There was a bit of a curfuffle a few weeks back because a handful of bloggers were handpicked to see David Fincher’s The Social Network, possibly by the director himself. A day or so ago, the fruits of that labor emerged when a unanimous chorus of praise coming from the likes of Slash Film, Collider, Devin Faraci, etc. The film has begun screening in New York and Los Angeles and since the bloggers already reviewed the thing, it’s basically a free-for-all, embargo-wise.
So far, the chorus continues, echoing Scott Foundas‘ first and early review of the film and Pete Travers’ rare four star rave (he gives out a scant few every year). The only reason I bring this to your attention is not because I think this kind of early praise helps a film Oscar-wise — it does anything but — but because it sounds like, despite the minor annoyance with favoritism and all — the film is a winner.
The most entertaining review I’ve read so far is Jeff Wells’ webgasm for the film. Wells, if you’ll recall, was 100% in the tank for Zodiac. Still, all of that enthusiasm didn’t warm the cockles of Oscar’s heart. The film was shut out. Many believe unfairly so, but now we get into the territory of why movies make it to the Best Picture race in the first place. Benjamin Button fared a bit better, with 13 Oscar nominations and 3 wins. To play this game you have to know this game.
Jeff Wells writes:
David Fincher‘s The Social Network (Columbia, 10.1) is Zodiac‘s younger, geekier, greedier brother. That means it’s good, as in really good — a movie for guys like myself and critics like Eric Kohn, Karina Longworth and Robert Koehler to savor and consider and bounce up against, and basically for smart, sophisticated audiences to savor in every cultural corner, and….can I just blurt it out? It’s the strongest Best Picture contender I’ve seen so far this year, and in saying this I’m obviously alluding to Inception.
Hm. Last time I checked, Karina Longworth and Eric Kohn don’t exactly bang the gong for Oscar’s Best Picture, in fact, they proudly and very specifically do not. So, to use those name and “strongest Best Picture contender” in the same graph is, well, perhaps a story for another time.
I do take issue with his pitting it against Inception. I don’t think those two are butting noses. Rather, both are looking to compete with films that deliver hard on emotion: The King’s Speech and 127 Hours (not that I have seen either film). But I do love how the commenters over at Hollywood-Elsewhere are prepared to see The Social Network take the whole enchilada. They do know that the Oscars aren’t decided that easily, right? Satirist and critic Glenn Kenny offers up the funniest one of all, “I’m almost 100 % sure I speak for Robert Keohler when I say “What the fuck?”
I will wait until I’ve seen The Social Network to say for sure, but from where I sit, Inception and The Social Network, while probably both genius in their own ways, aren’t at all alike. In fact, the Social Network (which may win Aaron Sorkin his first Oscar for screenplay, but he has to go up 127 Hours, etc.) is probably going to be high on dialogue, while Inception is high on directing. Maybe The Social Network has both.
To play the Oscar game is to know the Oscar game. And sometimes it’s best to keep Oscar talk off of the table for a while and just focus on the film itself. I find that really drives the Best Picture race a hell of a lot more than saying it will win prematurely. This, among other things I’ve learned over the past decade. Just saying.
In the end, I’m still have a heart all a-flutter for The Social Network and I can’t wait to see it. The bottom line is this: One can’t let the politics of this game interrupt one’s appreciation for the films themselves. That’s the whole reason any of us pays any attention at all.
