The Social Network (2010) - dir. David Fincher *****

A-List director David Fincher's new film is sure to influence people and win over some more friends.


The Social Network is the most enjoyable film of 2010. It tells the story - somewhat fictitiously - of Mark Zuckerberg, the Harvard geek who became the world's youngest billionaire through the invention of Facebook. The film isn't an honest biopic of Zuckerberg - it never intends to be. Aaron Sorkin's brilliant screenplay brings a boring man's story to the screen in an awe-inspiring fashion that ranks as one of the most entertaining film's of the 21st century.

The film's opening scene shows why Sorkin has created some of the best comedy-dramas in recent years (The West Wing, Charlie Wilson's War). Here, Zuckerberg gets dumped by his sweet girlfriend Erica. Unlike conventional breakup scenes in Hollywood, that often glorify or sensationalize the moment, Sorkin maintains complete integrity over the dialogue. The conversation is awkward. It's tainted with pauses and moments that derail the inevitable. And it launches us into the meat of the film. Quickly, Zuckerberg becomes resentful of the breakup and starts a retaliatory campaign against Erica. He blogs vengefully against her, but also sets up a network where guys can rate girls against each other. This all happens within the first ten minutes of the film - and there isn't a second that lacks entertainment. Soon, Zuckerberg sees the commercial nature of online social networking, and it is this beginning that the less hateful Facebook originates from.

Zuckerberg teams up with his only friend, Eduardo Saverin, played by Andrew Garfield, whose wealthy Brazilian background fuels Zuckerberg's jealousy. Meanwhile, two alpha-male twins, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, plan to set up their own Harvard social networking site with the help of Zuckerberg. Zuckerberg plays them along, promising that he will help them establish this exciting endeavor. Of course, Zuckerberg has his own endeavors - far grander - which ultimately leads to the lawsuit between him and the Winklevoss twins, who are antagonized in Sorkin's script.

Fincher tells the story through various lawsuits between Zuckerberg and his rivals (not just the Winklevoss lawsuit), which lead into flashbacks from various points of view. One lawsuit is by Eduardo Saverin himself. This is perhaps the most tragic the film gets, but also the most compelling. Saverin was Zuckerberg's only friend, and the driving force behind the financial investments that Facebook relied on at the outset. Sorkin shows sympathy for Saverin - in the way he was shut out of Facebook when Zuckerberg chose Napster founder Sean Parker for his confidence and magnetism. Yet we can never hate Zuckerberg enough, for he is the most compelling figure of the 21st century. As the film reminds us, he is the reason we all spend countless hours a week on Facebook - how can we possibly hate the guy who provides us with this hobby? We can't.

Jesse Eisenberg as Mark Zuckerbeg in The Social Network

The greatest irony of the film is that Zuckerberg was socially inept and could barely hang to any type of relationship, yet he was able to win over 500 million people and make Facebook into the most important social networking site in history. I've always been a big fan of Jesse Eisenberg, from his sensational performance in The Squid and the Whale, to the underrated portrayal of a bored teenager in Adventureland. In both these films, he exhibits a warm intelligence that makes him unquestionably the most likable young actor in Hollywood. In The Social Network, Eisenberg loses much of this warmth but retains the intelligence, making Zuckerberg an annoying yet fascinating young man. His arrogance and naivety is all the more compelling. He is the anti-hero who we can't get enough of. We are led to believe that it is this arrogance and coldness that was the foundation to Facebook's success.

Critics have called The Social Network a masculine movie, but this is unfair given the fact that it's much more about success than any gender-depictions. Yes, Zuckerberg is a jerk to women. But he's also the same to men. You don't have to be a certain sex or type of person to love The Social Network. There's a reason it became the best reviewed film of 2010 across the globe. It appeals to the masses, and this is refreshing in an industry where films are so heavily marketed to an audience that they lose their sense of self.

The film thrives on the environment it creates - a place where anyone with a big idea can thrive given the right circumstances. People will leave the film feeling an incredible sense of hope. This feel-good film of the year doesn't pretend to be something it's not. Fincher and Sorkin are far too experienced to let this happen. With masterful directing and writing, they have created a film so good that it's hard to think how a biopic could ever top this.

The Kids Are Alright (2010) - dir. Lisa Cholodenko ****

Lisa Cholodenko hits top form in this heartfelt comedy about two children conceived by artificial insemination, who bring their birth father into their family. Bening looks a lock for a Best Actress nomination.  


The Kids Are Alright may just be this years answer to "Little Miss Sunshine", only funnier and better acted. With mesmerizing performances by Annette Bening and Mark Ruffalo, and strong supporting roles for Julianne Moore and Mia Wasikowska, the film grows on us as it progresses into something much bigger and sadder than the premise leads us to believe.

