Hi, I'm Michael.
This is Lessons from the Screenplay.
Since my first video, the most requested screenplay has been The Social Network.
So I decided to make it a reward for my next Patreon goal,
and in December I passed that goal.
So I'd like to start by saying a very big thank you to my Patreon supporters for making
this video, and this channel, possible.
And I guess I shouldn't be surprised that The Social Network has been the most-requested
screenplay.
Because I think it’s safe to say that the most famous screenwriter working today is
Aaron Sorkin.
While he's a great screenwriter, I don't think he's famous because he's great.
I think he's famous because his style is noticeable.
His rapid-fire, quick-witted dialogue is hard to miss—for better or worse.
And not many writers have a style so distinct it earns them a cameo-slash-parody on 30 Rock.
"Do I know you?"
"You know my work.
Walk with me."
But this is not to say that he is all flash and no substance.
Rather that he uses flash to distract the audience so they don't notice when the substance
is hitting them.
So today I want to break down the function of his style.
To see how he uses non-linear structure to frame what the story is about.
And examine the critical role that collaboration played in the creation of The Social Network.
"He's 25 minutes late."
"He founded Napster when he was 19.
He can be late."
"He's not a god."
"Then what is he?"
"He's 25 minutes late."
Sorkin loves writing dialogue, and he's often said that he thinks of it as music.
"My parents starting taking me to see plays from a very young age."
"Even though I didn't understand the story, I didn't understand what was happening on
stage, I loved the sound of dialogue."
"It sounded like music to me and I wanted to imitate that sound."
Sorkin's dialogue is famous for being snappy, repetitive, and clever.
But what is all of this actually accomplishing?
I want to start by looking at his use of overlapping dialogue.
Sorkin uses overlapping dialogue to dictate the energy and rhythm of a scene.
For example, in this scene, Mark has an outburst during a deposition.
This begins when Divya's line is interrupted by Mark.
"He had 42 days to study our system and get out ahead."
"Do you seen any of your code on Facebook?"
Then, Sorkin has the two lawyers interject, trying to calm him.
"Sy, could you--"
"Mark--"
This forces the energy of the scene to increase, because now Mark has to overpower them.
"Did I use any of your code?"
Which, in turn, allows Divya to respond with increased intensity.
"You stole our whole goddam idea!"
"Fellas."
This confrontation continues until it climaxes with Mark's line:
"You know you really don’t need a forensic team to get to the bottom of this."
"If you guys were the inventors of Facebook you’d have invented Facebook."
By having the characters interrupt and talk over each other Sorkin increases the drama
and energy of the scene in a way that feels organic.
Another key feature of Sorkin dialogue is the misunderstanding.
"This must be hard."
Often in Sorkin scenes, the characters aren’t on the same page.
"Who are you?"
"I’m Marylin Delpy, I introduced myself—"
"I mean what do you do?"
The primary function of this technique is to tease out exposition in a way that feels
natural.
"I’m a second year associate at the firm.
My boss wanted me to sit in on the deposition phase."
But it can also make the scene more engaging.
By giving characters different trains of thoughts, it challenges the audience to keep up and
draws them in to the story world.
Nowhere is this more clear than The Social Network's now-classic opening scene.
So let’s track the characters’ trains of thought and examine how Sorkin uses misunderstandings
to propel the scene forward.
It begins, as many Sorkin scenes do, with a statistic.
"Did you know there are more people with genius IQs living in China than there are people
of any kind living in the United States?"
Erica immediately becomes preoccupied with the China statistic.
- "That can’t possibly be true." - "It is."
"What would account for that?"
"Well, first, an awful lot of people live in China.
But here's my question:"
However, Mark brought all this up to get to what he is preoccupied with.
"How do you distinguish yourself in a population of people who all got 1600 on their SAT’s?"
But Erica still thinks they're talking about China.
"I didn’t know they take SAT’s in China."
"They don’t. I wasn’t talking about China anymore, I was talking about me."
Now Erica focuses on Mark and the SATs,
but he's still trying to discuss ways of distinguishing himself.
