I recently saw David Fincher's movie The Social Network and enjoyed the movie immensely. The question I feel that the movie didn't (and perhaps couldn't) answer was the title of this blog.
According to the movie the evidence for:
He turned down $2m from Microsoft for some music play-list software
He was at Harvard in the first place
He wrote Facemash in one night - when drunk!
He's the CEO of one of the most influential start-ups in Silicon Valley history
The evidence against:
He allegedly stole the idea for Facebook
The movie seems to suggest that because he was socially inept and a good hacker that he's a genius. Is that enough? Whatever the truth of the matter the fact remains that he is at the helm of one of the hottest companies in the world whilst still in his twenties. If not a genius then that is evidence of some exceptional talents. Genius or not? I'd say it doesn't really matter after the first billion.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Why do people hate Skyline?
I saw Skyline a couple of weeks ago and thoroughly enjoyed it. I was quite surprised to see the scathing reviews from critics and moviegoers alike.
OK the script isn't great but neither was it that bad either. The cast and characters were OK too but I found the story, direction and effects all above average. IMDB rates this movie at 4.7 (based upon 4000 ratings) when I last checked but I'd score it somewhere in the 7.xs and I'm a pretty harsh movie critic.
So why the discrepancy? Well maybe I had an off day and just enjoyed a crap movie too much, but the doubt at the back of my mind I suspect that there is something more sinister at work here.
It turns out that the Brothers Strausse (silly name I know) effects company Hydraulx Filmz is contracted to work on Sony's big budget alien invasion movie Battle: Los Angeles due for release in early 2011 and that the Strausse Brothers didn't declare their involvement in Skyline to Sony. From what I gather Sony wanted Skyline pulled until after the release of their film. All in all it sounds a bit hypocritical of Sony to me given the acknowledged dirty tricks they've employed in the past
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4741259.stm
but hey I wouldn't want to get on their bad side. Whatever the truth of the situation I figure that Skyline is a pretty good movie and when the budget is factored in it becomes a pretty amazing movie. Count me in for Skyline 2. And as for poor old Sony - don't worry - the trailers for Battle: Los Angeles look great too so I'm in for that movie too.
OK the script isn't great but neither was it that bad either. The cast and characters were OK too but I found the story, direction and effects all above average. IMDB rates this movie at 4.7 (based upon 4000 ratings) when I last checked but I'd score it somewhere in the 7.xs and I'm a pretty harsh movie critic.
So why the discrepancy? Well maybe I had an off day and just enjoyed a crap movie too much, but the doubt at the back of my mind I suspect that there is something more sinister at work here.
It turns out that the Brothers Strausse (silly name I know) effects company Hydraulx Filmz is contracted to work on Sony's big budget alien invasion movie Battle: Los Angeles due for release in early 2011 and that the Strausse Brothers didn't declare their involvement in Skyline to Sony. From what I gather Sony wanted Skyline pulled until after the release of their film. All in all it sounds a bit hypocritical of Sony to me given the acknowledged dirty tricks they've employed in the past
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4741259.stm
but hey I wouldn't want to get on their bad side. Whatever the truth of the situation I figure that Skyline is a pretty good movie and when the budget is factored in it becomes a pretty amazing movie. Count me in for Skyline 2. And as for poor old Sony - don't worry - the trailers for Battle: Los Angeles look great too so I'm in for that movie too.
RED One
I don't get the opportunity to go the cinema as often as I'd like so it's a minor miracle I've managed to see two movies over the last couple of weekends. One has been savaged by the critics and the other lauded. The tenuous connection between the movies - they were both shot digitally using RED One cameras.
The first is a sci-fi flick called 'Skyline' which has been savaged by critics and user reviews alike. The question I'm wondering is why? OK the script is a bit hammy here and there but I thought the cast, story, direction and special effects were all fine, even dare I say it good. There's no doubt that the film plagiarizes elements of a whole bunch of other sci-fi movies (War of the Worlds, Cloverfield, Independence Day in particular and to a lesser degree The Matrix and Predator) but then what alien invasion movie doesn't owe something to H.G. Wells original story War of the Worlds? Aside from The Matrix I enjoyed this film more than the others listed above and I think it's the movie that Cloverfield should have been. So why the scathing reviews? Maybe that's a question for Sony and the subject of another post.
