Great scripting and acting, and then what?

Rating: 6/10 (14 October 2010)

OK I'm a tad prejudiced. I had read most about the Facebook backstory over the past year and I think David Fincher is an over-rated picture mash-up maker.
Let's try to be objective. There's not much to learn from the Facebook genesis. Basically it's Fight Club without fist fights. Nice elevator pitch, uh? If it wasn't for the 500-odd million people registered on The Social Network, nobody would give a damn. It Is Downright Anecdotal and Deeply Uninteresting. But the scripting is brilliant. All this uninteresting stuff just flows. There's no gap, no hang, the known reality is perfectly blended in additional fiction to leave no unknowns behind, only bright answers and nice half-answers.
The acting is just perfect too. So directing must be very good, not? As a 'project manager' I can admit David Fincher is really good. Yet, since this movie will mean nothing 5 years from now - whatever becomes of Facebook - to the general public, I can just acknowledge it is a very fine marketing product. A - somewhat - good movie? Scripting and acting keep you interested all along but there's absolutely nothing in it you would feel like discussing with your friends after it reaches the 2h mark when it's time to close shop.
So you may think David Fincher is a great director, I just think he has a talent for building his team, which is just half the job. Spielberg is a great director, he knows how to (and has the means to) build his dream team, he gets all the funding he wants and still, in every other movie he dishes out his trademark sentimentalism overflows. David Fincher has no trademark, he is great at nothing except feeling the breeze and setting sail at the right time. No small feat; no major achievement either.
In the end only a very small number of people are able to see precisely how much of a talents' catalyst Fincher is, and how much he owes to individuals' talent and hard work. Just like with Mark Zuckerberg.