The Social Network

The Social Reckoning (2026): I Reckon You Should See Something Else

Posted on by Jack Drees

“The Social Reckoning” is written and directed by Aaron Sorkin (Molly’s Game, Being the Ricardos) and stars Mikey Madison (Anora, Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood), Jeremy Allen White (Star Wars: The Mandalorian and Grogu, The Bear), Wunmi Mosaku (Loki, Sinners), Betty Gilpin (Mrs. Davis, GLOW), Billy Magnussen (Game Night, Made for Love), Bill Burr (The King of Staten Island, F is for Family), and Jeremy Strong (The Apprentice, Succession). This film follows Facebook engineer Frances Haugen and Wall Street Journal reporter Jeff Horwitz as the two work together to blow the whistle on Facebook’s secrets.

As a film fan, it pains me to mention that I waited about 16 years to watch “The Social Network” after it came out in theaters. That is despite hearing rave reviews, seeing the film make some best film of the year and decade lists, and owning a really cool-looking Blu-ray copy of it since 2019. I finally put in that Blu-ray disc for a reason, and I am pleased to say that I was delighted with the movie. The story moves at a breakneck pace and comes packed with tons of technical nuggets including the fast editing, the stunning color palette, David Fincher’s shot choices, and Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross’s score. In front of the camera, each member of the cast does a fantastic job, most especially Andrew Garfield and Jesse Eisenberg.

Now… Let’s take everything that was great about that movie and toss it into the black void of space!

That is because a new sheriff is in town, and its name is “The Social Reckoning!” What a bore this movie was. Is it just me, or is October becoming the new January? I feel like we’ve had a hot streak of crap at the box office lately, and “The Social Reckoning” is just the latest example.

“The Social Reckoning” is one of those movies that when I first heard about it I thought, “Okay, that might work.” Did we need this movie? Not really, but in a world where every other fictional movie is getting a sequel, it is fascinating to see “The Social Network,” based on real life events get a companion piece. Facebook has changed a lot over the years, and so has Mark Zuckerberg. That said, this movie is, for the most part, not necessarily about him. Instead, it is about someone who works at Facebook and their connection to someone at the Wall Street Journal who is getting a story out of them. This has the bones to work. After all, recent years have shown that journalism-based stories like “Spotlight” or “The Post” have a tendency to get some attention during awards season, maybe this could follow in their footsteps.

It doesn’t even come close matching the positive experiences I had watching those movies.

I did not watch “The Social Network” when it came out, so while I did enjoy the film, I did not have the same attachment to it that maybe some people did early on. However, as someone who watched “The Social Reckoning” days following its release, I can say that this film is lacking in personality. There is a lot that feels cookie cutter including the shots, the color grading, the directorial choices… It does not have the oomph that “The Social Network” had. This is even noticeable in the performances. Despite this film casting Mikey Madison and Jeremy Allen White, who have proven themselves to be talented, the film does not have a single scene featuring either of them that stands out.

Arguably the most interesting performance in the film is Jeremy Strong as Mark Zuckerberg. Of all the characters in this film, he comes off as the most robotic, perhaps on purpose. Much like Eisenberg’s portrayal in 2010, Strong dives into Zuckerberg’s quirks. But these are much different quirks this time around. Eisenberg’s Zuckerberg was occasionally hyperactive and dynamic. He was energetic. Strong feels much flatter. Usually I list that as a critique, but not today. Strong gives a Sheldon Cooper vibe throughout the entire film. You could also argue this character is Sheldon Cooper if he dyed his hair orange. While Zuckerberg is by no means stupid, the movie dives into his social abnormalities. Other people are telling Zuckerberg how to talk and present himself.

Aaron Sorkin, much like “The Social Network,” takes a non-linear approach in the screenplay, but the material is not as engaging as what was given in 2010. That said, I could see this film being somewhat easier to follow than “The Social Network,” but I also left “The Social Network” compelled enough by its fast-paced narrative to think about giving it a second viewing. That is not the case with this 2026 follow-up.

Speaking of the screenplay, this material is not going to change anybody’s minds. First off, no one is buying tickets to “The Social Reckoning,” so there is that detail to keep in mind. Second, this movie takes a particular viewpoint, which there is nothing wrong with. Mankind’s greatest stories have a viewpoint. That said, if you are fond of President Trump, and happened to be fond of him for the past number of years, you might not like this movie. If you are on the opposite side of the spectrum, this movie is probably going to align with your preexisting beliefs.