The Kids Are Alright centers on a lesbian marriage, although it shies away from themes of homosexuality. Instead, it microscopes marriage itself, an adventure that is universally challenging and daunting - something we may not have been raised to prepare for. The couple involves Nic (Bening) and Jules (Moore), who raise an angst-ridden boy named Laser and a sweet, intelligent girl named Joni. Basically, each mother gave birth to one of the children, but the kids are half-siblings because only one sperm donor was used. That's about as complicated as the movie gets.

They are a middle-class family living in suburban Los Angeles. Nic is a hard-working doctor, while Jules flits from one job to the next. This time, she tries her hand at garden landscaping, to Nic's disapproval. Like every marriage, they're going through a mini-crisis, but this is nothing compared to what awaits them.

The comfortable home life that Nic and Jules have created is rocked when Joni and Laser decide to meet their sperm donor, without telling their parents. Their father is the lovable and relaxed Paul (Ruffalo), about as far away from Nic and Jules as you could get. Paul owns a small organic restaurant. His life is sad, yet he seems content with it. He's never been married. He's got no children. And he occasionally sleeps with one of his co-workers for sexual satisfaction.

When Nic and Jules find out about Paul, they disapprove, although their liberal exterior forces them to accept him into their lives. Paul tries to win their approval by hiring Jules to design a new garden for his house. At this moment, the adult lives' suddenly get a lot more complicated. Nic and Jules fight increasingly more, with Nic retreating to alcohol to deal with the impending stress that Paul brings. Thus, she pushes Jules further and further away. When Jules and Paul sleep together, everything is thrown into question. I mean... everything. Jules tries to come to terms with her infidelity, but she ends up sleeping with Paul daily as she finishes up his garden. Paul falls in love with Jules. Everybody loves someone else, and this setup leads to a brilliant third act when Nic discovers the shocking truth.

Cholodenko create a fascinatingly original portrait of marriage, and the consequences of children, betrayal, but ultimately, loneliness. Bening's performance is amongst the best of her career, and that's saying something when you look at her impressive resume (American Beauty, Julia and Julia). She's a lock for a best actress nomination, and it wouldn't surprise anybody if she went the full distance. It's also a breakout performance for Mia Wasikowska, who has stamped her authority as one of Hollywood's most talented young actresses. Ruffalo - as ever - is sublime. He carries the role with his lovable quality.

The true winner is Cholodenko's script -  along with her writing partner Stuart Blumberg - which captures the idealism and compromises that it takes to make a marriage work. The characters are real. They are alive. Made for a miniscule $4m, The Kids Are Alright is testament that great things come in small packages.

"Black Swan" (2010), dir. Darren Arronofsky *****

In his blistering new film, Aronofsky states his mark as one of America's most influential and exciting filmmakers. 


Black Swan is not only technically the best film of 2010, but arguably the decade. Masterfully directed by Darren Arronofsky, the film is a psychological plight into the depths of despair of Nina, played perfectly by Natalie Portman. From the opening frame to the closing frame, it is a faultless display of cinema that is rarely seen these days. Sticking with his strengths, Aronofsky uses paranoia and nightmarish imagery to create a world that never feels comfortable for audience or characters. Throughout the two hours, we are not given any room to breath. We travel with Portman's Nina into a world that may or may not be what it seems. We are in the elite world of ballet, a brutal environment where back-stabbing and competitiveness lies at its forefront.

The story focuses on Nina, a ballerina who gets the role of a lifetime to play the Swan Queen in New York City Ballet's production of Swan Lake. Nina is technically perfect, and has no trouble adapting to the White Swan - innocent, beautiful and loving. However, it is the Black Swan that she cannot grasp, a role which requires less technique and more emotion. Her choreographer, Thomas (played by Vincent Cassel), a manipulative and predatory thirty-something, encourages Nina to find her dark side. In an art such as ballet, where we are led to trust our seniors, Nina doesn't call Thomas out for his unethical treatment towards her. He claims that he is helping Nina discover the tools she needs to play the Black Swan.

Mila Kunis as Nina's rival, Lilly

Enter a sexy competitor from the West Coast, Lilly (Mila Kunis), who would appear destined to play the Black Swan. She is a far cry from Nina. Her equanimity questions years of Nina's hard work. She has a devilish quality that can influence others in the blink of an eye. Nina confidence becomes undone. She questions her talents, her ability to play the Swan Queen. On top of this, her overbearing mother (Barbara Hershey) attempts to control her by keeping her locked up in the apartment at night. As Thomas begins to recognize Lilly's talents, Nina becomes increasingly more jealous.

Aronofsky doesn't follow the cliched narrative trick that most filmmakers might take. Instead, he implies that Nina lost her mind years before we first meet her - possibly because of her mother's smothering love, or the lack of a father figure in her life.

Black Swan might be the most love or hate films of the year. Some will find it near impossible to watch as it provokes the audience's emotions on levels rarely seen these days. There are moment you have to look away, moments when the pain of Nina's body becomes to great for her - and us, the audience, who are living vicariously through Nina's eyes. For those that can take the emotional torture, it will be a cinematic experience that you won't forget anytime soon. As with Aronofsky's previous films, Black Swan is visually arresting. It captures the pain that a top ballerina goes through with their bodies. Through Aronofsky's direction, you feel every tendon stretching, every muscle working to attain perfection. However, it's not a selfishly directed him. Like in Requiem For a Dream and The Wrestler, Aronofsky hands the control to the actors. Without Portman's Oscar-worthy performance, his effort might be nothing. Portman and Kunis started ballet training six months before principal photography commences so that their bodies would match that of professional dancers. It is this focus on the body that is so effective. Nina appears almost skeletal through the film. Her muscle tone - like every other dancer in the film - is accentuated, which helps the audience emphasize the physical toll that ballet has upon the body.


As a so-called "young director", Aronofsky has clearly borrowed a great deal of material and poured it into the vision of Black Swan. Its nightmarish quality parallels Polanski's Rosemary's Baby, The Red Shoes and The Shining. Instead of copying these films, Aronofsky has spun them into his own nightmarish world, which makes him one of America's most exciting directors working today (matching Paul Thomas Anderson).

The score of the film is brilliantly done by Aronosky's collaborator, Clint Mansell, who turned Tchaikovsky's music into a haunting and dreamlike quality. The way the music meanders the audience from feeling to feeling is testament to its excellence.

Black Swan is the darkest film of the year. It is highly sexual - but never in a glorified way. The film owns too much class for it to sink into that. It is one of those rare gems that - for any cinephile out there - should not be missed.

"Somewhere" (2010), dir. Sofia Coppola ***

Sofia Coppola returns to themes of hopeless celebrity and alienation in her latest film, Somewhere. 

Coppola, a scion of Hollywood royalty, delivers another film which centers around the lifestyles of the rich and famous - and more significantly - the chronically bored. Stephen Dorf and Elle Fanning play father and daughter, or rather actor and daughter, who are forced to connect when his estranged wife leaves town. The problem is, she's explored these territories so perfectly in The Virgin Suicides and Lost In Translation that she simply cannot live up to that expectation. Granted, Somewhere is a beautiful little movie that is wildly better than eighty percent of films out there. But Coppola has attained perfection, evidenced through her Best Screenplay Oscar for Lost In Translation. This begs the question: why is she going down the same route again? In many ways, Lost In Los Angeles would be a more appropriate title. 

Stephen Dorf and Elle Fanning in Somewhere

Nothing really happens in Somewhere, and this isn't necessarily a bad thing. Coppola is creating a mood piece, allowing the audience to share similar feelings of boredom and loneliness as its protagonist, Johnny Marco (Dorf). The film reminded me of Jean Luc-Godard's Weekend, where he makes us suffer through a long ten minute shot of a car moving through a traffic jam - all in one take, to make us feel like we too are in the same tedious traffic jam. In Somewhere, we see over-extended shots of Dorf watching Playboy girls dance on polls, his daughter ice skating, and of Marco driving down endless Los Angeles roads. These shots are boring. They are as mundane to watch as Marco's life is to live. Yet they work within the context of the film.

Where Somewhere stalls is its lack of dramatic conflict. As filmmakers, there is a responsibility to give something back to the audience. This doesn't mean huge, elaborate scenes of emotion or violence. Rather, we, the audience, have to feel like the characters are battling something other than their inner conflict. In Lost In Translation, it is Bob's sense of wanting to stay in Tokyo to spend more time with Charlotte that provides a lot of the drama. His happiness is dependent on Charlotte. And it's this that drives the film to its ambiguous climax. In Somewhere, Coppola doesn't offer us that same obstacle or need. We never know what makes Johnny happy. Like Bob, he is lost, but there's nowhere for him to go. And this is the film's biggest fallacy. On top of this, Dorf doesn't hold the same skills as Bill Murray, therefore in those "boredom" moments, there is little comic relief. 

I might be unfairly critical of Coppola, but this is because she's one of the brightest directors in American cinema. She is a true auteur. The expectations that she's created after The Virgin Suicides, Lost In Translation, and even the lukewarmly received Marie Antoinette is immense. Somewhere is a good movie, but not a great one. Coppola needs to move on to new territories, a bolder narrative that is outside her comfort zone. She's already earned the title as Queen of the "lost" movies.