Minions And Monsters (2026)

I have heard some people recently wonder just who Minions And Monsters is for. It takes the well-liked animated characters and puts them in a film packed with jokes and references to the entire history of cinema. Personally, I think many younger viewers will still enjoy the jokes for the simple silliness of the minions, but if there's one specific demographic being catered for then I'd have to say . . . it's me.

Bookended by scenes that show people wandering around a movie studio and being given information by a tour guide (Allison Janney), this starts off with familiar scenes from the past showing us the minions seeking the most appropriate horrible master to serve. Things don't go to plan, as ever, and the minions end up gate-crashing a movie production in the 1920s. Their anarchy and energy leads to them becoming major movie stars, but that stardom, as happened with people in real life, is threatened by the advent of sound becoming a fixture of movies. Maybe the minions can boost their careers by making a great monster movie. Especially when they have a powerful book of spells to help them create a proper monster.

I am absolutely aware of the fact that my opinion here may run contrary to so many others, but this is easily the best minions movie yet (and there have been a lot of fun adventures featuring these small and servile "crash test dummies"). The animation throughout it wonderful, the plotting and pacing are both perfect for the 90-minute runtime, and writer-director Pierre Coffin continues to excel as the main vocal performer, and the expert on speaking the cute gibberish that is Minionese.

Coffin is joined in the writing duties by Brian Lynch (who has worked on a number of these movies, including the almost equally good Minions). Both of them seem to relish a chance to add some mayhem and cute catastrophes to iconic movie moments, and it helps that the animated form allows for a whole heap of wonderful cameos and caricatures.

It's not just all down to the writing, direction, and voice work of Coffin though. There's a fantastic mix of other celebrities willing to lend their voices to the onscreen silliness, from Janney to Christoph Waltz (a director who feels very much based on the likes of Otto Preminger, Josef von Sternberg, etc), Jeff Bridges (two powerful studio execs) to Zoey Deutch (Debbie), as well as Trey Parker (a cute monster) and Jesse Eisenberg (a cute robot named Dort).  

Whatever the joke, whether it's the standard silliness or something a bit smarter, Minions And Monsters always feels as if it has been made with care and genuine love for cinema. Every main sequence has at least one fantastic homage, and many squeeze in multiple references without feeling as if the film is losing any energy or momentum. I know that some will keep wondering how this is supposed to be aimed at children who won't be aware of most of the references, but I think they'll still have fun with everything on a surface level, and will hopefully develop a sense of curiosity that will actually make it a lot easier to  introduce them to a lot of classic cinema in non-animated form.

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing. All links are HERE.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

A Real Pain (2024)

Written by, directed by, and starring Jesse Eisenberg, A Real Pain is the kind of film that feels as if it could only be made by someone who decided that they had to make it. It covers subject matter that many will be able to identify with, but also feels like a personal journey for someone processing some of their own feelings in film form.

Eisenberg is David Kaplan, a slightly awkward and reserved young man now a million miles from how Eisenberg appears to be in real life. He joins his cousin, Benji (Kieran Culkin), to go on a tour through Poland, hoping to ultimately end up at the old house of their deceased grandmother. Benji is much quicker to express and discuss his emotions, and much quicker to be blatantly honest, which may make others uncomfortable as they explore a painful past, including wartime genocide and a concentration camp.

Although a low-key affair, and although not entirely unique, A Real Pain works, thanks in no small part to the juxtaposition of Eisenberg and Culkin. Both actors do very good work, although neither seems to be stretching themselves, and they're ably assisted by a supporting cast that includes Jennifer Grey, Will Sharpe, Ellora Torchia, Kurt Egyiawan, Daniel Oreskes, and Liza Sadovy. Grey, Egyiawan, and Sharpe are the highlights, the latter trying hard to deliver a tour that is respectful and informative, but everyone has at least one memorable moment around our main characters.

