One thing that I did find fascinating is the lack of a sympathetic protagonist. Instead, there were three distinct types of asses that drove the film. Zuckerberg, Sean Parker (of Napster fame) and the Harvard elite. Zuckerberg was an ass to most people, but I don't think he knew that he was. He was simply not engaged with the relational part of any relationship he had and was instead engaged with the intellectual gamesmanship that a relationship provided. This carried over into his business as well and I will call him the Intellectual Ass. Parker was portrayed as a "F--- the Man" ass who was really about being the "The Man 2.0". Everything revolves around "The Man 2.0" and he thinks he is so revolutionary that no one would confuse him with The Man, but it is painfully obvious that he is just a Narcissistic Ass. Finally, there are the Harvard elite asses. I use Harvard here because that was the role played in the film by the Winklevoss brothers (I have no particular gripe with Harvard). Their particular brand of ass-ness is based on inherited wealth and entitlement. They are in fact The Man, even as 20-something undergrads. All of this leads me to wonder if there is in fact a classification of asses. For example, is there an enneagram of asses, where different ass types have specific characteristics? I am sure there are and I am sure that the three named here are pretty common. It was just interesting to see three distinct types (Intellectual, Narcissistic and Elitist Ass) portrayed so clearly and distinctly in a single film.
4 stars (out of 5)
1 comment:
Not a half-assed review, Ty! This might be my favorite review ever on CineBux.
Post a Comment