Hating a movie can be just as engaging and perhaps more entertaining than loving it. A film that is egregiously foolish, poorly planned, or downright malevolent can offer as much material for contemplation and conversation as one that is truly impactful. In both scenarios, there is at least something worth caring about.
This disappointment arises when encountering works like “The Social Reckoning.” This Aaron Sorkin sequel to “The Social Network,” the remarkable 2010 Facebook origin tale, written by Sorkin and directed by David Fincher, is a rare and lamentable anti-artistic creation. It is one of those films so devoid of substance and unoriginal that it fails to provoke genuine hatred, despite trying to position itself as perpetually relevant.
The movie, revolving around the perils of social media and corporate-controlled groupthink, could ironically exemplify the issue Sorkin aims to unveil: the abundance of subpar and uninteresting “content” inundating our feeds and For You pages. Yet, this mishandling of rich source material is carried out by a cast and crew boasting some of the most intriguing talents in the industry.
“The Social Reckoning” delves into Facebook’s era of exponential growth and pledges to critique one of the three tech titans of doom. The narrative unfolds with Wall Street Journal reporter Jeff Horwitz, played by Jeremy Allen White, and disillusioned product manager Frances Haugen, portrayed by Mikey Madison, as they expose a clandestine malpractice known as MSI (Meaningful Social Interactions), which has disrupted governments, eroded intellect, and distorted truth.
In contrast to Jesse Eisenberg’s nuanced portrayal in the original, Jeremy Strong’s depiction of Mark Zuckerberg in this iteration appears uninspired and poorly crafted. Strong’s performance, albeit carnival-like in showcasing Zuckerberg’s peculiar traits, feels somewhat tangential to the plot.
Further, the movie’s narrative shortcomings lie not with Strong but with Sorkin himself. The film’s reliance on clichés and lack of narrative depth diminish its potential impact. “The Social Reckoning” ends up as a shallow and unoriginal tale that fails to explore its timely themes effectively.
Ultimately, the film’s greatest flaw is its lack of risk-taking, specificity, and purpose. Sorkin’s attempt, despite his accolades, falls short, creating a work so devoid of substance that it hardly evokes strong feelings. This lack of depth is particularly disappointing when compared to its predecessor, “The Social Network,” which delved deep into its characters and themes.
In conclusion, “The Social Reckoning” falters not only in comparison to its predecessor but also on its own merits. Its neutrality and timidity render it a forgettable and disappointing piece of cinema, lacking the boldness and impact that art should strive to achieve.