There's a tightrope being walked here, and some may view the film as a failure. Both David and Benji have their failings, and the latter will certainly be a bit too irritating for some people, but they are rendered rather insignificant by the weight of the history around them anyway. This isn't really about the main characters. It's about pain, as the title says. There's internal pain that doesn't always need an external factor, there's pain that comes through connection to loved ones and the times when those connections are severed, and there's pain that reverberates throughout generations, a scar on our world that some people feel more keenly than others.

I liked this a lot, and I responded to what was being presented at the very heart of it. It's not a great film though, in many ways, and some of the awards buzz it has been garnering may set people up for disappointment. People shouldn't flock to this to marvel at the writing or directorial skill of Eisenberg, and they may not even appreciate the performances as much as I did. I would hope that they find something worthwhile though. Something appreciably human. Sometimes all you need is the vague feeling that someone making art has even the smallest idea of your own journey running alongside their own. A Real Pain gives you that.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Netflix And Chill: Adventureland (2009)

Director Greg Mottola has been consistently entertaining for almost three decades now, on both the small and the big screen. I cannot comment on his short films made in the 1980s, but I don't think there's too much to be overly critical of from The Daytrippers (1996) onward. I'm not saying he has made classic after classic, and, as we can say about everyone, some will hate his work, but he's been doing very solid work throughout the majority of his career. This coming-of-age story remains one of his best.

It's 1987. Jesse Eisenberg plays James Brennan, a young man who ends up reluctantly taking a job at a local amusement park. His parents (played by Jack Gilpin and Wendie Malick) can't necessarily afford all the plans that James had in mind for his future student life, much to the surprise and disappointment of James. Unhappy with his role, things soon start to look up when James meets Em (Kristen Stewart). But can he make a good impression when everyone at the amusement park seems to be overshadowed by the cool and handsome Mike (Ryan Reynolds).

With Mottola taking on both the directing and writing duties this time around, showing that he's equally good in either role, what you get here is a sweet and amusing comedy drama that won't necessarily be embraced by those seeking out the very next feature from "the director of Superbad". Not that you can't see any connective tissue (Mottola knows how to show the insecurities of young characters as they make mistakes and stumble into what they think the next stage of their life should be), but this is actually a fair distance removed from that film, more in line with films such as The Way Way Back and The Kings Of Summer.

Eisenberg is a great choice for the lead role, bringing his usual mix of cockiness, intelligence, and the ability to be occasionally knocked down while he finds out that he doesn't always know more than everyone else around him. This is up there with his very best roles, and he's complemented by a pretty perfect selection of supporting performers. Stewart is equally good as Em, a young woman making her mistakes without the relatively comfortable background that James has, Margarita Levieva is well-cast in the role of another desirable young woman, Lisa, and Martin Starr excels as the more experienced park worker, Joel, who really should have moved on to something else by now. Gilpin and Malick are good fun in their few scenes, Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig are scene-stealers, as expected, any time they appear as the husband and wife park management team, and Reynolds is brilliantly utilised, with his charisma and good looks helping to soften the edges of someone who can viewed as very sad and quite awful, a man able to play at being king amongst youngsters who cannot smell the whiff of his BS.

The 1980s time period allows for a couple of great hits on the soundtrack (and I continue to be a big fan of Rock Me Amadeus, as performed by Falco), a main plot point allows for numerous Lou Reed tracks to be sprinkled throughout the film, there's a nice visual style that manages to feel both soft and crystal clear, and an air of authenticity runs through everything, from the content to the presentation. I highly recommend this, especially to anyone who has spent years avoiding it under the misapprehension that it was in the same vein as Mottola's previous teen movie.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Netflix And Chill: Zombieland: Double Tap (2019)

While most sequels aren't always met with great expectations, especially when a decade has passed between the release of the original and the release of the next instalment, Zombieland: Double Tap was one that I was looking forward to watching. Not looking forward to enough to prioritise it too highly, mind you (which is why this review is appearing about four years after it was released), but I was heartened by the fact that everyone both in front and behind the camera was coming back for some more comedic zombie slaying.

