[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/tv/ - Television & Film

Name
Spoiler?[]
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File[]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


[Advertise on 4chan]


>>
>>217465368
Wolf
>>
I used to think it was the TSN but when you do your own research you realize it's just painting Zuckerberg like the asshole of the story for the sake of drama whereas the real story is much more nuanced and Eduardo was a liability

At least Wolf of Wall Street is more honest and authentic about its characters
>>
>>217465368
>social network
2 hour Facebook ad with no soul
>wolf of wall street
>waaaah stock market le evil we should embrace socialism waaah
both movies are ass
>>
>>217465399
>Eduardo was a liability
How so?
>>
>>217466215
Also, lmao I did not realise how far along the sequel was:
>called the social reckoning
>no david fincher
>no jesse eisenberg
>no returning cast members
So wtf is the point? It won't feel like a sequel at all, simply an entirely separate project out there about zuckerberg's 2010 activities
>>
They're both disgusting kikes but I'd rather watch Dicaprio for 2 hours than that malformed hebrew goblin
>>
>>217466215
He was the CFO and didn't do shit. Was supposed to set up the company, get the funding and create a business model, none of which he did. Instead he was working on another startup on the other side of the US while Zuck, Parker & co were partnering with massive investors. They knew they had to get rid of the guy who held 1/3rd of Facebook while being a complete absentee of the company. So they made him sign contracts that said that he would keep his share but renounce his voting rights and status as a FB employee, which he did, and then injected massive amounts of new shares that were spread among all FB workers and with the bigger amounts going to the main shareholders, omitting obviously Eduardo since he was no longer a FB employee, therefore proportionally diluting his shares down to 9% (and not .03% like the film suggests)

They knew it would be settled with an NDA afterward anyway and that Eduardo would leave happily with a few billions in his pockets, in the end everyone got what they wanted
>>
>>217466204
You hate true messages?
>>
>better movie about entrepreneurs
Ghostbusters.
>>
>>217466684
I hate dishonest movies
>>
>>217465399
the movie doesn't paint him like that, it vilifies "old money" via the winklevosses (even though zuck also went to a top preppy school). zuck is painted as an autist who just cares about his project
>>
>>217465368
The BBC (billionaire boys club)
>>
The 90s stockbrokers jews ripping off dumb rich people was more entertaining than the autistic sperg jew funded by DARPA.
>>
>>217465368
The wolf of wallstreet was more entertaining but I think the social network is a better film.
>>
>>217466636
SOOOORRRY
MY PRADA IS AT THE CLEANER'S
>>
The Social Network is a far better movie I don't even know why you're comparing them. It's like comparing Andrew Tate to John Pierpont Morgan. A better comparison would be Faceberg Movie vs. Ligma Movie, but I still think the Social Network clears, as quotable as "I play the orchestra" is.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.