Can someone explain to me how the Social Network movie is so popluar?

I have seen it and I think It’s like the movie Pirates of Silicon Valley… people want to know how to get rich and the implications of getting rich…Seeing Facebook is worth 25 billion dollars and the founder owns 51% that makes him a billionaire… But I don’t know how to spell his name yet off by heart… so He will have to do more for name recognition Mark Zuckerberg spelled with the help of the internet

The acting itself is enough to commend. Personally, I haven’t seen it myself but I know a lot of people who have. The storyline contains enough humor and drama to keep it interesting. Many have even claimed it to be Oscar worthy. It really depends on your taste in movies.

@talljasperman I forgot about looking at it like that. So, danke for that.
@Stephystars263 I guess I’ll have to rely on others opinions, too.

Just massive appeal + being a good movie throughout.

Because the movie isn’t about Facebook. It’s about how Facebook was created, and it’s quite the Shakespearean tale. There’s love, friendship, betrayal, greed, lust, the quest to find one’s self… Plus, amazing acting, writing and directing on everyone’s part.
Think of it this way: I don’t have to know or care about racial issues in the Deep South in the 1930’s to find To Kill A Mockingbird to be moving, intriguing, and an all-out excellent film.

@Stephystars263 That’s because it is Oscar worthy. Especially when you compare it to the rest of the crap that gets produced these days.

It was done be the guy responsible for the show “The West Wing”. That gives it some street cred.

Beats me. Maybe the target audience are avid cinema goers. Yeah that’ll be it.

@ucme I’m pretty sure their target audience are chronic movie pirates.

It’s written by Aaron Sorkin, who wrote The West Wing and SportsNight, which are well known for their smart dialoge.
It’s directed by David Fincher, who directed Benjamin Button, and Fight Club, which has a huge following.
Plus, it’s got Justin Timberlake, and he is very good! (Shocked me!)
It’s the (mostly) true story of someone who became a millionaire, then billionaire, very quickly. People like that kind of thing.

I had high expectations for it going in, and while it didn’t quite meet them, it was pretty good.

I guess it’s because so many people use Facebook, and so just wanted to see how it got started.

First, the name itself is very catchy, Facebook. its self-explanatory, not like Twitter and MySpace. and, i believe Facebook was the first social networking site on the web. this may or may not be true. look at the numbers. compare participants on Facebook, compared to the other two. big is beautiful and Facebook is BIG. would this boost your decision to chose Facebook?

Have you seen the movie? I’m fairly sure it will surprise you. I went to see it this weekend because none of the movies I really wanted to watch were showing. My expectations were low, but it turned out to be superb.

It’s good because it’s not just about Facebook. It’s quite literally about the social network. How relationships and connections are built, sustained or broken between different types of people. How no single character is one-dimensionally a victim or a villain, but fueled by their own social motivations – to achieve or hold onto social prestige.

The concept of “social” is everywhere, in every character in the movie, and it provides a new perspective on the concept of “social” in yourself and every person you know. It’s actually a very relatable movie. Facebook, as a site or a product, is merely the supporting structure for overarching commentary.

Oh, and the acting is fantastic.

The same reason Titanic was so popular. People want to see how it happened. Plus it is a really good movie and word of mouth is getting more people to go.

SPOILER ALERT

As others have pointed out, it’s a very well crafted movie, with great bits of comic relief.

Writing, producing (read:casting of actors and director), directing, acting, editing – solid all.

I love @papayalily’s insightful reference to “Shakespearean”, and wholeheartedly agree that it’s Oscar nomination worthy; particularly adapted screenplay, editing, directing, supporting actor, and possibly even best movie.

For me the opening verbal joust, and then tasteful mix of modern “artistic” shots and editing technique, carried the movie. Andrew Garfield (a Brit) was pitch-perfect as Eduardo. If there was an Oscar for casting, this movie would win it – impeccable casting. Eisensberg (perfectly unsympathetic). Armie Hammer (actual WASP royalty), as both Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss, came off technically as effortless; and I’m sure it was not.

There were some over-cooked scenes (Winklevoss partner Divya Narendra flipping/tripping.., the Harvard president scene..,. and others) but.. they handled technology pretty damn good, without being idiots or patronizing, which is all but impossible to pull off in a mainstream American movie.

I was (and to some extent still am) hyper-sensitive to it being one big fat huge infomercial, actually financed by Facebook, feigning being critical – but it was a very good movie in its own right, so all is forgiven.

The producers were “all-in” to make this a great movie. I applaud them.

Great trailer

:) Well, well, well. I guess I got my answer, then. Thanks everyone for explaining it so wonderfully. I should consider it if I’m out of movie choices this weekend. Danke!