MOVIE REVIEW: THE SOCIAL NETWORK 2010 BY AGOREYO KESIENA
David Fincher’s 2010 film The Social Network tells the story of Facebook and its complicated founder, Mark Zuckerberg. It takes us back to the early 2000s at Harvard, a time when betrayal and ambition were just starting to create new kinds of ethical dilemmas in our digital world. Watching Jesse Eisenberg’s Zuckerberg, I couldn’t help but notice how often he sacrifices friendships—and maybe even his own sense of right and wrong—as he tries to balance building something huge with connecting to the people around him.
To better understand these encoded meanings, it’s important to unpack how the film’s uses of narrative structure, editing, and mise-en-scène work together to communicate ideas about ambition in the early tech world
The movie shines a light on the early tech culture, where chasing status and power often comes before building real relationships. Using Stuart Hall’s encoding/decoding model helps me see the film as more than just a story; it’s a sharp critique of the power structures and class divides that shape the tech industry. Fincher’s use of tight editing and a narrative filled with tension and irony really pulls you in, while the moody, gloomy visuals add a layer of cynicism about how one of the most powerful platforms in the world came to be. It left me wondering what gets lost in the race for success.
When I watch a film like The Social Network, I am always fascinated by how its story, editing, and view come together to reveal deep ideas about ambition, power, and even gender and class - especially within the tech culture. The film's back-and-forth scene switch from the current lawsuit deposition (starting about 10 minutes in) tries to piece together a complex truth between flashbacks. This is not just a direct success story; this shows how ambitions can separate people and complicate identity. One of my favorites is the "you are not a donkey" moment (about 32 to 35 minutes). Quick cuts and sharp dialogues actually occupy the ruthless energy of technical culture, where being sharp and funny often beats everything else. It prefers to see a terrible competition, where every word is counted; it explains how the relationship between early tech geniuses can feel territorial and competitive. The statements feel cold and tight (between 12 and 20 minutes), such as the places where the power struggles and the feelings of being trapped.
While The Social Network sends strong messages through its visuals, editing, and performances, not everyone will see it the same way. According to Stuart Hall’s decoding model, audiences can understand a film in different ways depending on their own background and beliefs. Viewers might read the film in a dominant, negotiated, or oppositional way, with each bringing out different meanings from the same scenes.
The dominant reading agrees with what the film seems to be saying: Mark Zuckerberg is a brilliant, misunderstood tech genius. People who see it this way may admire his focus and ambition, even if he doesn’t always make the right decisions. In the scene (around 34:00 minutes in), when Mark explains the bigger idea behind Facebook, it frames him as someone who’s thinking ahead of his time. The cold lighting and quiet tone of the legal hearing scenes (46:05 minutes in) help paint him as an emotionally distant but focused person, someone willing to sacrifice relationships for his own aspiration. This view can often overlook the emotional harm he causes.
The negotiated reading takes a middle ground. Viewers here might agree that Zuckerberg is smart, but they also see the damage his ambition causes. In the scene where Eduardo finds out about his shares being cut (1:42:00 in), the tension, close-up shots, and long silence show how ambition turns friendship into betrayal. People with this view might think the film shows both the excitement of startup culture and its emotional cost.
On the other hand, an oppositional reading rejects the idea that Zuckerberg is a genius at all. From this angle, the film is a warning about how tech culture rewards bad behavior. Scenes like Erica breaking up with Mark at the bar (04:00 minutes in) or Sean Parker’s flashy club entrance (50:00) show how women are often sidelined or treated as status symbols. Viewers with this perspective see the film as criticizing the toxic masculinity and power dynamics in Silicon Valley. They might also notice that the film centers almost entirely on white men, pointing to a lack of diversity and a narrow view of who gets to “make it” in tech.
Even the sound design supports this darker view. The cold score during coding scenes (07:30) makes the work feel more robotic and mechanical than creative. And the quiet, lonely ending when Mark refreshes Erica’s Facebook profile (1:55:00) leaves us with a sense that success came at a huge emotional cost.
No matter how we read it, The Social Network pushes us to think about the price of ambition. So what lasting impact does this film leave on us, and what does it say about the world we’re building?
The Social Network leaves a strong impression, making us think hard about what ambition and success really mean in today’s tech-driven world. It doesn’t just tell the story of Facebook’s rise; it reveals the costs behind that success with broken friendships, loneliness, and betrayal. Whether we see Zuckerberg as a misunderstood genius, a strange figure, or a symbol of a toxic and bad system, the film challenges us to question the price we are willing to pay for success, however success means for each of us.
As viewers, we’re invited to look beyond the surface and ask ourselves, in a world that celebrates impact and success, how much do we lose when we ignore the human relationships that truly matter?
Comments
Post a Comment