字号·· | 护眼
福克斯新闻网

反扎克伯格电影《社交清算》在政治两派均遭到批评Anti-Zuckerberg movie 'The Social Reckoning' takes critical heat on both sides of political aisle

点「原文对照」整页切到原文,或双击某段只看那段的原文。

这部旨在抨击脸书创始人马克·扎克伯格及其平台的新电影收获了褒贬不一的评价。与2010年大获成功的《社交网络》相比,部分评论显得尤为负面。(图片来源:David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)The new film vilifying Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his platform has received mixed reviews, some of them decidedly negative compared to the 2010 hit "The Social Network." (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

作为2010年热门影片《社交网络》的续作,《社会清算》遭到了来自政治两极的严厉批评,影评界的评价也较为平淡。不少评论家尖锐地指出了影片的政治立场表达方式,以及其对脸书在美国政治中所扮演角色的刻画手法。

"The Social Reckoning," the follow-up to the 2010 hit "The Social Network," is facing blistering critiques from both sides of the political spectrum alongside lukewarm reviews from critics, with some reviewers sharply criticizing the film's political messaging and its handling of Facebook's role in American politics.

《社交网络》主要讲述了脸书的创立过程及其所有权纠纷,最终斩获三项奥斯卡奖,包括最佳改编剧本奖(获奖者为亚伦·索金)。该片在影评汇总网站烂番茄上的好评率高达96%。而由索金亲自编剧并执导的这部更具政治色彩的续作《社会清算》,则收获了褒贬不一的评价。截至周四晚间,该片在烂番茄上的影评人好评率仅为61%。

"The Social Network" focused on the creation of Facebook and the legal battle over its ownership, earning three Oscars, including for screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, and a 96% positive rating on review-aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes. It's more political follow-up, "The Social Reckoning," written and directed by Sorkin, has received a more mixed response, with a 61% critics' score on Rotten Tomatoes as of Thursday evening.

今年早些时候,影片预告片首次亮相,画面中由杰瑞米·斯特朗饰演的马克·扎克伯格正接受喜剧演员比尔·伯尔所饰角色的质询。在片中,扎克伯格为网络言论自由辩护,并强调用户理应对自身行为负责;而伯尔饰演的角色则对他提出了激烈反驳。早在2019年,索金就曾公开发表公开信,批评扎克伯格对社交平台的管理方式。

Earlier this year, a trailer debuted showing Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg (played by Jeremy Strong) being questioned by a character played by comedian Bill Burr. In the scene, Zuckerberg defends online free speech and argues that users are responsible for their own behavior. Burr’s character vigorously challenges him. Sorkin published an open letter in 2019 criticizing Zuckerberg’s management of the platform.

Outkick网站撰稿人伊恩·米勒(Ian Miller)是嘲讽该预告片不合时宜的几位保守派评论员之一,他在回应中写道:“拼命想让所有人相信那个讲完全理的人是坏人,而要求进行威权式意识形态强制的人反而是好人,这真是好莱坞有史以来最典型的做派。”

Outkick writer Ian Miller was one of several conservative critics who mocked the trailer as tone-deaf, replying, "It is the most Hollywood thing ever to desperately try and convince everyone that the guy making complete sense is the bad guy and the one demanding authoritarian ideological enforcement is the good guy."

大卫·马库斯(DAVID MARCUS):觉醒运动1.0版正是艺人们需要我们秘密保守派俱乐部的原因 影评人们也提出了尖锐的批评。《环球邮报》(The Globe and Mail)影评人巴里·赫茨(Barry Hertz)在推特上发文称,这部电影是“今年最乏味、丑陋、扁平的电影之一——一部令人难以忍受的、充满蓝州婴儿潮一代(blue-state Boomers)自以为是的幻想。”

DAVID MARCUS: WOKE 1.0 IS WHY ENTERTAINERS NEEDED OUR SECRET CONSERVATIVE CLUB Film critics were also sharply critical. The Globe and Mail film critic Barry Hertz tweeted that the film was "one of the most insipid, ugly, flat films of the year — an insufferably sanctimonious fantasia of blue-state Boomers."

他在正式的影评中辩称,这部电影产生了适得其反的效果,因为它“甚至会把最坚定的脸书(Facebook)厌恶者变成忠实的脸书信徒——这部电影就是如此宏大、难以置信且卑劣地糟糕。”

In his actual review, he argued that the movie is so counterproductive in that it "will turn even the most hardcore Facebook hater into a true-blue Facebook believer — the film is just that magnificently, unbelievably, despicably bad."

《综艺》(Variety)杂志称该片严重缺乏原版导演大卫·芬奇(David Fincher)的水准,并且“已经显得落后于时代”,而《连线》(Wired)杂志的评论则形容这部新电影“已经显得毫无关联”。《连线》指出,电影开场是一个因酒驾被捕的女性,她对警察进行种族主义和右翼性质的辱骂,并因威胁要杀死其中一名警察而被捕。当视频在网络上疯传时,一名脸书的吹哨人认出这个女人是她普拉提(Pilates)课上的一位前自由派熟人。

Variety said it badly missed the original's director David Fincher and "already feels behind the curve," while Wired magazine’s review described the new film as one that "already feels irrelevant." Wired noted that the movie opens with the DUI arrest of a woman who directs racist, right-wing insults at police officers and is arrested for threatening to kill one of them. When the video goes viral, a Facebook whistleblower recognizes the woman as a former liberal acquaintance from her Pilates class.

正如《连线》所指出的,该片的高潮是2021年1月6日的国会山骚乱,“其恐怖之处部分被归咎于脸书未能控制住选举欺诈阴谋论,或是在唐纳德·特朗普煽动这些煽动性虚假言论时封禁他的账号。”该媒体质问:“如今,在特朗普的第二个总统任期过半之际,他及其运动在公开支持他的科技寡头的串通下受到鼓舞,这难道还是什么惊天大揭秘吗?”

The film's climax, as noted by Wired, is the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol Riot, "the horrors of which are blamed in part on Facebook’s failure to either get a handle on election fraud conspiracy theories or remove Donald Trump’s account as he stoked such inflammatory falsehoods." "Now, halfway into Trump’s second term, is it all that much of a revelation that he and his movement are emboldened by the complicity of tech oligarchs, who openly backed him in 2024?" the outlet asked.

克里斯·墨菲呼吁“对互联网实施监管”,以防民众被“像唐纳德·特朗普这样的煽动者”所蒙骗。记者兼影评人斯蒂芬·西尔弗将这部电影形容为“一部老头对着云朵发牢骚式的关于脸书的作品”。西尔弗写道,索尔金实际上是在主张:脸书在2010年代时的审查力度不够,如今政府应当介入,对《通信规范法》第230条进行改革——该联邦法律通常可免除在线平台对用户发布内容的法律责任。

CHRIS MURPHY CALLS FOR 'REGULATING THE INTERNET' SO PEOPLE WON'T FALL FOR A 'DEMAGOGUE LIKE DONALD TRUMP' Journalist and film critic Stephen Silver described the movie as "an old-man-yells-at-cloud treatment of Facebook." Silver wrote that Sorkin essentially argues Facebook was not censorious enough in the 2010s and that the government should now step in by reforming Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — a federal law that generally shields online platforms from liability for content posted by users.

2026年2月18日,在加利福尼亚州洛杉矶,Meta平台公司首席执行官马克·扎克伯格在作为证人出席庭审后离开法庭。该诉讼指控Meta及谷歌旗下的YouTube通过设计易使人上瘾的平台损害了儿童的心理健康。(图片来源:Mike Blake/Reuters)Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg departs the court after taking the stand at a trial in a case accusing Meta and Google's YouTube of harming kids' mental health through addictive platforms, in Los Angeles, California, on Feb. 18, 2026. (Mike Blake/Reuters)

“不,我不认同脸书要为美国政治极端主义或1月6日事件负主要责任这一观点,”西尔弗写道,并强调网民仍需为自己的网络行为负责。

"No, I don’t buy that Facebook is primarily responsible for American political extremism, or for January 6," Silver wrote, arguing that individuals remain responsible for their own actions online.

《SFGate》的林赛·巴尔指出,虽然影片中某些政治观点切中要点,但整体远不及前作:“对《社交清算》而言,不幸的是《社交网络》早已存在。”《IndieWire》的评价更为严苛,批评其剧本与演员表现均乏善可陈。

SFGate's Lindsey Bahr wrote that while certain political aspects hit the mark, the movie falls far short of its predecessor: "It is unfortunate for ‘The Social Reckoning’ that ‘The Social Network’ exists." IndieWire was even harsher, panning its script and performances.

BBC的影评人仅给出两星评价,认为该片不太可能影响任何人;《卫报》则在褒贬不一的评论中称其为“一部未能反映我们当下所处现实的影片”。即便是在烂番茄网站上获得好评的评论,评价也较为平淡。《西雅图时报》的评论称影片节奏明快,但仍只是《社交网络》的“拙劣仿制品”。媒体研究中心主席大卫·博泽尔在接受福克斯新闻数字频道采访时,对影片的政治倾向发表了看法。

The BBC's reviewer gave it two out of five stars, calling it unlikely to influence anyone, while The Guardian in a mixed review dismissed it as a "film which doesn’t reckon with the future we’re living in." Even some reviews rated as positive on Rotten Tomatoes were tepid in their assessements. A review from The Seattle Times said it moved "snappily" but was still a "pale imitation" of "The Social Network." Media Research Center President David Bozell commented on the film's political messaging to Fox News Digital.

“从这部影片就能看出阿伦·索尔金及好莱坞精英阶层的真实立场:他们试图传达的观点是,科技巨头的真正失误在于对保守派人士的言论审查力度不够,”博泽尔说道。

"It says everything you need to know about Aaron Sorkin and the Hollywood elite that they would make a movie suggesting Big Tech’s real failure was not censoring conservatives enough," Bozell said.

“媒体研究中心花费多年时间揭露脸书如何压制保守派声音,我们的做法是正确的,”他继续说道。“马克·扎克伯格最终也承认了Meta过去存在的审查滥用行为,并采取了切实措施促使公司回归更加开放的平台。虽然Meta远称不上完美,但扎克伯格让公司摆脱了曾经的审查机器形象,这一点值得肯定。”

"The Media Research Center spent years exposing how Facebook suppressed conservative voices, and we were right to do it," he continued. "Mark Zuckerberg eventually acknowledged Meta’s past censorship abuses and took meaningful steps to move the company back toward a more open platform. Meta is far from perfect, but Zuckerberg deserves some credit for redirecting it away from the censorship monster it had become."

“尽管扎克伯格已经向前看,好莱坞却似乎执意要打一场早已过时的‘战役’,”博泽尔补充道。“美国民众已经受够了政府强制实施的审查、意识形态层面的把关机制,以及科技巨头决定民众能听到何种政治观点的做法。”

"Hollywood seems determined to fight yesterday’s battle even as Zuckerberg has moved on from it," Bozell added. "Americans have had enough of government-imposed censorship, ideological gatekeeping and Big Tech deciding which political views they are allowed to hear."

在这部电影获得的诸多中,最值得称道的是《旧金山纪事报》的评论,该报将其誉为一部“扣人心弦的新闻惊悚片”。

Among the more positive reviews of the movie came from the San Francisco Chronicle, praising it as a "stirring journalistic thriller."