We reunite with Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Wichita (Emma Stone), and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) at a time when they seem quite happy with their lot in life. They take over a big house, they get to spend their days avoiding mayhem, most of their time is now available for them to just play around and have fun, and it's almost what you could describe as blissful. Then Wichita and Little Rock leave. Tallahassee and Columbus pick up a new companion (Madison, played by Zoey Deutch), but it's not long until Wichita returns to ask the guys for help. Little Rock is in danger, something much worse than the zombie carnage. She's gone off . . . with a musician.

Writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick are joined this time around by Dave Callaham, and it's clear that none of the three had a strong enough idea to make this whole adventure necessary. It's also clear, however, that working to a similar enough template to the first film isn't a terrible idea, considering that it allows us to spend more time in the company of characters who made such a strong impression the first time around. Director Ruben Fleischer is also happy to retain the same style and energy that added to the fun of Zombieland. Some may be quick to point out that you may as well just watch the first film again, and they wouldn't be too wrong, but there's still plenty here to enjoy, including a very fun performance from Deutch as the new, super-perky but not-too-bright, potential member of the group.

Harrelson and Eisenberg still work very well together, the juxtaposition of laid-back cool and constant anxiety keeping things amusing in between the more obvious gags. Stone adds more cool, and is as good as ever, while Breslin is enjoyable enough in her limited amount of screentime. Deutch aside, as she's already been mentioned, other newcomers to the series include Avan Jogia (the dreaded musician), Rosario Dawson (a character named Nevada who catches the eye of Tallahassee), and Luke Wilson and Thomas Middleditch (both fun, but playing two characters providing a comedic set-up that feels very close to a gag that was presented much better in Shaun Of The Dead).

If you had some kind of Zombieland bingo card then it wouldn't be long until you were shouting out "house". Metallica over the opening credits again, more rules to help you survive the zombie apocalypse, a journey to a final setting that may prove to be a deathtrap if a large enough zombie horde swarms in, and at least one fun celebrity cameo proving to be a highlight. The familiarity doesn't do enough to detract from the fun though. And, from the opening logo sequence to the end credits, this IS fun.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Mubi Monday: The Hummingbird Project (2018)

Two cousins, Vincent (Jesse Eisenberg) and Anton (Alexander Skarsgård), have a dream to pursue in The Hummingbird Project, which uses an unusual central idea to create a fascinating journey for the main journey. It is a film full of familiar moments, but things feel fresh because of the main character motivation.

Basically, the plan is to lay a 1000 mile long line of fibre between one location and the New York Stock Exchange, which could allow someone to get stock market information milliseconds before anyone else. And those milliseconds can allow people to make millions more dollars. Vincent is the one driving this plan, and Anton is busy working through computer code to see how much time he can shave off the data transfer.

Written and directed by Ken Nguyen, someone I am not familiar with (but a quick look over his filmography shows that I should check out the rest of his work), The Hummingbird Project gives a unique perspective on the race to make money from the stock exchange. While focusing on the attempt to create that one, absolutely straight, line - under properties, through mountains, underwater, etc - it manages to emphasise that single-minded pursuit of monetary gain, with no real thought to others affected by it.

Things are helped a lot by the leads. Eisenberg is able to do a lot of his usual stuff, talking quickly and with confidence to get people on his side even as they are still trying to process the information, and he’s a perfect fit. Skarsgård is playing someone much more awkward and quiet, the typical genius who isn’t so good at social interaction, and he does a great job, especially on moments that show him not being quite as vulnerable and lacking in common sense as you might suspect. Salam Hayek gets to add tension, playing their ex-boss who knows something is going on and wants to either be part of it or beat them at their own game, and Michael Mando is superb in a large supporting role, playing the man who can head up the massive job of getting that line stretched out along 1000 miles.