Also, I cannot speak for every viewer, this film heavily dives into how Facebook (and by extension, Instagram), negatively affects its userbase. This movie would probably be more compelling if I were not aware of some of these things already. Maybe if I were not on social media I would enjoy this movie more. But I live in an age where I know enough about how the algorithm works, and some of the less than stellar ways the algorithm gets utilized. This movie seems to be going in with a swift punch, but it doesn’t hit that hard. I hate saying this next critique because movies typically take a long time to make, and I am sure “The Social Network” is no exception… But despite this movie being set in the 2020s, the subject matter already feels somewhat dated. When it comes to movies about tech, I have a strong feeling that another movie coming out this year, “Artificial,” is going to tackle A.I. in such a way that is relevant to today’s times. “The Social Reckoning” failed to do that with Facebook. I am not saying that this movie is not going to impact somebody, it just didn’t impact me.

In the end, “The Social Reckoning” is a bland, forgettable film that is probably not going to change the world in the way its crew imagined it would. Aaron Sorkin plays around with a good idea, and the fact that he is diving back into the world of Facebook rather than having someone else do the screenplay makes this film all the more intriguing, but the results left me disappointed. The characters have no pizazz. The direction is dull. The script feels like a step down from its predecessor, if you want to call it that. If it were not for Aaron Sorkin being involved, and perhaps the big names like Mikey Madison and Bill Burr, I would not be shocked if we lived in alternate reality where “The Social Reckoning” winds up going straight to streaming. Heck, the movie acknowledges the COVID-19 pandemic, so it would have been somewhat fitting to have “The Social Reckoning” wind up where almost every other film released in 2020 happened to go. I am going to give “The Social Reckoning” a 4/10.

“The Social Reckoning” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now!

Thanks for reading this review! I am happy to announce that the next episode of the Scene Before original series Movie Requests drops Monday, November 2nd! This episode is going to feature “Adam Ruins Everything” star Adam Conover! You may also know Conover from “The Crystal Maze,” “The G Word with Adam Conover,” as well as his podcast series “Factually! with Adam Conover.” His new comedy special “Big Divorce Energy” is available now on his YouTube channel, which you should totally subscribe to. He makes some excellent long-form videos, and I recommend watching them in your spare time. And you can catch the new episode of Movie Requests on MY YouTube channel, please subscribe now, that way you can stay alert for when said episode officially drops!

My next review is going to be for “Sense and Sensibility.” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “Whalefall,” “Wildwood,” “Clayface,” and “You Can See Everything.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, it feels weird saying this at this point in the review… I have a Facebook page and you should totally give it a follow! I want to know, did you see “The Social Reckoning?” What did you think about it? Or, did you see “The Social Network?” Tell me your thoughts about that movie! Which of the two “Social” movies do you prefer? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Molly’s Game (2017): Passable, but with “High MIstakes”

Posted on by Jack Drees

mv5bntkzmzrlyjetmtq5yi00owy3lwi0nzytngq4zdkzztu0m2iwxkeyxkfqcgdeqxvymtmxodk2otu-_v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Molly’s Game” is directed by Aaron Sorkin (Steve Jobs, The Social Network) and stars Jessica Chastain (Interstellar, Zero Dark Thirty), Idris Elba (Pacific Rim, Thor), and Kevin Costner (Man of Steel, Dances with Wolves) in a movie based on a book of the same name. It’s about the true story of Molly Bloom, a former poker entrepreneur and Olympic-class skier who was charged with running the world’s most exclusive high-stakes poker game.

I haven’t really followed much of Aaron Sorkin’s previous work. This movie is actually his directorial debut, and if you have followed Sorkin’s work, you’d know he’s typically known for his writing. Sorkin is responsible for creating “The West Wing,” which he often wrote. As far as movies go, he has written “Moneyball,” “Steve Jobs,” “The Social Network,” “A Few Good Men,” and “Charlie Wilson’s War.” I was actually going to watch “Steve Jobs” in 2015 during its theatrical run, but I never got around to it. Nevertheless, I heard the fellow can write. Having seen this movie, I’d say he can direct too. I can appreciate the vision this movie contained. Going at a quick pace, all the while providing a serious tone. There were a couple of moments that I really liked from a lighting perspective as well. The colors just meshed together almost like a very small lens flare that didn’t feel obnoxious in any sort of way. As far as writing and editing goes, here are my thoughts.

