank and his team; and I have to point out that the fight scene between Frank and Cooper is easily the most energetic and enjoyable action sequence in the film. Unfortunately, these positive elements were not enough to make Red anything more than a mediocre entry in the action-comedy genre.
Now, critics have been absolutely raving about Red, and some may think me overly critical, but as hard as I try, I do not understand how some of the weak elements within the film have been overlooked. My single biggest problem with Red is that the best parts of the film were revealed to audiences in the previews; that is, beyond the scenes that were used to provoke audiences to go to the theater in the first place, the rest of the film just was not that entertaining. I liked Bruce Willis’ performance, but I think that the rest of the acting talent of the cast was considerably wasted on weak characters, as none of Frank’s team is given any kind of back-story or character development…Marvin’s crazy, Victoria kills people, and Joe is old, that’s it, take or leave it without explanation. Hollywood heavyweight Richard Dreyfuss also appears as a villain, but his character comes off a sleazy rather than menacing, so you’re not exactly sure how to react to him. Finally, the overall conspiracy of the film is so vague and confusing that it’s really easy to lose interest as the plot drags its feet explaining the conflict; by the time you figure out why Frank and his team are being hunted, you’re not really sure that you care anymore. Sadly these elements combine to make Red a fairly-weak and forgettable action-comedy that was neither very exciting nor very funny.
Despite the disappointing execution of this highly touted blockbuster, Red has been performing surprisingly well at the box-office, placing second its opening weekend with just under $23 million. Again, I want to emphasize that Red is not a bad movie; it’s just not that good, and a mediocre entry is especially disappointing when you consider the combined acting talent of the ensemble cast. If you are a fan of any one of these aging actors, I’m sure you’ll find something to enjoy in Red, but if you’ve seen any of the previews, don’t expect anything surprising. As I said, critical reviews for Red have been strong, so I expect the film to continue to perform well at the box-office and regain some credibility for DC Comics film adaptations, but I wouldn’t recommend that anyone rush to the theater to see this one.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Distributor: Summit Entertainment
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #2 with $21,761,408
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $43,518,185
Gross Revenue: $43,518,185
Budget: $58 million
Director: Robert Schwentke
It has been refreshing to see comic book adaptations branch out from the traditional superhero flick, but after disappointing entries like The Losers and Jonah Hex, DC Comics has had a pretty hard time convincing audiences that they can handle anything beyond the Batman series or Watchmen. The idea of highlighting post-retirement superspies (classified as Retired and Extremely Dangerous) was intriguing enough, but some critics were concerned that audiences had seen these types of characters before in some of the cast’s previous work. Sure, Helen Mirren was stepping out of her comfort zone to play a ruthless assassin, but John Malkovich has definitely played crazy and paranoid before (just think of Con Air and Burn After Reading), while Morgan Freeman proved that he could pull-off an aging assassin when he curved bullets in 2008’s Wanted. Still, if these formulas worked with audiences before, there was little reason to believe that Red wouldn’t be able to replicate a similar level of success by playing to the actor’s strengths. Either way, trailers and promotional materials clearly tried to evoke positive feelings by highlighting the popularity of the individual cast members and pointing out the appeal that they would have appearing together in a film filled with humor and violence. Regardless of having never read the original comic, I was still excited to see some of my favorite actors in Red.
Red begins by introducing the audience to Frank Moses (Willis) a retired black ops CIA agent who fights boredom by speaking with a lonely representative from his pension office, the sassy yet naive Sarah (Mary-Louise Parker from Showtime’s Weeds). After an unexpected attempt on his life, Frank realizes he is being hunted and takes measures to protect Sarah by bringing her along, as the assassins would be aware that she and Frank are in regular contact and therefore target her as well. With the help of his former black ops team, which includes Frank’s mentor Joe (Freeman), thoroughly insane conspiracy theorist Marvin (Malkovich), and ruthless wetwork agent Victoria (Mirren), Frank tries to identify those who are trying to kill him. As it turns out, Frank and his team stumble across a conspiracy that not only involves the CIA, but also reaches all the way up to the White House. In the end, these retired agents end up fighting for survival with both style and humor, fully illustrating why they are still the best in the business.