As described by Eisenberg’s character at one point, this is a “David vs Goliath” tale, which means viewers can all root for the underdog, even if the underdog is harder to distinguish from the strong reigning champion this time around. You get strong performances, an intelligent and thoughtful script, and an enjoyably bittersweet third act. Highly recommended.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Vivarium (2019)

The last time director Lorcan Finnegan worked with writer Garret Shanley, on their debut feature after collaborating on a fine short, Foxes, they gave viewers a film about someone finding strangeness and potential insanity in an isolated wooded area. This time around they give us a couple finding strangeness and potential insanity in a picture-perfect suburban home.

Imogen Poots and Jesse Eisenberg are Gemma and Tom, a young couple looking for their ideal home. They meet a strange agent, Martin (Jonathan Aris), and are then taken to a home in a street of identical homes, in an area full of identical streets. Martin then disappears, leaving Gemma and Tom to find their own way out of the neighbourhood. They can't manage it, and it soon becomes clear that they are somehow always fated to end up back at the front door of what is now their new home. No matter how hard they try to escape, they keep finding themselves back home. And then they receive a child.

That's pretty much everything about Vivarium, and the main plot is fully set up within the first 5-10 minutes. Although I would be hesitant to compare it to something like Blue Velvet, it certainly uses the fantastical concept to illustrate how much the dream of suburban contentment can soon sour and become a nightmare for those who are trapped in it (which, in this case, is a very literal situation).

Visually, you get an excellent exaggeration of most typical modern street layouts. All of these new homes look the same, the streets are the same, and every home even has one fluffy cloud-shaped cloud (you know what I mean) resting just overhead. Finnegan really does all he can to create a vision that is both uniformly mundane and also very creepy.

Shanley's script is a bit less satisfying, but I also admired the fact that he didn't set out to provide any answers for the non-stop string of oddities that make up the various plot points. The child alone (played mostly by Senan Jennings) is one major part of the movie that you never get an explanation for, which doesn't stop him being incredibly creepy and disturbing, but you also get no extra information about the motivation of certain characters, about the logic and physics of the environment, or even how certain things are always worked out (such as deliveries and repairs). Viewers are as bemused as the main characters.

Poots and Eisenberg are very good in the main roles, with the latter becoming more angry and aggressive than the former. They adjust to their new life quite quickly, but that's when they realise they have no choice in the matter. Jennings is excellent as the child, one of the most loathsome little people I have had to endure onscreen, and Eanna Hardwicke does a decent job as the grown-up version of the same character.

I'd recommend Vivarium if you're after something far removed from the norm. Just don't expect answers to any of the questions it puts forwards.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice (2016)

It's been hard to avoid the hype machine for Batman v Superman: Dawn Of Justice (forthwith known as BvS for the purposes of this review). Ever since initial announcements were made, to either applause or sneers, or both, there has been an almost steady, grinding inevitability to viewing this superhero battle. A sense that Warner Bros. have placed us all on a conveyor belt that they alone have been operating, with the end drop either leading to a fiery hell or cool oasis, depending on your general view of the DC properties and their plan to rival Marvel on the big screen. And if you don't LOVE this one, well that is okay, because don't forget that Suicide Squad will be along soon enough, as well as a Wonder Woman movie (which, based on the impression made by the character in this movie, could be a very good thing indeed - but that will come later).

This is a movie that apparently garnered such a positive reception at the screening for certain studio execs that new Batman Ben Affleck was immediately signed on for more movies and everyone started to simply look at their about-to-soar stock shares whenever their partners were unable to bring them to orgasm. That last bit is untrue. Of course. But I have to state the untrueness of it . . . . . . . just in case.

