The Social Network: The Music of Dialogue and Art of Non-Linear Storytelling A film analysis of The Social Network (2010) Written by Sofi Abouassali1,2,3 1 Humanities, 2Physical Sciences 3 First-year undergraduate, Innis College, University of Toronto This analysis of The Social Network will dive into Aaron Sorkin’s screenwriting, and how his decisions and style drive the film and allow for a full understanding of the characters and situation at large. The use of dialogue and the film’s organization will be observed to show how these elements foster character development and work within the plot’s framing.
The Musicality of Dialogue Sorkin is known for his style of writing witty and fast-paced dialogue. This dialogue often resembles a rhythm that feels musical. The reason for this may be that Sorkin claims his dialogue is music to him. The effect resembles a very natural ebb and flow of realistic communication riddled with misunderstandings, stumblings, and frustration—this resemblance to real-life grounds his audience in the story while requiring their attention to keep up with the fast pace. There is also an immense amount of repetition present. Words or phrases are often reused by a character towards the end of their line that echoes the previous line of the conversation partner or an earlier line. An example is seen in the opening scene where Mark reiterates words from Erica’s line, “row crew,” and “final club” directly afterward (Fincher et al. The Social Network 00:45). There are also numerous calls to previous lines where one character may be mentally ahead or behind in the conversation. Due to the dialogue’s fast pace, it leads many of the characters to feel tense or frustrated. Oftentimes when this occurs the rhythm is broken, resulting in the audience feeling uneasy. Repetition in this film is also used not just for rhythm and frustration but for humor. At the film’s most significant peak in conflict, Eduardo confronts Mark in all seriousness and betrayal, using repetition to emphasize his emotions as he feels unheard. Meanwhile, Sean is present; though not central to the scene, he is echoing Eduardo’s accusations in confusion, giving levity to an emotionally tense scene as his character is used almost to emphasize the ridiculousness of the situation. While Eduardo accuses Mark of leaking a story that claimed him to be guilty of animal cruelty, Sean can be heard behind him questioning, “Chicken. What chicken? (Fincher et al. The Social Network 1:44:23)” In addition, this juxtaposition of two opposite emotions in one scene occurring simultaneously sheds light on the characters and furthers the audience’s understanding of what each character values. Sean’s disregard for Eduardo and lack of care shows the audience that he does not value Eduardo or Mark’s relationships—further consolidating him as an apathetic manipulator. Similarly, this scene brings to the surface Mark’s naivety by which Sean uses to control him. While we see this slowly happen throughout the film, the final decision happens off-screen, allowing the audience to feel the same betrayal as Eduardo and be shocked when the dialogue is what reveals the falling out of their relationship. Screenwriters’ Perspectives Vol. 2 No. 1 2021
35
