Editor's note: Welcome to the twenty-sixth of a 33-part series dissecting the 83rd Academy Awards, brought to you by the Large Association of Movie Blogs and its assorted members. Every day leading up to the Oscars, a new post written by a different LAMB will be published, each covering a different category of the Oscars. To read any other posts regarding this event, please click the tag following the post. Thank you, and enjoy!by Tom of Movie Reviews by Tom Clift 
It seems like only yesterday when the blogosphere – myself included – was condemning the premise of David Fincher’s The Social Network as an utterly preposterous idea for a movie, and a colossal waste of a very talented director’s time. After all, how could they possibly make a movie about Facebook into something worth seeing? Yet as we count down the days to the 83rd Annual Academy Awards, that very same movie now finds itself one of the forerunners in the hotly contested Best Picture race. With a phenomenal and deeply nuanced screenplay by "West Wing" scribe Aaron Sorkin, an electrifying, propulsive score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, rich dark digital cinematography from frequent Fincher collaborator Jeff Cronenweth, and one of the best ensemble casts of under thirty actors ever assembled, The Social Network is somehow one of the most discerning, enthralling and exhilarating motion pictures of the fledgling decade, and proof that under the guidance of a director as bold and meticulousness as David Fincher, even the most pedestrian subject matter can be turned into something great.
By now, the Oscar race has essentially boiled down to two films. In one corner is the aforementioned The Social Network. A favourite for a large majority of this year’s awards season, the film won many precursor accolades including the National Board of Review, a considerable majority of the US Critics Associations awards, as well the increasingly irrelevant yet highly publicized Golden Globe awards. In the other corner is Tom Hooper’s The King’s Speech, a film that has been gaining steam in recent weeks by taking three very important awards, namely: Best Ensemble Cast at the SAG (Screen Actors Guild) awards, Best Picture at the PGA (Producers Guild of America) awards and, most surprisingly and from The Social Network’s perspective most ominously, Best Director at the DGA (Directors Guild of America) awards. With only a few weeks until the winners of Hollywood’s ultimate honours are announced, it seems as though The Social Network is about to be overtaken, defeated at the last minute as the Academy prepares to select what in many ways would be a more traditional Best Picture choice. What follows is my argument as to what a mistake that would be.
The King’s Speech is not a bad film. In point of fact, The Kings Speech is an excellent film, one that is well made, superbly acted and at times legitimately moving. But for all its many qualities, The Kings Speech is a stunningly safe choice for the Academy to make; it is exactly the kind of film that springs to mind when you hear the words “Oscar bait”. The Kings Speech represents cinema’s past. The Social Network, on the other hand – shot on the innovative new RED camera, easily one of the most beautiful films to ever be captured digitally – represents all we have to be excited about for in cinema’s future. While The Kings Speech is filled with veteran actors who have long since been showered with acclaim, The Social Network features the very best that young Hollywood has to offer, whose talent and potential is only just starting to be recognized. While The Kings Speech features a largely traditional score by a well established filmic composer, The Social Network is scored by a rock-star, one who employed urgent, propulsive sounds to unique and electrifying ends.
Most importantly of all however, while Tom Hooper churns out Oscar bait, David Fincher has made a career out of creating dark and distinctive pictures that resonate with young, discerning moviegoers. And as a film that tells the story of the founding of one of the most visited websites on the internet, The Social Network has a particular relevance to youthful audiences of today. The film has been praised up and down by critics as speaking to the beliefs and attitudes of the so called “Facebook generation” – personally, I think this praise misses its correct target by just an inch. What makes the film so great is that it takes the birth of a recent social phenomenon, and uses it to tell a story with themes as old as humanity; a story of greed, ambition and
betrayal. Where the movie really delivers its critique of digital citizens is in its portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg. To quote from my review of the film:
“The Facebook CEO as portrayed by Eisenberg is a character for the ages; quick witted, abrasive, socially inept and unexpectedly ruthless – essentially every characteristic we would associate a youth who makes a life for himself online…Sorkins dialogue is rapid-fire and razor-sharp, and is delivered with the kind of blithe sarcasm and detached irony that is characteristic of internet users all around the world.”
We live in an age where the internet, and especially Facebook, allows us to be funnier, smarter and more capable than we actually are. But it also allows us to be crueler, and more detached. And what character is recent history better embodies that state of mind than Mark Zuckerberg, a billionaire barely more than a child; not an asshole, but trying so hard to be.
With eight nominations, The Social Network sits equal with Inception for the third highest number of nominations, behind only The Kings Speech with twelve, and True Grit with ten. If it were up to me, the film win Best Picture, not to mention Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Actor (Jesse Eisenberg) and, in the light of Tron: Legacy and Inception going un-nominated, Best Original Score and Best Editing as well. As it stands, the movie seems practically a lock for Screenplay categories, while at the other end Eisenberg can be essentially ruled out of the actor race in favour of Colin Firth more showy (though indisputably brilliant)
performance in The Kings Speech. I do think there is a reasonable chance that Fincher could defy the precedent set by the DGA to take Best Director. But unfortunately, when it comes to the night’s top prize, my money is on Tom Hooper’s conventional historical drama.
But whether or not The Social Network does get overlooked, in five years I have little doubt as to which film will be remembered. I will conclude by again returning to a quote from my review:
“The Social Network transcends the realm of movie based on true events; it is a masterpiece of modern screenwriting, a veritable acting clinic and a subtly gorgeous aural and visual experience. It is also one of the most discerning movies yet made in and about the internet era, and is the most mature entry in its director’s entire filmography. David Fincher ended the nineteen-nineties by producing one of its most important films; with The Social Network, he has started the twenty-tens in a similar fashion.”
