Sorkin
My favorite thing about writer/director Aaron Sorkin is his ability to frame complicated topics in ways that are easily understood. Whether it’s A Few Good Men (1992), Charlie Wilson’s War (2007), The Social Network (2010), The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020), or any episode of The West Wing (1999-2006), you will understand whatever you just watched when the credits roll. As a bonus, Sorkin’s writing makes for very engrossing viewing, no matter the topic. He made Moneyball (2011) a riveting watch about baseball statistics. Think about that act of wizardry for a moment (and I say this as a pathological baseball fan). His latest film, The Social Reckoning, is no different.
Since I know you’re wondering, The Social Reckoning is not a sequel to The Social Network. Yes, Sorkin wrote both films. Yes, they are both about Facebook. Yes, both feature a portrayal of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg as a loathsome sack of shit. But that’s the end of the connection. The Social Reckoning doesn’t pick up where The Social Network left off. Sorkin’s latest film doesn’t try to tell us what’s happened in the sixteen years between films. Reckoning doesn’t even keep Zuckerberg as its main character. The Social Reckoning is about an algorithm. And you thought baseball statistics were mundane.
More specifically, The Social Reckoning is about the impact of Facebook’s algorithm on its users. To frame this, Sorkin focuses on two things. One is a journalist and whistleblower investigation that led to the Wall Street Journal’s aptly titled 2021 series, The Facebook Files: A Wall Street Journal Investigation. The other is Zuckerberg being prepped for an upcoming congressional testimony. The investigation runs from 2019 to 2021, and Zuckerberg’s prep takes place on January 6, 2021. So, the film jumps back and forth between the two as they progress to their respective climaxes. To avoid confusion, the film shows a timeline on screen every time these transitions occur. I told you – easy to understand.
Before you start watching, you should know that it will make you mad at several points. Well, probably make you mad. Depends on how you feel about a drunk asshole verbally accosting two cops for the sin of stopping to check on the asshole because the assholes car was belching a ton of smoke from its engine. Especially when that drunk asshole veers her assault into some wildly virulent racism. If my repeated use of the word asshole upsets you, you really, really shouldn’t see this movie. Because asshole is the nicest word I can think of to describe her, and it’s not the toughest scene in the movie to watch. Also, this scene is how the movie opens.
Synopsis
It’s an important scene for so many reasons, but its primary purpose is to establish a motivation for the whistleblower, Facebook employee Frances Haugen (Mikey Madison). Frances is a real person who worked in Facebook’s civic integrity team to combat misinformation spread by Facebook posts. The opening scene includes the asshole recording her encounter and posting the video online. Frances recognizes the asshole as a past friend and is alarmed at how radicalized that friend had become, knowing that much of it had to do with her former friend’s online presence. Being a data scientist, Frances does some digging through internal Facebook files and comes up with some very alarming statistics.
Around the same time, investigative journalist Jeff Horwitz (Jeremy Allen White) takes an assignment to cover Facebook. His intuition tells him something is terribly wrong with Facebook (and social media in general), so he starts digging. Eventually, Frances contacts him and the two develop a working relationship over several months. By working relationship, I mean she drips information to him in small parts because she really believes in Facebook’s mission (connecting people) and doesn’t want to get fired (or worse).
As the investigation develops, we see how Sorkin uses it to explain the issue in simple terms. Horwitz has the technical acumen of a marble, and Frances continually reminds him (and us) about it. This allows the movie to explain things like algorithms and MSI (meaningful social interactions) in very simple terms, and in an organic manner while not interrupting the flow of the film. It does the same thing in the opposite direction, with Horwitz constantly trying to explain how journalism and reporting really work.
Discussion
The same thing goes for the Zuckerberg scenes. In those scenes, he (Jeremy Strong) is constantly displaying an aura of “I’m smarter than everyone” vibe, if not outright saying it. Conversely, an old friend-turned-critic, Charlie Garrigan (Bill Burr), spars with Zuckerberg while Zuckerberg is trying to answer questions they expect Congress to ask. Garrigan keeps explaining to Zuckerberg what he is missing or ignoring by, among other things, refusing to stop platforming political ads containing misinformation and lies.
Like with Horwitz and Haugen, we have two people with very different knowledge backgrounds, but this time it's both a political discussion (Garrigan explaining to Zuckerberg) and a business discussion (Zuckerberg explaining to Garrigan). And again, everything is spoken in very clear terms so that the audience doesn’t get lost in all of the dialogue.
Further Analysis
Of course there is a lot of dialogue – this is a Sorkin piece. He’s the exact opposite of the man of few words. But it’s always a good thing, especially because Sorkin (and his associates) always seems to find the perfect actors for his screenplays. No matter how good his writing is, it only works with good performances. And this film is packed with great performances. Madison turns in a layered performance that makes her Haugen sympathetic, frustrating, strong, and meek all at the same time. In other words, a very, very human performance.
White gives us a reporter who we want to see succeed. He’s kind, understanding, very direct with his intentions, and never makes you think he has motives other than to help people through his journalism. Strong is excellent as well; all the proof you need is that you want to punch his version of Zuckerberg’s stupid, condescending, greedy face. Just like the actual Zuckerberg. And then there’s Burr, who is so good that you’ll forget he made his name as a stand-up comedian. Like John Leguizamo in The Odyssey, Burr deserves a lot of consideration for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar.
Conclusion
At this point, you probably want to know if The Social Reckoning is better, as good as, or worse than The Social Network. Honestly, I don’t know. It’s been sixteen years since I saw that movie, and I don’t remember much about it anymore. Just that by the time the film was over, I wanted someone to punch Zuckerberg’s (Jesse Eisenberg) stupid face. Still do.
![Pinterest](https://pinterest.com/pin/create/button/?url=https://cinemascholars.com/the-social-reckoning-review/&media=https://cinemascholars.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/MV5BYjdlZTgzZDUtMmVjYy00M2EyLWFlNGMtNjVhYjM2ODNmZjEzXkEyXkFqcGc@._V1_FMjpg_UX1000_.webp&description=Cinema Scholars reviews "The Social Reckoning," the new film from Aaron Sorkin starring Mikey Madison, Jeremy Allen White, and Bill Burr.){kind=link}