Sound On Sight Radio #232: The Social Network / Catfish

- Advertisement -

It seems like all anyone can talk about is a little movie called The Social Network, a new film from director David Fincher and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin about the origins of internet stronghold Facebook, particularly through the prism of its progenitor, Mark Zuckerberg. Many have hailed it as one of the year’s best films, if not its best outright. We’ll set the hype aside and figure out if Fincher and Sorkin have indeed crafted a great film, as well as talking about another Facebook-themed flick, Catfish – and yes, that review will include some spoilers, so anyone wanting to stay virgin-white before seeing it will want to steer clear.

listen now

Download the show in a new window

Playlist:
Roots Manuva – Ital Visions
Dead Kennedys – California Uber Alles


11 Comments
  1. […] The Social Network […]

  2. […] Take a listen to our review of The Social Network from episode 232 of Sound On Sight. […]

  3. Sound On Sight-Ricky

    Sound On Sight Radio #232: #TheSocialNetwork and other Facebook movies
    http://bit.ly/9GPivL
    #podcast

  4. Madeleine says

    I can’t believe you didn’t like Catfish!! It was completely real, by the way, none of it is staged. Universal completely botched the marketing to try and make it a thriller, but it’s really just a documentary about people and how people form relationships. I saw them give a Q&A after the film, and they didn’t even have to say it was true, you could tell by their the nature of their answers that the whole thing was an experiment they stumbled across. That, and the amount of courage it took to put such an intimate event in the main character’s life on film is astonishing, and I frequently think the two filmmakers were a step ahead of him in figuring stuff out and kinda manipulative. I also pieced together that they are just some wealthy young guys working in commercials, so they had the spare money to take a risk on a project like this. That, and they claimed they filmed everything that happens anyhow, and to back that up, were still filming while they were doing the Q&A.

    I think Universal has really destroyed any success this film could have had with the marketing scheme. Instead of just engaging in the story, everyone is going to come into the film as a skeptic, and it’s that analyzing the legitimacy of the film that is going to keep viewers from paying attention to the actual subject, which is real human interaction in an age where… well, technology has really mutated the equation. Not whether or not it’s a trick.

    1. Ricky D says

      Well I stayed away from all the hype. In fact I never watched the trailer for the film. I just heard that you weren’t supposed to talk about the movie so I stayed cleared. So while watching the film I had no clue what it was about but it didn’t take me long to figure out where it was heading. The bottom line is while watching the film and especially when it ended, I never once believed any of it was true. I believe it happened but the scenes were clearly reconstructed and I think the final piece of monologue about the Catfish proves this theory. Considering the husband had no clue what his wife was doing, that monologue wouldn’t make any sense had he not known.

      On top of that I just found it really boring. Like I said on the show, it’s commonplace. It happens all the time. In this case they just happened to have a camera along for the ride.

      1. Madeleine says

        I guess when you believe a film is going to be fake, and it’s not, the problem with that is, the viewer thought it would be unbound by reality and isn’t.. and it’s very hard to take something that’s real and happened by itself without direct manipulation and make it more interesting than some insane horror-thriller where the crew is getting stabbed to death. Yeah, people fake their identities online all the time. This only grows interesting because instead of doing what any.. well, logical person would do, and eradicate it from their life, they took an insane risk and went to the woman’s house to interview her about it. And I think that reveal of who she is is a million times more interesting than revealing who she isn’t. She’s in love with this young, successful, city photographer, and she believes the only way she will ever get to interact with him is to make up this fantastic life and family instead of showing him how much pain she is in in her real life… she’s not evil.. she’s not even bad. She’s just miserable, and this is the only thing making her happy. Personally, I thought it was beautiful.

        And I guess, again, for a lot of the things that didn’t seem to be plausible, there’s a lot of manipulation of the subjects from the filmmakers, but for the most part, everyone was willing to let them make the film, even if it exposed them.

  5. Ricky D says

    Hey Keith,

    I assume you are a first time listener because you clearly didn’t catch on to an ongoing running gag of me, mispronouncing the names of actors and filmmakers on purpose. I don’t think I need to prove to anyone out there that I am probably one of the Sound On Sight hosts who has the broadest knowledge in film. I am not saying that because I think I am smarter than everyone else, because truthfully I am not, but simply because I am older and have watched more movies than some of the hosts combined.

    Do you honestly think I didn’t know who Arron Sorkin was? Honestly dude. I am not getting paid to do this show. We put on a great show week after week and run great website with an incredible team that I am pretty proud of. It is a full time gig and I would like to think we can have a little fun from time to time, especially on the radio show.

    Before I move on, I will tell you what I told Simon and Justine after the review. I said “I am sorry I was more hyper than usual and perhaps I had too much coffee.”

    BUT…

    As for the comment about being terrible in participating in the conversation. What you don’t hear on the show is the dead air I often have to cut out because I am waiting for someone to jump in. When we do the show, we do look at each other and try to hint at each other when someone wants to jump into the conversation.