The other interesting aspect is that this move allegedly cost $10-15m to make and that included 1000 effects shots. That's amazing as to me it looks like an $80-100m movie. Given that I'm currently working on a $10.5m IT project I find it amazing that a film that looks as good as Skyline can be made for the same money.
Best Scene: When the F22-Raptor takes out an alien.
Best Quote: Well there aren't any!
The second movie is 'The Social Network' and certainly nobody is complaining about Aaron Sorkin's wonderful script, David Fincher's direction of the fantastic cast. I found the movie interesting on a number of levels but mainly in its portrayal of life in a US Ivy League University (Harvard) - they have groupies? - and to a lesser extent the evolution of a tech startup in Palo Alto. What I felt the film didn't really address is a question that's burning in tech circles right now. Is Mark Zukerberg a genius or was he just lucky? Again that's a question for another post.
Best Scene: The Henley Rowing Montage
Best Quote:
Gage: Mr. Zuckerberg, do I have your full attention?
Mark Zuckerberg: [stares out the window] No.
Gage: Do you think I deserve it?
Mark Zuckerberg: [looks at the lawyer] What?
Gage: Do you think I deserve your full attention?
Mark Zuckerberg: I had to swear an oath before we began this deposition, and I don't want to perjure myself, so I have a legal obligation to say no.
Gage: Okay - no. You don't think I deserve your attention.
Mark Zuckerberg: I think if your clients want to sit on my shoulders and call themselves tall, they have the right to give it a try - but there's no requirement that I enjoy sitting here listening to people lie. You have part of my attention - you have the minimum amount. The rest of my attention is back at the offices of Facebook, where my colleagues and I are doing things that no one in this room, including and especially your clients, are intellectually or creatively capable of doing.
[pauses]
Mark Zuckerberg: Did I adequately answer your condescending question?
The first is a sci-fi flick called 'Skyline' which has been savaged by critics and user reviews alike. The question I'm wondering is why? OK the script is a bit hammy here and there but I thought the cast, story, direction and special effects were all fine, even dare I say it good. There's no doubt that the film plagiarizes elements of a whole bunch of other sci-fi movies (War of the Worlds, Cloverfield, Independence Day in particular and to a lesser degree The Matrix and Predator) but then what alien invasion movie doesn't owe something to H.G. Wells original story War of the Worlds? Aside from The Matrix I enjoyed this film more than the others listed above and I think it's the movie that Cloverfield should have been. So why the scathing reviews? Maybe that's a question for Sony and the subject of another post.
The other interesting aspect is that this move allegedly cost $10-15m to make and that included 1000 effects shots. That's amazing as to me it looks like an $80-100m movie. Given that I'm currently working on a $10.5m IT project I find it amazing that a film that looks as good as Skyline can be made for the same money.
Best Scene: When the F22-Raptor takes out an alien.
Best Quote: Well there aren't any!
The second movie is 'The Social Network' and certainly nobody is complaining about Aaron Sorkin's wonderful script, David Fincher's direction of the fantastic cast. I found the movie interesting on a number of levels but mainly in its portrayal of life in a US Ivy League University (Harvard) - they have groupies? - and to a lesser extent the evolution of a tech startup in Palo Alto. What I felt the film didn't really address is a question that's burning in tech circles right now. Is Mark Zukerberg a genius or was he just lucky? Again that's a question for another post.
Best Scene: The Henley Rowing Montage
Best Quote:
Gage: Mr. Zuckerberg, do I have your full attention?
Mark Zuckerberg: [stares out the window] No.
Gage: Do you think I deserve it?
Mark Zuckerberg: [looks at the lawyer] What?
Gage: Do you think I deserve your full attention?
Mark Zuckerberg: I had to swear an oath before we began this deposition, and I don't want to perjure myself, so I have a legal obligation to say no.
Gage: Okay - no. You don't think I deserve your attention.
Mark Zuckerberg: I think if your clients want to sit on my shoulders and call themselves tall, they have the right to give it a try - but there's no requirement that I enjoy sitting here listening to people lie. You have part of my attention - you have the minimum amount. The rest of my attention is back at the offices of Facebook, where my colleagues and I are doing things that no one in this room, including and especially your clients, are intellectually or creatively capable of doing.
[pauses]
Mark Zuckerberg: Did I adequately answer your condescending question?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)