While Red was nowhere near as good as it could have been, there were still some pretty enjoyable elements. Among the star-studded cast, Bruce Willis’ character stood out as the deepest and most sympathetic, as the audience is quickly able to empathize with the loneliness and boredom that Frank experiences as a retired agent. There is also a considerable amount of chemistry between Willis and Parker, with the offbeat romance shared by these characters coming across as surprisingly sweet. And though his presence in the cast was slightly overshadowed by his costars, Karl Urban is pretty convincing as conflicted CIA agent William Cooper, who is assigned to hunt Frank and his team; and I have to point out that the fight scene between Frank and Cooper is easily the most energetic and enjoyable action sequence in the film. Unfortunately, these positive elements were not enough to make Red anything more than a mediocre entry in the action-comedy genre.
Now, critics have been absolutely raving about Red, and some may think me overly critical, but as hard as I try, I do not understand how some of the weak elements within the film have been overlooked. My single biggest problem with Red is that the best parts of the film were revealed to audiences in the previews; that is, beyond the scenes that were used to provoke audiences to go to the theater in the first place, the rest of the film just was not that entertaining. I liked Bruce Willis’ performance, but I think that the rest of the acting talent of the cast was considerably wasted on weak characters, as none of Frank’s team is given any kind of back-story or character development…Marvin’s crazy, Victoria kills people, and Joe is old, that’s it, take or leave it without explanation. Hollywood heavyweight Richard Dreyfuss also appears as a villain, but his character comes off a sleazy rather than menacing, so you’re not exactly sure how to react to him. Finally, the overall conspiracy of the film is so vague and confusing that it’s really easy to lose interest as the plot drags its feet explaining the conflict; by the time you figure out why Frank and his team are being hunted, you’re not really sure that you care anymore. Sadly these elements combine to make Red a fairly-weak and forgettable action-comedy that was neither very exciting nor very funny.
Despite the disappointing execution of this highly touted blockbuster, Red has been performing surprisingly well at the box-office, placing second its opening weekend with just under $23 million. Again, I want to emphasize that Red is not a bad movie; it’s just not that good, and a mediocre entry is especially disappointing when you consider the combined acting talent of the ensemble cast. If you are a fan of any one of these aging actors, I’m sure you’ll find something to enjoy in Red, but if you’ve seen any of the previews, don’t expect anything surprising. As I said, critical reviews for Red have been strong, so I expect the film to continue to perform well at the box-office and regain some credibility for DC Comics film adaptations, but I wouldn’t recommend that anyone rush to the theater to see this one.
Overall Recommendation: Low
Friday, October 22, 2010
The Social Network: Short and Sweet
One of my favorite parts about the summer movie season is that is filled with films that have been building buzz for months, but high anticipation prior to release is pretty rare during the fall season, especially when a new film is not part of an established franchise. That being said, I was shocked by the level of hype surrounding The Social Network, but given the résumés of director David Fincher (Seven, Fight Club, Zodiac, and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button) and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin (A Few Good Men and The West Wing), it was clear that this drama could be an early Oscar contender. Facebook has evolved into an absolute necessity for film marketing, so it was going to be interesting to see a film about the birth of the website, especially when it was made without the collaboration of the Facebook staff. I was particularly excited to see Jesse Eisenberg (of Zombieland and Adventureland fame) portray the notoriously private Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, especially when early previews made it clear that he wasn’t going to be shown in the kindest of light. With more the 500 million active users, who wouldn’t be interested in the founding of Facebook’s social networking phenomenon?