- "You got 1600?" - "Yes."
I could sing in an a Capella group, but I can’t sing."
"Does that mean you actually got nothing wrong?"
"I could row crew or invent a 25 dollar PC."
The Mark train keeps on rolling and he ignores her question.
So Erica gives up on her focus and meets Mark where she knows he’s headed.
"Or you could get into a final club."
"Or I get into a final club."
This is one page of dialogue into the film, and in trying to keep up, we may not realize
what we've learned so far.
We know Mark's motivation—he wants to distinguish himself.
We know that he got 1600 on the SATs, and we know his current desire is to get into
a final club.
We also see that Erica is polite, patient, and impressed by getting 1600 on the SATs—
something that will come into play later in the scene.
By wrapping all this exposition in misunderstandings, it seems to naturally flow from their conversation.
But the misunderstandings are also used to establish Mark's character
as someone who has trouble communicating with others.
Let’s look at a few more lines to see how these misunderstandings inform Mark's character.
"You know, from a woman’s perspective, sometimes not singing in an a Capella group is a good thing."
"This is serious."
"On the other hand I do like guys who row crew."
Erica is referencing these previous lines, and by trying to bring some levity into the
conversation, says something that Mark misinterprets.
The fact that he's hurt by this is signaled by an interruption to the rhythm,
the parenthetical of "beat."
"Well I can’t do that."
"I was kidding!"
"Yes, I got nothing wrong on the test."
After taking a blow to his ego, Mark then finally answers Erica's question from nine
lines ago about how good he is at the SATs.
Then...
"Have you ever tried?"
"I’m trying right now."
"To row crew?"
"To get into a final club."
"To row crew? No. Are you, like-whatever-delusional?"
She's asking about rowing crew, he's talking about final clubs,
so she's confused, so he's confused, and finally we arrive at:
"Maybe, it's just sometimes you say two things at once and I’m not sure which one I’m
supposed to be aiming at."
By this point, the audience can sympathize with Erica.
We've witnessed first-hand how difficult it is to have a conversation with Mark,
and how fragile his ego is.
And this is just page two.
There are seven more pages of misunderstandings.
What's impressive about this scene, is that even if you don't follow every beat of the
conversation, you still understand what happens.
And Sorkin makes sure to punctuate it with the point that hits Mark the hardest.
"But you’re going to go through life thinking that girls don’t like you because you’re
a nerd."
"And I want you to know, from the bottom of my heart, that that won’t be true."
"It’ll be because you’re an asshole."
Sorkin's dialogue is essentially a kind of misdirection.
We, the audience, are so caught up trying to follow what the characters are saying that
don't notice all the information being delivered to us.
But it's not just the dialogue that is doing several things at once.
It's also the structure.
Sorkin began his career as a playwright, so it makes sense that most of his early works
follow a very linear structure.
But with The West Wing—which I should mention is my favorite tv show of all time
—he started to embrace film's non-linear capabilities.
Some of the best episodes make great use of flashbacks.
His comfort with non-linear storytelling is very apparent in The Social Network
For the first twenty-two pages, the script moves linearly, then jumps forward in time
to Eduardo's deposition.
These flash-forward scenes allows the lawyers to supply exposition.
"Gretchen, they’re best friends."
"Not anymore."
As well as ask the characters directly about how they were feeling at the time of the events.
"Would you say that Mark was excited about this meeting?"
"Yes."
"Very."
This lets Sorkin frame scenes in different contexts.
For example, when the characters meet Sean Parker, we don't just watch them meet Sean Parker.
We get to hear Eduardo's thoughts on the meeting.
"A psychiatrist would say that he was paranoid."
"They'll hire private detectives who'll follow you day and night."
And because Mark is sitting five feet away in the deposition room, we also get to see
how he reacts to Eduardo’s story.
But perhaps most importantly, this non-linear structure re-frames the dramatic question
of the entire film.
Because it's based on a true story, we know that Facebook eventually becomes a success.
And in the first 26 pages we learn that Mark ends up getting sued by Eduardo,
the Winklevoss twins, and Divya.
