The Social Reckoning (2026) Sorkin took up Facebook again, but this time without Fincher

The film begins in the recent past, namely in 2021. Frances Haugen worked at Facebook and saw from the inside what the company would prefer to hide. Algorithms that increase aggression. Influence on adolescents, misinformation that spreads faster than the truth. Francis copies thousands of internal documents and gives them to The Wall Street Journal's Jeff Horwitz.

Then everything is like in the classic thriller about whistleblowers. Publication, congressional hearings and corporate pressure, attempts to discredit. Mark Zuckerberg struggles to hold his face as his empire bursts at the seams. This is not a direct sequel to The Social Network. It is rather a spiritual heir. The first film told how the guy created the website. The second tells what this site has done to the world.

What went well

Dialogues. This is Sorkin at his best, fast, sharp, sarcastic. Characters are notthey're just talking, they're fencing words. Even a regular meeting in the editorial office looks like a duel. Film reviewers write that they have practically no claims to the script work, especially to the construction of history and dialogues.

Actors: Mikey Madison plays Frances. She is quiet, stubborn and stubbornly does not want to be a heroine. The Time writes that Sorkin gave her almost the entire film, and it is her restrained presence that makes him alive. Jeremy Allen White plays a journalist who smells a story. Jeremy Strong plays Zuckerberg so that you believe him. Vogue notes that his character summons immediately, and this is a positive.

The pace. The film does not sag in the moment, everything is quite smooth and stable - two hours fly by quickly. Sorkin knows how to keep an eye on negotiations, calls, and documents. Suspilne writes that it transforms a boring but important worked

Directing. This is the main problem.Sorkin as a screenwriter is brilliant, and Sorkin as a director is still studying. Film reviewers explicitly point out that his directorial style is reminiscent of an ordinary television drama. Gray, visually uninteresting and damn banal. Fincher was able to create tension from nothing. Sorkin can only create tension with words. And when the words end, it becomes empty.

Caution: The title promises payback, this movie promises a punch, but no punch. The director seems to be afraid of offending someone, he shows that Facebook did bad things, but does not show how bad they really were. The Boston Globe writes that if the film had been released three years earlier, it would have been more appropriate. Now he does not say anything that we do not know yet, and the problems of social networks have become even worse. The BBC is even tougher: a film about how social media affects people doesn't.

Final. It's sterile, the problem remains and Zuckerberg remains. The system remains, the viewer leaves the hall with the feeling that he watched a good lecture, but did not watch a movie. Variety calls the film less human, less candid, and less connected than its predecessor.

Female characters: Mashable writes that Sorkin's tendency to portray women as either sexy or grumpy, or both, undermines the story he's trying to tell. This is not a new claim against Sorkin, but here it sounds especially loud, because the main character is a woman.

What critics and ratings

Ratings are split. On Rotten Tomatoes, the film has 55-69% of critics depending on the sample. Metacritic gives 46-54 out of 100. holds 6.7 out of 10. CinemaScore put B-. For Sorkin, this is one of the weakest starts. But the audience treats the film more warmly than the critics. Popcornmeter on Rotten Tomatoes shows 73-74%. People praise the actors, the tempo and the theme. Critics praise dialogues, but scold the director.

My rating

6.5 of 10

It's a good movie, it's definitely not bad - but not the one the audience was waiting for. Sorkin wrotegreat script and shot it mediocrely. Dialogues are held, actors are held, the theme is held. But the director doesn't let them take off. It's like listening to a brilliant conversation in a room where someone forgot to turn on the lights, hear everything, and see almost nothing. If you love Sorkin for the West Wing and Gru Molly, you're in. If you were waiting for the second Social Network, it is better to look at the first one.