Early reviews of The Social Network were immensely positive, and I couldn’t agree with them more. Strong acting and clever dialogue combine to bring an entertaining and fully engrossing story to life. Eisenberg shines as the internet entrepreneur, bringing Zuckerberg’s persona to the screen with an intensity and confidence that leaves the audience conflicted…you may not like his controversial personality, but you can’t help but root for his success as he develops Facebook. A strong supporting cast also helps guide the audience through a unique narrative structure, and though there are times the dialogue is a little confusing, you can’t help but appreciate the inherent intelligence of the film. Given the relevance that Facebook holds in this generation, audiences owe it to themselves to see The Social Network, an easy contender for the best drama of the year.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Sorry for the prolonged abscence loyal readers...mid-terms will do that to you. More reviews coming soon, including Red and Jackass 3D
Early reviews of The Social Network were immensely positive, and I couldn’t agree with them more. Strong acting and clever dialogue combine to bring an entertaining and fully engrossing story to life. Eisenberg shines as the internet entrepreneur, bringing Zuckerberg’s persona to the screen with an intensity and confidence that leaves the audience conflicted…you may not like his controversial personality, but you can’t help but root for his success as he develops Facebook. A strong supporting cast also helps guide the audience through a unique narrative structure, and though there are times the dialogue is a little confusing, you can’t help but appreciate the inherent intelligence of the film. Given the relevance that Facebook holds in this generation, audiences owe it to themselves to see The Social Network, an easy contender for the best drama of the year.
For more information, please read the full review.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Sorry for the prolonged abscence loyal readers...mid-terms will do that to you. More reviews coming soon, including Red and Jackass 3D
Thursday, October 21, 2010
The Social Network: Full Review
The Social Network - (October 1st, 2010): PG-13
Distributor: Columbia Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #1 with $22,445,653
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $62,436,364
Gross Revenue: $82,372,521
Budget: $50 million
Director: David Fincher
As I said in the “Short and Sweet” review, the combined guidance of director David Fincher and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin was more than enough give The Social Network a high level of credibility, but the development of the film was not without some level of controversy. Though the screenplay was adapted from Ben Mezrich’s 2009 nonfiction book, The Accidental Billionaires, the project was developed without the collaboration of Zuckerberg or any of Facebook’s staff, and rumors were surfacing that Zuckerberg himself was furious with his portrayal in the film. Nevertheless, the trailer was released in late June and attached to such films such as Inception, Salt, and The Other Guys, so buzz was continuing to build. In terms of the young cast, Jesse Eisenberg’s previous work has largely been confined to independent films, but early screenings had critics convinced that this film would help launch him to mainstream prominence; Andrew Garfield has been relatively unknown in Hollywood, but ever since he was announced to be the new Peter Parker/Spider-Man in Sony’s 2011 reboot, many were curious about whether he could hold his own on screen; and finally, there was Justin Timberlake, who apparently had to jump through hoops to play Napster founder Sean Parker. With this carefully selected cast and crew combining with popular and relevant subject material, it was clear the Columbia Pictures would be shooting for the stars with its newest drama.
If you haven’t heard by now, The Social Network traces the founding of the social networking website Facebook. The story starts in 2003, where, after a tense breakup with his girlfriend, Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg (Eisenberg) drunkenly creates a webpage that allows students to rate the attractiveness of Harvard’s female students. After traffic to his site crashes the network, Mark attracts the attention of entrepreneurial twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss and their business partner, Divya Narendra, who hire Mark to create a networking site exclusive to Harvard students. Mark decides to expand on this idea with his best friend Eduardo Saverin (Garfield), christening the social networking tool “the facebook.” As the site grows in popularity, Mark and Eduardo attract the attention of Napster’s co-founder, Sean Parker (Timberlake), who sees the potential of Facebook and resolves to help Mark take the website to the next level. Unfortunately, a rift forms between Mark and Eduardo, and Mark eventually finds himself fighting two lawsuits, one from the Winklevoss twins and one from Eduardo, both of which may threaten the continuance of the Facebook phenomenon.