And then it was released. Audiences were good. Ticket sales seemed in line with the predictions. And critics unleashed a large selection of reviews that seemed to come perilously close to calling this a big, fat turkey. Articles started to appear in support of the movie. Many articles started to appear that tried picking apart just what it got wrong. And a perceived divide between critics and audiences seemed to widen. But was that really the case? It's far too early to decide whether or not this film will end up proving to be a bit of a financial disappointment, compared simply to what Warner Bros. are obviously expecting from it, but I've heard from very few people who unequivocally loved it. Do we regular cinema-goers invest that little bit more just because we've already invested our money in a ticket? I actually suspect that we do. Pair that up with the growing feeling that many critics have in the internet age, that they're becoming less and less necessary in a world in which quotes can be culled from blogs (I know, I know, I guess I may well be part of the problem) and Twitter alike, and you can start to appreciate why it is probably easier for critics to either lambast a film or heap great praise upon it. They're seeing it for free, and we live in a world that demands more and more hyperbole to grab attention amidst the vast material adrift in cyberspace.

Anyway, let's get to the film itself.

The title really tells you everything you need to know. Henry Cavill is back in the role of Superman, Amy Adams also returns as Lois Lane, and Ben Affleck is a certain Gotham resident. During the events that took place at the climax of Man Of Steel, Bruce Wayne saw many innocent bystanders die. He decides that Superman is a powerful threat. And many others start to agree with him, leading to debates about power and morality. Oh, and Lex Luthor (Jesse Eisenberg) plans to pit the two heroes against one another. And Diana Prince (Gal Gadot) is on the scene. And a few other familiar characters, giving fleeting cameos. Which just about covers everything, apart from the inclusion of one more major element, featured in the trailers. Doomsday.

I'd better start by clarifying that I didn't love Man Of Steel (please see the review hyperlinked above). As much as I often like the work of Zack Snyder - and, believe me, I am one of the few who enjoyed Sucker Punch - I think that he fundamentally misunderstood just what makes Superman so super. Henry Cavill was superb in the main role, and he continues to be superb this time around. But there was certainly a lot of room for improvement.

The good news is that BvS DOES hold up as a move in the right direction. There are some interesting themes and ideas in the mix, with one or two moments of dialogue nicely summing up the different views of the main characters. Visually, it's a slightly brighter film than Man Of Steel, certainly when it comes to Superman himself and the scenes that show Metropolis not in any immediate danger. And most of the newcomers do themselves proud. Ben Affleck is fine as Bruce Wayne/Batman but I'd still put him just below both Keaton and Bale. Jeremy Irons is a wonderful Alfred. Gal Gadot doesn't get too much to do, but she does well enough with what she's given.

The action scenes are also pretty well done, with the main event being the unsurprising highlight of the film. It's a shame that the climax goes down the overblown, overly-CGI route (although it's still not as ineffective and ultimately dull as the videogame that made up the grand finale of Avengers: Age Of Ultron). And it's all grounded quite nicely, which is pleasantly unexpected, considering the characters being portrayed.

Now let me get to the bad stuff.

Snyder seems to continue misunderstanding the main character, with the additional damage caused by him also now misunderstanding Batman. Perhaps it's best to blame the writers (Chris Terrio and David S. Goyer) but Snyder has always seemed to be a director able to put his vision directly on to the screen, and this time around his vision jars when set against the long history of these characters in comic book form. It's easier to forgive this time, however, as viewers should be able to accept a little bit of "fudging of the details" to line things up for the battle and the cinematic growth of this universe. There's certainly nothing here as bad as the major mis-step that many people criticised in Man Of Steel, and the fact that it uses the end of that movie as a developmental stepping stone almost makes me re-evaluate my opinion of it. Almost.

The bigger problem comes from some of the casting. I like Jesse Eisenberg. I've often REALLY liked him onscreen. And I think he's the absolutely worst Lex Luthor in the history of onscreen Lex Luthors. There's no way around it. His motives are murky, at best. His mannerisms are ridiculously over-emphatic. And a weak villain unbalances any standard "good vs evil" tale. Ezra Miller may only be seen for less than a minute, but that's some casting that I can't get behind (see the movie to see who he is portraying). And then you have Kevin Costner and Diane Lane. They're not bad here, but their presence feels unnecessary, as if they've been shoehorned in just to keep the cast prestigious enough. Which isn't necessary when you have a couple of scenes featuring Holly Hunter reminding people how great Holly Hunter can be.