I totally see what people are talking about when it comes to Aaron Sorkin and writing, the two go together like FedEx and that arrow between the “E” and the “x.” What’s that? You didn’t know about the FedEx arrow? Google the FedEx logo and observe it closely. The opening sequence of this film has Molly Bloom talking like I’m listening to what happens when an auctioneer and a motivational speaker combine into a single person. Not only was the diction well done, it was funny, it was informative, and it set a proper tone for the movie. This movie’s based on a book, and I apologize to books, but I never read the book for this film. I don’t know how similar this movie’s introduction is to the book, but if the writing resembles the book here, I’d say this is great writing in general. Props to both Bloom and Sorkin if that’s the case. Still, at the very least, props to Sorkin. I’ve heard a saying that the best directors make the best editors. As far as directing ability goes, this was mostly competent. I have a couple of issues, but this can apply to either the script or the editing instead of just directing.

A couple of shows that really make me uncomfortable are “The Office” and “Modern Family.” I heard a lot of people like both programs. Personally, I can’t watch them. Maybe I’ll give “The Office” a try because I hear a lot of folks talking about it like it’s the greatest thing between Netflix and the idea of Netflix and chill. Also, f*ck Netflix. However I don’t think I can watch “Modern Family” ever again. It’s not only unfunny despite how many people watch it and revered it is, but it’s also shot in a style that tries to make you feel like you’re there, but it just comes off like a student film to me. It almost reminds me of the shaky cam from “The Hunger Games!” “Molly’s Game” is not as bad, it’s not as shaky, it’s not as handheld, it works for what it’s doing. …For the most part. When it comes to editing, this movie cuts way too quickly sometimes. It tries to maintain this very quick style of filmmaking, and it just doesn’t work. I noticed one or two jumpcuts here as well. As far as writing goes, it’s tonally inconsistent. While most of the movie is fast and stays fast, it sometimes just slows down to a point where it’s horribly slow. Throughout the entire film, Jessica Chastain is narrating as Molly Bloom and it almost feels like something that should keep you going towards the edge of your seat. There are moments here that just don’t match what the movie feels like the entire time. It feels like a couple movies meshed into one. It’s like combining one movie, “The Grand Budapest Hotel,” with another movie, “Manchester by the Sea,” although it’s a million times happier. The editing combined with the screenplay is like a hotel room with a comfortable bed, no bugs, it’s got a clean carpet, the TV is 4K, everything looks nice, but the toilet isn’t working, the shower’s water system is screwed up, and the sink handles for hot and cold are grungy and hard to operate. It just all needs minor tweaking on perhaps major flaws before absolute perfection.

However let’s move our attention to the best part of the movie, Jessica Chastain as Molly Bloom. Some people may go see this movie for a number of reasons. Some people are interested in the story of Molly Bloom, some people like Aaron Sorkin’s writing, and some will say that the cast looks promising. I’ve observed Idris Elba and Kevin Costner in this film, and while both give competent performances, Jessica Chastain trumped them both. If the writing wasn’t excellent enough, this movie had an amazing actress to go off of it. I must say, despite my love for Jessica Chastain, I haven’t seen too many performances from her. However, much like the other movies where I saw Jessica Chastain performing, this is another fine example of how someone should act in a movie. They transform into a different person, and they allow the audience to see them as more than someone on a screen.

In the end, I got to say that “Molly’s Game” is not really a movie that I’d recommend to everyone, but I wouldn’t say to shy away from it either. It’s one of those movies that can impress you in a number of ways, but isn’t entirely screwed together to the point of perfection. I like the acting. I like the directing. I like the writing. However, the movie itself is sloppy when it comes to pacing. At times it wants to accelerate, and at others it wants to drag. There are times where I just nearly wanted to fall asleep, and I must have felt that during the fast parts due to the inconsistency of pacing. Although I will say this, Jessica Chastain f*cking rocks. I’m going to give “Molly’s Game” a 6/10. Thanks for reading this review! On Thursday, I’m going to start off my “Maze Runner” review series by talking about the first installment in the movie franchise, “The Maze Runner,” so look forward to that. Also, depending on what happens, tomorrow I’m going to upload a surprise post. I won’t tell what it is. But January 17th is a special day in my heart. That’ll be your hint. I might not post this, but that’s if I don’t finish it in a certain amount of time. Stay tuned for more reviews and other great content! Did you see “Molly’s Game?” What are your thoughts? How do you think Aaron Sorkin did as a first-time director? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!