My short description of the story does not do the film justice, as the story itself is easily one of the most positive features of The Social Network, brought to life by clever dialogue and superb acting. Listening to Eisenberg energetically rattle off his ideas for the Facebook format is almost hypnotic, while the banter between the competitive Harvard students and the internet entrepreneurs is surprisingly clever and humorous. Jesse Eisenberg and Justin Timberlake showcase considerable acting ability as they bring Zuckerberg and Parker to life with an almost sympathetic arrogance (they’re jerks, but likable jerks), but the real surprise is Andrew Garfield, who in addition to being almost instantaneously likable as Facebook’s first CFO, also shows considerable emotional depth as he transitions from a loyal friend to legal opponent still stinging from betrayal. I also thoroughly enjoyed the unique framing style of The Social Network, where the narrative switches between the early development of Facebook and the legal depositions that Zuckerberg faces now that the site is popular…it really helps keep the audience on their toes by building curiosity as to how the relationships between the characters fell apart. Put all this elements together, and The Social Network is a smart and clever drama that audiences are sure to enjoy.
Fortunately, they’re actually aren’t that many negatives to be said about The Social Network, but if anything, I have to admit that this drama almost destroyed its appeal in the first scene. The film opens with Zuckerberg talking with his girlfriend, and Eisenberg rattles off his lines with such a smug intensity that he’s almost incomprehensible, not only making him unlikable, but also sparking fears that the entire movie could be as exhausting as that first scene. Don’t worry and stay strong, you get used to the pace of dialogue eventually and you’re sure to enjoy the film in its entirety. Another small criticism is that there are points where the film gets a little overly technical, which could make it hard to follow for those not familiar with Facebook, but given the site’s popularity, I don’t see this aspect alienating a large portion of the target audience. In the though there are some small problems, The Social Network is still near-perfect, just sit back and enjoy an entertaining story.
Like the website it’s based on, The Social Network has been surprisingly profitable, bringing in over $22 million its opening weekend and taking the box-office crown two weeks in a row. With the large amount of media coverage surrounding its release and both positive reviews and favorable word-of-mouth, it isn’t that surprising that The Social Network was able to beat out some vague horror entries like Case 39 or My Soul to Take or underperforming family appeals like Life as We Know It or Secretariat. The real Mark Zuckerberg had remained pretty quiet over the development of the film, but he has now gone out of his way to point out the large differences between the fiction and reality of his success. Either way, I expect The Social Network to continue to perform strongly at the box-office and do considerable damage at this year’s Oscars. Just like not having a Facebook profile keeps you out of the social loop, it’s important that even the most casual of movie fans not miss The Social Network.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Distributor: Columbia Pictures
Opening Weekend Box-Office: #1 with $22,445,653
Domestic Box-Office Gross to-date: $62,436,364
Gross Revenue: $82,372,521
Budget: $50 million
Director: David Fincher
As I said in the “Short and Sweet” review, the combined guidance of director David Fincher and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin was more than enough give The Social Network a high level of credibility, but the development of the film was not without some level of controversy. Though the screenplay was adapted from Ben Mezrich’s 2009 nonfiction book, The Accidental Billionaires, the project was developed without the collaboration of Zuckerberg or any of Facebook’s staff, and rumors were surfacing that Zuckerberg himself was furious with his portrayal in the film. Nevertheless, the trailer was released in late June and attached to such films such as Inception, Salt, and The Other Guys, so buzz was continuing to build. In terms of the young cast, Jesse Eisenberg’s previous work has largely been confined to independent films, but early screenings had critics convinced that this film would help launch him to mainstream prominence; Andrew Garfield has been relatively unknown in Hollywood, but ever since he was announced to be the new Peter Parker/Spider-Man in Sony’s 2011 reboot, many were curious about whether he could hold his own on screen; and finally, there was Justin Timberlake, who apparently had to jump through hoops to play Napster founder Sean Parker. With this carefully selected cast and crew combining with popular and relevant subject material, it was clear the Columbia Pictures would be shooting for the stars with its newest drama.
