New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Edwin Davies: In the short term, I think Sony might be a bit disappointed that it didn't make more, especially given the $30 million-plus numbers being thrown out there during the week, but then again that was always going to be a stretch given that there aren't any huge stars in it (Justin Timberlake being the exception, but he's never been a draw when it comes to films) and Fincher's never been someone whose films have broken out to huge numbers, instead living long, fruitful lives either in theaters or on DVD.

I think that'll be the case with The Social Network, too. The rapturous reviews and deafening Oscar buzz will keep it chugging along for the next couple of months, probably giving it a total in the $80-90 million range.

I've been thinking about why it didn't make more this weekend, and I'm wondering if anyone else has encountered a phenomenon that I have, which is that people are putting off seeing it because they can't believe that someone has made a film about Facebook, and find the whole idea quite ridiculous. I don't know if this extends beyond my group of friends, but I can see why people might hold off seeing the film for a while because they find it to be a rather strange proposition.

Kim Hollis: I'm not disappointed in the opening, and honestly wasn't sure to expect. I saw the film with eight other people (my boss to my team to see it for work - no, really) and it was an early afternoon crowd and therefore small. Even so, it had interesting buzz, but people were finding it hard to believe that a movie about Facebook and with these stars could possibly be as good as the reviews were saying.

Reagen Sulewski: If you're disappointed in this number, you're underestimating just how tough a sell this film was. This is a film with no particular stars and about a subject that makes people roll their eyes reflexively. This was a hit movie pulled out of nothing by sheer will, and thanks to an almost concerted and coordinated effort by critics to make sure people saw this.

David Mumpower: I joked in a status update on Facebook the other day that I wouldn't be discussing the movie because it was too recursive. Still, when a friend chimed in about his slight disappointment with the film, I made the comment there that this is one of the strangest releases in recent memory. Who is the hero in The Social Network and who is the villain? Is Mark Zuckerberg the villain? The hero? An anti-hero? How does Eduardo Saverin fit in? He's clearly intended to be sympathetic for the most part, but he's also the Michael Vick of the film. Also, it's difficult to describe him as the hero when he's better described as the victim more than anything else. And even if that's true, how much victimization are we watching about someone who is well on his way to being a billionaire at 26?

The Social Network involves subject matter lacking in easy answers or even resolution. Facebook is a kingdom today, but we've seen many sites like this stand at the top of the hill for a while only to fall later. We are discussing a period piece with the period being five years ago. There is nowhere near enough distance from those events, so the whole affair plays out as a binary take on the California gold rush in the mid-1800s. This is an arthouse film disguised as a Sony blockbuster and while I had hoped it would earn $100 million domestically, this is a respectable opening weekend on a par with the prior Ben Mezrich adaptation, 21, which debuted to $24.1 million on the way to a $81.2 million North American tally. And that title had more sizzle to sell since it was based on Vegas dreams.

The one trouble spot The Social Network had that it was never getting beyond is that in order to garner the support of Facebook, they would have needed Zuckerberg's seal of approval. When they asked for that prior to the start of production, he demanded too much in terms of story control. To tell the story they wanted, they had to cede the tie-in that may have made the $100 million opening...well, that was still overly optimistic, but this could have been a sell-out project that debuted to $60 million. Would Sony have rather had that or an exponentially better film that earns less but isn't a puff piece? Well, they're a vast, multi-national corporation, so this is a surprising turn of events in that regard. Selling out is what Sony does best, which is why their name brand matters so much. Like the movie itself, there isn't an obvious right or wrong answer between quality and shameless commercialism. The Social Network has walked a fine line between the two and largely came out okay in the end.

Continued:       1       2       3       4       5       6