    In fact if you listen to previous shows in which I co-host with Justine, you will often hear me ask her questions to get her more involved. She is still fairly new and it can be overwhelming at times. In fact during the Social Network review I stopped to ask her questions so she could cut in.

    Also if you listen to the start of the review. Simon asked me what I felt. I wrapped it up in a few minutes. He than came in and it was his turn to express himself, but for some reason he got distracted and instead of explaining what his problems with the movie were, he quickly passed the “mic time” to Justine because he became distracted with some technical problems.

    I say this week after week to people who write in. We are not a podcast. We are a radio show that airs live. We can’t have dead air and we are left alone to not only discuss the films but to produce the show ourselves – meaning handling the technical side of things too. It’s a lot of work, even in that one hour time frame and it involves a lot of multitasking. We don’t have the luxury of podcasters who can simply restart or take a break. It’s not easy to discuss film for two hours live and on the spot.

    I’ll also take this moment to allow anyone of my co host to voice their opinion on this issue and let me know if you are right and I was wrong. If so I will apologize. Hell either way I apologize for coming in too hyper. But perhaps they can let me know if they felt I was taking up too much time on the mic and if they left unhappy. Because I remember Justine specifically saying that she thought it was an amazing episode.

    As for the constant remark from unhappy listeners about moving on to other movie podcasts. Well what can I say? There are many film podcasts out there. Feel free to listen to them. I do and I also speak to those hosts from time to time. I can recommend Filmspotting and /film.

    We didn’t charge you or anyone to listen to the show. The podcast is there for anyone to download and we hope people will enjoy it, but we can’t please everyone. But I refuse to listen to the constant threat that if we don’t do a better job, a listeners will jump ship. We do amazing work.

    You are right. Your comment wasn’t very nice but it’s quite alright. We’ve heard worse. If your looking for podcasts about movies so you can get a broader perspective, I don’t think that you will find another show that covers as much ground as we do.

    Finally. You stated below that I was annoyed that my co hosts were presenting a less positive view on the film. Dude my co hosts like this film more than I do and I believe I more than expressed why I think this film is good on various levels. Again perhaps you should take another listen.

    I have always admitted that I am the loudest and the most animated on the show and therefor I will most likely receive the most negative feedback, but I think for once, the feedback is completely off. Had you commented on my problem, say in pronouncing words that starts with “TH” because of my heritage , than I would agree. Instead you presume to know me well enough to actually believe I am stupid enough to think the writer of The Social Network was a lady.

    Final note: I am listening back to the show now and I must say this is the most Justine has ever spoken in one show and yet this is the feedback we get. It’s funny how a few weeks ago she appeared on another episode without me as a co host, and the other two hosts allowed her to say but five sentences. Yet no one noticed? How strange?

    I hope you do keep listening and sending feedback, good or bad but I will always reply.

    Ricky

  6. Keith McNally says

    I’m sorry, that last post wasn’t very nice. Let me try to be more constructive:

    Basically, I like looking for podcasts about movies I enjoyed so that I can get a broader perspective on those movies. I think that’s why the Social Network section of this show rubbed me the wrong way: Ricky’s initial impressions were overwhelmingly positive without clearly articulating why, and it became tiresome when the other hosts tried to convey their more moderated view, only to have it cut off by Ricky’s all-encompassing positive. It was as though he was annoyed that they were presenting an opinion that was less than completely positive. I liked the Social Network too, but come on, man. No movie is so great that you shouldn’t let people finish their sentences.

    Part of getting a broader perspective on movies through podcasts is to learn tidbits about the production that I may not have come across on my own. I think a host should go into a recording having done a certain level of research. Hearing “Who is Atticus Ross?” and “Who is Aaron Sorkin? / What gender is Aaron Sorkin?” is intensely tiresome. I’m taking the time to listen to your podcast — Take it a little seriously.

    Again, sorry for my initial dickhead comment. I hope you can see past my asshole-ish-ness and find something useful in these comments.

    -Keith McNally

  7. Keith McNally says

    Jesus Christ Ricky, you’re fucking terrible at participating in a conversation. You’re constantly interrupting and stepping on the speech of the other two hosts, whose opinions are much more balanced and well reasoned than yours. They also have a basic grasp of the actor and character names behind The Social Network, which you seem to take pride in not knowing. There are a lotta movie podcasts, I think it’d be worth your while to try being a little less shitty at it.

    Yours in Christ,

    Keith McNally

  8. Sound On Sight-Ricky

    ONE OF OUR BEST SHOWS EVER!
    #Podcast : Sound On Sight Radio #232: Reviews on… #TheSocialNetwork & #CatfiSH
    http://bit.ly/9GPivL

  9. Sound On Sight-Ricky

    ONE OF OUR BEST SHOWS IN A LONG TIME http://fb.me/sz4frK5N

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.