By Leo Sefton, Arts Editor
Sixteen years later, the follow-up to David Fincher’s acclaimed Facebook biopic, The Social Network (2010), has arrived. Making its way to the big screen without the award-winning director, with original screenwriter Aaron Sorkin taking the reins, it seems like a classic case of diminishing returns - though it is not without its merits. The film has a general vibe of “this could have been an email” about it, but it is far from a joyless watching experience, and at points recaptures some of the thrill of its predecessor.
Overall, this is quite a well-cast film. Jeremy Strong as Mark Zuckerberg is a natural fit and neatly captures the Meta CEO’s quasi-robotic demeanour. Unfortunately, he doesn’t really have enough screen time to merit a true comparison to Jesse Eisenberg’s Zuckerberg, and isn’t particularly well served by the script either, which depicts him a tad too one-dimensionally. None of this can be allowed to detract from Strong’s efforts, however, as he makes the most of what he is given to both chilling, and sometimes humorous effect. The true stars of the film, Mikey Madison, and Jeremy Allen White work well together. That said, they have the bulk of the screen time to fill and often aren't quite interesting enough to consistently keep your attention across the film’s runtime. They effectively serve as conduits for the film’s message rather than fully fleshed out characters.
The film’s narrative is another mixed bag. While it covers an admittedly interesting period in Facebook/Meta’s history and US politics, it doesn’t quite recapture the feeling of intimacy with its subjects that The Social Network did. It feels like we are looking from a distance at something we already know the broader strokes of, without getting much finer detail. There are, however, highlights, such as the narrative arc of Mikey Madison’s Frances Haugen. While, as previously mentioned, her on-screen presence with her co-star isn’t exactly gripping, the subtext of her growing disillusionment with her unscrupulous employer is interesting to see and highlights a very real tightrope that many tech employees have to walk, between loyalty to a renowned employer, and their own personal morals.
Visually, the film does impress at points, such as the imagery of Zuckerberg alone behind a desk in a darkened auditorium as he rehearses for a hearing. The staging of these scenes seems purpose built to highlight his distance from his employees, facing only distant sycophants with no real equal in his work life. Strong cuts an imposing figure here, and the staging certainly helps this. Elsewhere, Sorkin’s visual decisions prove much less successful, however. The film flits between 2019, 2020, and 2021, and this is illustrated with a timeline graphic, which appears so often as to be completely grating. Perhaps less offensive, though still not particularly rewarding, is Sorkin’s use of black and white cinematography for flashbacks which seems a bit clichéd as it is not used effectively, or consistently, as much of the film’s colour scenes could also be considered flashbacks.
Charles Hubbard
Though the script is at times a little flat, there are genuinely funny moments where Sorkin’s trademark wit shines through. Though that obviously makes for a more entertaining watch, on the other hand it does highlight the film’s lesser success with its more dramatic and hefty intentions. Though the film’s message about social media manipulation and negligence is obviously important, I couldn’t help but feel that it is coming a bit late, and that its relevance as a warning is already starting to feel a bit dated in a world where generative AI seems to be taking over as the predominant form of political misinformation on social media, rather than simply the algorithmic amplification of hateful content.
Overall, The Social Reckoning isn’t an inherently bad film. It has its moments. Though by my reckoning, you might as well rewatch its predecessor instead.
Featured image: IMDb / Jeremy Strong in The Social Reckoning
Do you think we needed a sequel?
