Page 8 of 10

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 1:07 am
by Big Magilla
I have no interest in Facebook, but I very much want to see this movie - the best reviewed American film, as Mister Tee keeps reminding us, since what?

I imagine there are other filmgoers who will want to check out such a phenomenon for themselves. Then there are those West Wing devotees who will be lured by Aaron Sorkin's name.

I think it will be a commercial hit as well as a critical one, quite possibly the biggest non-gimmick movie since Titanic. Then again, maybe not. I don't care how much a film makes or doesn't make, I only care if it's worth my time. This one looks like it may be.

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 12:52 am
by Sonic Youth
I don't know about that, Damien. Are you sure you're not inadvertantly using the general public as a stand-in for your own disinterest?

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 12:51 am
by taki15
Sonic Youth wrote:What true cineaste avoids a movie because of its subject matter?

Citizen Kane plot summary: "A reporter tracks down the people who worked with and were close to an infamous newspaper tycoon and multi-millionaire in order to learn about his life and personality." Newspapers? Someone pass me a pillow please.
Actually, your Citizen Kane summary sounds very intriguing.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:28 pm
by Damien
Mister Tee wrote:
Sonic Youth wrote:What true cineaste avoids a movie because of its subject matter?

Citizen Kane plot summary: "A reporter tracks down the people who worked with and were close to an infamous newspaper tycoon and multi-millionaire in order to learn about his life and personality." Newspapers? Someone pass me a pillow please.
I gave up judging a movie's potential by plot blurb 35 years ago, when "Guy robs a bank to pay for his male lover's sex change operation" sounded like the most ludicrous idea for a movie imaginable. (Damien, of course, thinks the movie itself was ludicrous, but a whole lot of us felt different)
Tee, I don't think Dog Day Afternoon is ludicrous, only dull. :D (Would that it had had some ludicrous qualities -- maybe Almodovar can remake it.)

Sonic, I wasn't speaking of serious film people in turns of not being enthused at the prospect of a movie about Facebook, just the general public. (But I'm lousy at predicting how popular a picture is going to be.)

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:18 pm
by Mister Tee
Sonic Youth wrote:What true cineaste avoids a movie because of its subject matter?

Citizen Kane plot summary: "A reporter tracks down the people who worked with and were close to an infamous newspaper tycoon and multi-millionaire in order to learn about his life and personality." Newspapers? Someone pass me a pillow please.
I gave up judging a movie's potential by plot blurb 35 years ago, when "Guy robs a bank to pay for his male lover's sex change operation" sounded like the most ludicrous idea for a movie imaginable. (Damien, of course, thinks the movie itself was ludicrous, but a whole lot of us felt different)

As I wrote earlier in the thread, I think the marketing strategy has been really aggressive and outside-the-box. Especially given the movie's apparent high quality, I hope this approach pays off. Otherwise, it'll be another nail in the coffin of the Serious American Movie.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 11:14 pm
by Okri
1. The Social Network skews younger than Sideways, which I think plays in its favour.

2. I don't like Fincher, Sorkin OR have a Facebook account, yet I'm excited by this movie.

3. I know a number of people who I wouldn't have pegged as people looking forward to this movie... who are looking forward to this movie.

4. I want it to be successful more than I want to like it.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 10:49 pm
by Sabin
At the end of the year, I think the two best marketing campaigns will be Inception and The Social Network. I'm willing to give the edge to The Social Network simply because it doesn't have the star-power of Leonardo DiCaprio vs. Jesse Eisenberg. This comes after being wronger about the longevity of Scott Pilgrim than I've been about any movie ever. I'm out of the loop. It is easier to sell cool-looking nothing (Inception's trailer-qualities rather than its cool-looking nothing narrative) than facebook. At this point, it looks like an American Beauty-style watershed, a movie "of our time" that may or may not be, although the reviews seem to indicate it's the superior film. Lord knows, David Fincher's sensibilities would ensure that.

It's opening against Let Me In, a genre film that may or may not cross over like some are hoping. I'm thinking it will win the week with $25+ mil. The next week, it faces Secretariat which looks like the anti-Social Network, The Blind 'Biscuit. I don't know what kind of legs it can have outside of a constituency that cannot really be relied upon: teens and twentysomethings. It could end up being an Oscar-winner, but it could also end up like Sideways.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 10:26 pm
by Sonic Youth
What true cineaste avoids a movie because of its subject matter?

Citizen Kane plot summary: "A reporter tracks down the people who worked with and were close to an infamous newspaper tycoon and multi-millionaire in order to learn about his life and personality." Newspapers? Someone pass me a pillow please.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 8:12 pm
by Bog
flipp525 wrote:I guess taste just varies. Personally, I think the trailer is close to brilliant. It gives me chills.
Second.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:25 pm
by flipp525
taki15 wrote:Not to mention that the trailer is pretty awful.
I guess taste just varies. Personally, I think the trailer is close to brilliant. It gives me chills.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 5:42 pm
by OscarGuy
The difference between a 60 Minutes movie and a story about the creators of Facebook is obviously age. While it may not seem that appealing a story (how many times have we, as film enthusiasts, seen the same or essentially the same story? But to young people, it's not the kind of film they normally get to see. The driving force of the success of this film will be younger audiences. Then, once the buzz starts in, the Oscar enthusiasts will start seeping in. It's going to do some decent business...perhaps not on the level of Fincher's previous entry, Curious Case of Benjamin Button, but it's going to do better than many here are expecting.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 5:40 pm
by Greg
Here's one question I have that I hope The Social Network answers. How did Mark Zuckerberg become the world's youngest billionaire for hosting a free Internet site. Does Facebook really get that much revenue from advertising?

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:48 pm
by MovieWes
At this point, I'd be willing to bet good money that The Social Network is our next Best Picture winner.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:35 pm
by Bog
Allow me to go out on a "limb" and predict Social Network pounds out at least the $29mil (not sure what that would be adjusted for inflation 10 years later) by Sunday the 3rd.

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:30 pm
by taki15
The Original BJ wrote:The public is not interested in Facebook?
I don't know how representative of the public at large I am but certainly the subject matter seems less than exciting to me.

Not to mention that the trailer is pretty awful.