I am a person of horribly inane, moral stands. Typically, these stands are baseless, formed irrationally amongst my small, equally absurd friends and last years. For example, I refuse to root for the Arkansas Razorbacks athletic program because in NCAA 2005 for PS2, they were ranked #26 in the country, meaning my friend Adam could pick them using our "You Can't Start a Dynasty With a Ranked School" Law. Granted, Adam was a dick for picking them, we couldn't argue since they were our rules. A moral grudge was much easier to uphold. Hell, I have a friend who refuses to step foot in a bowling ally because, one time, he finished in last place in six consecutive games at Holiday Lanes in Westport. Seriously. We actually went to a bowling ally with a large group two years later and he sat in the car like a frustrated puppy while we got our Lebowski on.
So anyway, I really hate Jesse Eisenberg and won't watch his movies. Or at least, I wouldn't go see his movies until the reviews for "The Social Network" started pouring in.
Quick background story here: yes, I am aware that everybody under the age of 70 loved "Zombieland." Yes, I know about the Bill Murray scene and, yes, I probably would have laughed. Yes, I'm also a huge Woody Harrelson fan which is why it killed me that I couldn't see the movie because of stupid Jesse Eisenberg.
And it's "Adventureland's" fault. I'm the kind of guy who sees a movie, loves or likes it, then learns to adore or hate it. I'm not very neutral about this sort of thing. I left "Adventureland" feeling like the day would have been better spent burning ten dollar bills in a bon fire. Between Greg Motolla basically making an autobiography about how lame he was as a youth, despite having girls all over him and smoking pot with the cool kids, to Eisenberg's pathetic excuse for a Woody Allen impression...I hated it. Not even the gangly kid from "Freaks and Geeks" could save it for me. Every time I saw Eisenberg's face, I thought of how contrived self congratulatory the whole thing was...and an inane moral stand was born.
When I first head about "The Social Network," I was pretty pumped. When I heard David Fincher was directing, I was downright giddy. When I found out Aaron Sorkin was directing I...well...I was satisfied. Being under the age of 40 makes me legally obligated to not like Sorkin as much as older folks loved "The West Wing." Hell, even when the first movie trailer came out using the creepiest variation of Radiohead's "Creep," I was feeling pretty good. I mean, it's not too often that a major movie gets made that's:
A.) Not a remake
B.) Made by awesome people about a cultural phenomenon that we haven't even fully understood yet.
Except for that a**hole, Eisenberg. Justin Timberlake, fine (the SNL Boston teen's skit when was improperly diddled, anyone?). But Eisenberg? What, was Michael Cera to busy playing a socially awkward teen with girl problems too, we couldn't cast him? Being so close to the release date, we're now starting to hear the reviews of "The Social Network" and they are, in a word, fantastic. Hyperbolic, attention starved lunatic movie reviewers have even gone so far as to compare it to "Citizen Kane" or "The Godfather" in the realm of films about people in positions of power who don't deserve it. Although, saying that is like comparing "Scott Pilgrim VS. The World" to "The Longest Day" because, at one point, somebody gets into a fight.
Today, the real life Mark Zuckerberg started an emergency PR campaign, that is being reported on by all the news networks, to repair his image before "The Social Network" comes out. He'll be appearing on Oprah donating $100 million to the New Jersey/New York school system. Apparently, Sorkin's screenplay borrows heavily from a biography about Zuckerberg in which the primary sourced used was an ousted investor. It seems that rather than focus on the social ramifications of Facebook..."The Social Network" is actually more about how much of a d-bag Zuckerberg is/was. How, as 19 year old Harvard student he stole ideas from hacked emails to create the website as a way to get laid, then stabbed everyone who helped him in the back. From all the reviews I've seen so far, this characterization never lets up. In the end, he's such a pathetic jerk that the audience is supposed to sympathize.
A d-bag? An underserving, socially inept loser whom everyone hates? A guy who's made millions riding the coattails of other people as a genuinely talented person but with no original ideas?
That's Jesse Eisenberg! Awesome!
Rooting against or for an actor is like pro wrestling storylines. Would I rather boo or cheer a super-duper popular good guy who just loves the crowd? No way. Screw that. Should the same guy turn around with the same gimmic, only taunt the crowd and generally act the way he should have from the get go...then I'm on board.
Jesse Eisenberg's given me really good reasons to hate him...now he's given me a good reason to take down my moral wall and pay money to see him: he's playing the person I'm pretty sure he is.
Which is why now, I'd like to be the first to announce my plans to start the "Jesse Eisenberg for Lex Luthor" message board on IMDB.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment