The Social Reckoning (2026, Sorkin)

Aaron Sorkin began his directing career at the tender age of 56, decidedly later than most. As one of Hollywood’s most widely celebrated screenwriters, he might’ve felt the compulsion to bask in a little more glory, and what better way to garner attention than calling the shots on set? The leap from screenwriter to director certainly isn’t unheard of — some of American cinema’s greatest filmmakers, like Preston Sturges and Billy Wilder, successfully transitioned from pen to bullhorn. It’s company Sorkin would like you to think he keeps, peppering his latest film with rapid-fire wit and genuine concern for the well-being of the nation.

But The Social Reckoning releases into a broken nation, and it is itself a broken film. The film is a sequel to The Social Network in name only (kind of like Doug Yule recording Squeeze under the Velvet Underground moniker): where David Fincher cooled The Social Network’s Sorkinisms and executed a style befitting the technological revolution it depicted, The Social Reckoning yearns for a world before that revolution. It evokes dramas such as JFK or the later work of Clint Eastwood, depicting an America where its people may have their disagreements on a micro level, but on the macro can agree with the steadfast pillars of democracy and Constitutional integrity. It refuses to acknowledge that the revolution is over, and the war for a people-oriented digital economy has been lost. There’s a great movie to be made about picking up the pieces in the wake of that defeat (and it’s called Possible Love), but The Social Reckoning’s relationship to social media seems mediated by that very technology, offering holier-than-thou commentary on the kinds of outbursts Sorkin likely saw doomscrolling between sessions in the tanning bed.

My review continues at In Review Online. This will be my last post here for the month, I'm taking a vacation and will return on November 11th. Enjoy autumn, however you take it!