Last, but by no means least, we have the editing. Despite the runtime, the pacing isn't really a problem here, but there are some unnecessary sequences that I couldn't help thinking would have been better left on the cutting-room floor. One dream sequence too many is mildly irritating, but using one dream as a potential prophecy/warning is downright lazy.

Despite the flaws here, I decided to be generous to BvS. It actually does everything that it sets out to do. Comparing it to other movies isn't always going to leave it in the best light, but that isn't always going to be fair either (particularly when comparing it to any of the now-well-established Marvel outings). This is an impressive blockbuster. It's got some great imagery, with a sequence set during a Day Of The Dead celebration standing out as a personal favourite, it's got one or two ingredients too many being stirred into a big pot, and it's got a handful of small delights in pretty much every sequence. Considering what Snyder was tasked with, it's hard to think of a final product ticking as many boxes as this one does.

And it's got plenty of people excited for the upcoming Wonder Woman movie. Which can't be a bad thing.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

The Social Network (2010).

Before The Social Network was released it was one of the few movies in 2010 that I knew I just didn’t want to miss seeing at the cinema. Everything just seemed to be in place for the making of a modern classic. A cracking script by Aaron Sorkin based on a book by Ben Mezrich. David Fincher directing – the guy has done no wrong thus far in his career, in my view. Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, Rooney Mara, Justin Timberlake, Rashida Jones, Max Minghella and Armie Hammer in the main roles – all may not be household names but I’m a huge fan of Eisenberg and the cast list signalled something aimed directly at those who had been making the most of Facebook since it’s creation.

 

I went to the cinema and something amazing happened, something that has been happening less and less frequently in the past few years. I wasn’t disappointed. In fact, I was absolutely blown away by the whole thing and engrossed from beginning to end.

 

There’s no doubt that certain liberties have been taken with the truth here and there (indeed, Mark Zuckerberg would try to convinve everyone that almost the entire movie is a complete fiction) but this is a barnstorming interpretation of the events that saw Zuckerberg (played, brilliantly, by Jesse Eisenberg) create Facebook and upset a number of people in the process, including the Winklevoss brothers (both played by Armie Hammer, with help from Josh Pence) and Zuckerberg’s best friend, Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield).

 

Structurally, the movie starts with the evening that saw the genesis of what would eventually lead to the creation of Facebook and then moves on to show the two major depositions that Zuckerberg is involved in some time later before hopping back and forth between the most important moments in Zuckerberg’s professional life, including his involvement with Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake as the man who created Napster).

 

What ends up surprising most people when they view The Social Network is just how enjoyable and interesting it all is, quite an achievement considering it’s really the ultimate “nerd made good” tale interspersed by some legal wranglings in a boardroom. Computer programming and depositions do not make for exciting cinema but Fincher spins gold here thanks to the performances, the script so sharp it could be used to provide a clean close shave and his mastery of the camerawork mixing with an unusual, and highly impressive, soundtrack by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross.

 

Eisenberg, it must be said, is playing someone who comes across as quite unlikeable but he does it brilliantly, portraying a man as bored and frustrated as he is intelligent. Garfield is more than his equal and when the two are working with, and sometimes against, each other it’s just a double helping of superb acting. Hammer and Minghella are both excellent but it’s worth, perhaps, specifically mentioning how good Justin Timberlake is for those doubtful of the singer’s talent. His portrayal of Sean Parker has the cockiness and showbiz-grin that you’d expect but also changes as we start to see the paranoid, sneaky little man behind the dotcom assurety. Rooney Mara plays Erica Albright, a girl who makes a massive impact on Zuckerberg’s life, and she does very well with her limited screentime. There are plenty of other people in the cast and my not mentioning them is in no way a slight on their performances, it’s simply that this film is full of the right people in the right roles doing the right stuff.

I could go on and on but I fear I’ve already spent too much time rambling like a rabid David Fincher fanboy (which, I suppose, I am). This is another cinematic masterpiece from one of my favourite directors.  

10/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share