I actually think Zuck should just hire Eisenberg to be him anytime he has to appear in public. And get Sorkin to write his speeches. He'd be far more entertaining that way, and he would get to stay at Facebook doing what he does best.
So if he just stays nice, and do charitable things, people will eventually like him. It has already started, The Social Network has been huge boost for that.
If PoSV was made about Bill, it would have been even more similar to TSN.
I just hate the idea that the whole world has to be structured to maximize our personal entertainment and comfort. It's part of the problem. Just because someone is geeky and awkward doesn't mean they should be assumed to be a bad person. I know that's not what you're suggesting but it is part of a real problem. We all need to collectively accept the smartest guy in the room might be the one who hasn't spent many mental cycles on being the most lovable person in the room.
Goodness gracious, I couldn't disagree more. I thought Eisenberg played MZ like an angry cartoon character. And Sorkin's incessant zingers were classic bad "good" writing calling attention to itself, the writer trying to wedge himself in as one of the stars of the movie (which worked, judging by the attention he got for it).
But as to Sorkin's writing, he's always written that way, right back to fairly unsuccessful TV writing in the 90s. Personally I love it, and have loved everything he's done, he is in my view the best TV/film writer currently working - and I know I'm not alone in that view.
Obviously, his quality is subjective and therefore debatable, but having watched The Social Network a few times, I haven't seen anything that strikes me as anything but classic Sorkin.
The reason he's "wedged in as one of the stars of the movie" is partly because the writing was so good that he's winning awards for it, and partly because many critics share my view of him, so they rave about him. To give some context, before Studio 60 On The Sunset strip aired (in 2005, I think), critics hyped it up SO much, simply because it was created by Sorkin. (And I think that was one of the reasons it was cancelled after one season - it wasn't too bad, but compared to expectations, and his normal work, it just wasn't good enough.)
So, nothing new to how he writes, or to the fact that people pay a fair bit more attention to him than to the average screenplay writer.
Did we watch the same movie? True Grit had some of the wittiest, zippiest dialogue I've seen in a long time. The writing was incredibly conspicuous, in a good way.
I disagree with your notion that conspicuous writing makes for a bad movie, just as I would argue that conspicuous editing, or score, or cinematography, or acting can lead to an excellent movie.
Oh c'mon; if he had received training, people would have chided him as being faked and rehearsed. He's damned, regardless of what he does.