[Napoleon17]

I love movies and still have absolutely no interest in seeing The Social Network. Kinda want to see The King's Speech, but it too seems kind of boring.

[Art]

Originally Posted by Napoleon17

I love movies and still have absolutely no interest in seeing The Social Network. Kinda want to see The King's Speech, but it too seems kind of boring.

I understand this sentiment. I shared it. Then, I found out that Aaron Sorkin wrote the screenplay, and I watched it. It was well worth watching.

[bowstaff981]

Originally Posted by Chocolate Bear

I understand this sentiment. I shared it. Then, I found out that Aaron Sorkin wrote the screenplay, and I watched it. It was well worth watching.

The thing that bothers me about The Social Network is that nobody seems to care that the movie is based off only one person's side of the story and is probably mostly sensationalized. So I think that the argument that he made a boring story interesting is null because he made it interesting with lies. However, I don't know if all the fabrications were in the book or if he added some himself. Either way he either made stuff up or perpetuated lies. Anyone can make a boring story interesting by adding in things that didn't happen. It takes a really talented person though to take what actually happened and make it interesting (127 Hours, The King's Speech, etc.). Just my opinion though.

[rock_show_host]

Originally Posted by bowstaff981

The thing that bothers me about The Social Network is that nobody seems to care that the movie is based off only one person's side of the story and is probably mostly sensationalized. So I think that the argument that he made a boring story interesting is null because he made it interesting with lies. However, I don't know if all the fabrications were in the book or if he added some himself. Either way he either made stuff up or perpetuated lies. Anyone can make a boring story interesting by adding in things that didn't happen. It takes a really talented person though to take what actually happened and make it interesting (127 Hours, The King's Speech, etc.). Just my opinion though.

To a point, this is true of virtually every movie based on a true story. Directors and screenwriters always tweak or even outright fabricate story details for the sake of making things more entertaining. To be fair, it looks like The Social Network's liberties were pretty extreme, but Aaron Sorkin has been pretty open about the fact that the movie is heavily fictionalized. He's said that he saw the Facebook story not as an opportunity for a documentary, but as a jumping-off point for a modern day parable. True, this doesn't necessarily justify defaming real-life people in the process, but my point is that The Social Network is hardly unusual for taking serious liberties with a true story. Nor do I think that keeps it from being a fantastic movie.

Maybe I'm just biased because I loved The Social Network and didn't really care for The King's Speech. But remember, The King's Speech had its share of historical license too. And I haven't seen 127 Hours, but I have heard Aaron Ralston say that it might as well have been a documentary. So, props to them.