If you haven’t heard by now, The Social Network traces the founding of the social networking website Facebook. The story starts in 2003, where, after a tense breakup with his girlfriend, Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg (Eisenberg) drunkenly creates a webpage that allows students to rate the attractiveness of Harvard’s female students. After traffic to his site crashes the network, Mark attracts the attention of entrepreneurial twins Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss and their business partner, Divya Narendra, who hire Mark to create a networking site exclusive to Harvard students. Mark decides to expand on this idea with his best friend Eduardo Saverin (Garfield), christening the social networking tool “the facebook.” As the site grows in popularity, Mark and Eduardo attract the attention of Napster’s co-founder, Sean Parker (Timberlake), who sees the potential of Facebook and resolves to help Mark take the website to the next level. Unfortunately, a rift forms between Mark and Eduardo, and Mark eventually finds himself fighting two lawsuits, one from the Winklevoss twins and one from Eduardo, both of which may threaten the continuance of the Facebook phenomenon.
My short description of the story does not do the film justice, as the story itself is easily one of the most positive features of The Social Network, brought to life by clever dialogue and superb acting. Listening to Eisenberg energetically rattle off his ideas for the Facebook format is almost hypnotic, while the banter between the competitive Harvard students and the internet entrepreneurs is surprisingly clever and humorous. Jesse Eisenberg and Justin Timberlake showcase considerable acting ability as they bring Zuckerberg and Parker to life with an almost sympathetic arrogance (they’re jerks, but likable jerks), but the real surprise is Andrew Garfield, who in addition to being almost instantaneously likable as Facebook’s first CFO, also shows considerable emotional depth as he transitions from a loyal friend to legal opponent still stinging from betrayal. I also thoroughly enjoyed the unique framing style of The Social Network, where the narrative switches between the early development of Facebook and the legal depositions that Zuckerberg faces now that the site is popular…it really helps keep the audience on their toes by building curiosity as to how the relationships between the characters fell apart. Put all this elements together, and The Social Network is a smart and clever drama that audiences are sure to enjoy.
Fortunately, they’re actually aren’t that many negatives to be said about The Social Network, but if anything, I have to admit that this drama almost destroyed its appeal in the first scene. The film opens with Zuckerberg talking with his girlfriend, and Eisenberg rattles off his lines with such a smug intensity that he’s almost incomprehensible, not only making him unlikable, but also sparking fears that the entire movie could be as exhausting as that first scene. Don’t worry and stay strong, you get used to the pace of dialogue eventually and you’re sure to enjoy the film in its entirety. Another small criticism is that there are points where the film gets a little overly technical, which could make it hard to follow for those not familiar with Facebook, but given the site’s popularity, I don’t see this aspect alienating a large portion of the target audience. In the though there are some small problems, The Social Network is still near-perfect, just sit back and enjoy an entertaining story.
Like the website it’s based on, The Social Network has been surprisingly profitable, bringing in over $22 million its opening weekend and taking the box-office crown two weeks in a row. With the large amount of media coverage surrounding its release and both positive reviews and favorable word-of-mouth, it isn’t that surprising that The Social Network was able to beat out some vague horror entries like Case 39 or My Soul to Take or underperforming family appeals like Life as We Know It or Secretariat. The real Mark Zuckerberg had remained pretty quiet over the development of the film, but he has now gone out of his way to point out the large differences between the fiction and reality of his success. Either way, I expect The Social Network to continue to perform strongly at the box-office and do considerable damage at this year’s Oscars. Just like not having a Facebook profile keeps you out of the social loop, it’s important that even the most casual of movie fans not miss The Social Network.
Overall Recommendation: Very High
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)