Is there an underlying theme against people who aren't men of action in The Social Network...

Is there an underlying theme against people who aren't men of action in The Social Network? I suppose it's kind of obvious, but I thought about the contrasting scenes between Mark and Eduardo while Mark is building The Facebook. Do note that I'm sure Eduardo is a pretty damn good student to be head of the Harvard Investor's Association and to be attending Harvard at all.

Mark spends hours upon hours writing and building The Facebook in a montage. Contrasting shots of Eduardo just fucking around with the Phoenix club are interspersed in there. But the interesting thing is when Mark tells Eduardo they need a new device (I forget what) to handle traffic into The Facebook, so he needs to use Eduardo's money to buy it. Eduardo is shown contemplating this, and with a smile he says "do it." Mark, without even looking up, says he already did. Eduardo, for the first time, is forced to confront his only purpose as an ATM for Mark's ambitions.

The interesting thing to note, is that while Mark is working his hardest to build The Facebook, he didn't get punched by the Phoenix club. Eduardo, who has shown no ambition in the film thus far, did for some reason. And as far as we've seen, all the Phoenix members do is fuck around. This eventually comes back towards the end of the film where Wardo's shares get diluted down to .03% Something in there about not being a man of action leading to your undoing?

*BrRRrAAaAAAAAAAAAaaAAaPpP*

Is this a kike FBI-book propaganda film?

Eduardo was a cuck.

>there about not being a man of action leading to your undoing?
Depends. Sometimes non-action is action.

A good movie, but Facebook itself sucks.

Good start to a thread when OP asks a legit framed question.

*sharts*

*sniffs*

lol

I have nothing to contribute but want to bump a thread that has had thought put into it

I don't know. It feels like an iffy connection with little else to point at in the film. Eduardo does say he's been trying to get investors, but the problem is he's not cool/good enough (or as notorious as Sean Parker). I think the main point isn't about men of action, but rather that institutionalized "coolness" like the Final Clubs is something that Zuckerberg wants to beat.

I think the real question to ask for the film, is questioning Mark's motives. Did he really do everything just to impress his ex-girlfriend? Is that what it comes down to?

I don't really know why Eduardo should gain anything other than his money back and maybe lil bonus. He didn't work for the Facebook, Mark did it (in the film at least), so when the spoils are being shared Eduardo should get his share back and maybe some extra little.

Depends on whether the film intended to be more of a biography or a visual short story.

Either way it achieves the end of glorifying Zuckerberg as a man with drive and focus: qualities that deliver success, but might not necessarily reflect his personality well. Admittedly I haven't seen the film in a few years, but isn't he portrayed as an autist sometimes? But if you're right about the antagonism of people who aren't men of action, that probably wouldn't matter. Personality wouldn't mean anything if you're ultimately pursuing success.

thta's the point, they want to show that literally everyone in this is flawed, which is the cop out that most film makers take now because they're fucking marketing it to the masses so that threads like this are made possible.

IRL nothing like the movie really happened, a lot of it is fiction, and mark isn't that big of an asshole IRL, and EDuardo left becaue of differences and not because they diluted his shares down to 0.003 (they did, but he had already negotiated it to a higher, but less than 0.5% share).

They're just dramatizing for the sake of dramatization, and not showing the true story.

It was oscar bait from the start.

>mark isn't that big of an asshole IRL
Mark pls go

>Eduardo does say he's been trying to get investors
Ah that is true. Riding subways 14 hours a day. I think it was a mistake not to show us why Eduwardo wasn't able to acquire investors despite the fact that he lacked Mark's interruptions. They could've played up the idea more, that maybe Eduardo's heart wasn't in those meetings. Oh well.

Something I just thought of, albeit very, very minor. The film has a few instances of the word "cool."

[Wardo and Mark discussing commoditizing Facebook]

>I know the word means, I'm asking how do you want to do it?
>Advertising
>No.
>Well, we've got 4,000 members
>'Cause The Facebook is cool. And if we start installing pop-up ads[...]

Sean Parker says The Facebook is cool, and that ads would ruin it as well. Mark talks about Facebook being cool in the cab ride home from the dinner with Sean. Mark obviously looks up to Sean because he's cool, and founded Napster. Finals Clubs are cool, as you stated, and Wardo getting punched for the Phoenix but still not ponying up and getting investors in New York means he wasn't cool enough. As evidenced by his lack of ambition.

>Did he really do everything just to impress his ex-girlfriend? Is that what it comes down to?

The film makes that pretty explicit, like getting the story in the BU student newspaper about The Facebook going live, or when Sean relates his story about making Napster for a girl he had a crush on. I think it's more that we have to ask ourselves about what we would do, or do for women, or for what at all.

>They're just dramatizing for the sake of dramatization, and not showing the true story.

I think we all know that, when I made the thread I was speaking completely within the context of the film's narrative.

wee wee lol

hey WInklevi

>filmgoer realizes what a white boys' club mean

get woke. most whites get ahead because of their skin color when they're just lazy privileged assholes

Mark's white, though.

>character has a retarded cousin from finland

Final Clubs. Not "finals clubs."