"Your best friend is suing you for $600 million dollars."
"I didn't know that, tell me more."
So the dramatic question isn't "what will happen?" but instead "how will it happen?"
Sorkin is signaling to the audience what the story is really about.
Not a company, but a friendship.
And the structure allows us to see this friendship be destroyed, while also watching the characters
reflect on these events years later.
"I was your only friend.
You had one friend."
There is one last point I want to touch on.
Aaron Sorkin is clearly a talented writer, but while many of his scripts have been turned
into acclaimed films and shows, many have not.
"The West Wing, A Few Good Men, The Social Network."
"Studio 60?"
"Shut up."
In an attempt to partially address this, and because The Social Network is such a good
example, I want to talk about the importance of collaboration.
When David Fincher was first announced as the director of The Social Network,
it was a bit of a surprise.
Even Sorkin said:
"You know, at first glance it's a strange marriage of director and material."
"David is most known for being peerless as a visual director,
and I write people talking in rooms."
But I think there are two key things Fincher brought to the table that are necessary when
producing an Aaron Sorkin screenplay.
First, it appears that Fincher pushed for some script edits.
"David was so focused on finding what was behind each word in the script
and why it was there."
In some cases, it appears that Fincher even de-Sorkin'd parts of the script.
"Feel entitled to this.
It's our time."
"I love it that he says, 'this is our time, and I know what I'm f***king talking about.'"
"Put those two things together, but let's not have the 'this is our time' three times."
"It announces it as a thesis.
You know what I mean?"
I think this is a hallmark of a good collaboration.
To quote a line from The West Wing:
"The president likes smart people who disagree with him."
You should try to work with people who are talented and aren’t afraid to challenge
your work in search of the best possible version.
The second thing Fincher brought to the table was the ability to make Sorkin's words cinematic.
In The West Wing, this was accomplished using long steadicam shots through well-designed
and beautifully-lit sets.
This created momentum and made sure the visuals were always changing.
The famous walk-and-talk.
The Social Network achieves the same things, but in a different way.
Fincher avoids the walk-and-talk in favor of his own style:
Rapid, relentless cutting between impeccably-composed shots.
A great example is the scene where Mark is being asked about leading on the Winklevoss
twins, and his attention wanders elsewhere.
"It's raining."
"I'm sorry?"
"It just started raining."
This scene is two pages long and almost exclusively dialogue.
"Mr. Zuckerberg, do I have your full attention?"
"No."
When translated to film, there are 16 separate camera angles and 33 cuts.
The last element of collaboration I want to mention is, of course, the performances.
Sorkin dialogue is difficult to perform.
Not just because it’s fast, but because of the aforementioned multiple trains of thought
happening at any given time.
Not only that, but Sorkin also writes a lot of what he calls “verbal hiccups.”
"I tend to write little hiccups into the language, like at the beginning of that speech."
"It begins: I, you know.
And then he speaks."
"I've...you know."
"Dash-dashes and dot-dots."
"Most actors have a lot of trouble with that and Jesse is able to take those verbal hiccups
and casualize them."
"Make them seem organic."
"Sorkin dialogue is hard."
If the actors can't make this stylized writing seem natural, it doesn't work.
As a writer, you only have so much control over all of this.
But I still think it’s important to remember how collaborative filmmaking is.
That the most successful people aren’t just talented, they're experts at surrounding themselves
with people as talented or more so than them.
I think the collaboration between Fincher and Sorkin is a match made in heaven.
Sorkin engages the audience with rapid-fire, multi-layered dialogue, ideally telling them
a story without them even noticing.
And Fincher's filmmaking does the same thing, but with stunning visuals and relentless editing.
Together, their styles immerse us in the world of The Social Network.
"Hey guys!"
"I just want to say thank you again everyone who supports me on Patreon."
"I really enjoyed having this celebratory video to look forward to, so I think for my
next goal I will do the next-most-requested screenplay, which is Pulp Fiction."
"I have a lot of fun things planned for this year so be sure to subscribe."
"And finally, thank you for watching."