I admit that I’ve been seeing movies in a very different way since I started blogging. It used to be that I would simply watch a movie and try to enjoy myself. Now, I actively search for nits to pick in the movie I’m watching. I’m constantly looking for deficiencies, cataloging them in my head for analysis and documentation after the fact. Sure, I’ve been slavishly devoted to a few movies — Scott Pilgrim being one recent example — though that’s never stopped me from voicing my complaints about them even as I’m singing their praises. This time, however, I’m at a loss.

I’m serious, folks. I’ve got absolutely no complaints against The Social Network. To be fair, it’s possible that there might be some problems with the film in its portrayal of events and people and so on, but I wouldn’t know because I don’t know a thing about the subject. Taking the movie entirely on its own merit as a work of historical fiction, it’s staggering.

Easily the most important contributing factor to this movie’s success is the collaboration between Aaron Sorkin and David Fincher. Sorkin has a lot of hard-earned recognition as one of written dialogue’s great modern masters and he brings his A-game from the first spoken line. The moments of comedy relief are fantastic. The moments of drama are electrifying. Every inside joke and callback to a previous scene carries a lot of heft.

A lot of what makes this screenplay work is the editing. Most of the film is framed by the various court actions, with the story told in flashback as Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and co-founder Eduardo Saverin give their testimonies to the various lawyers and court officials involved, along with rivals Cameron Winklevoss, Tyler Winklevoss and Divya Narenda. The two time periods act off each other beautifully, aided by superb direction, meticulous editing and of course, outstanding dialogue. In fact, the film is loaded with tons of dialogue exchanges, every one of which is made much more tense and better-timed through the wonderful editing and meticulous direction.

Naturally, the actors deserve a lot of that credit as well. Jesse Eisenberg is amazing to watch in his portrayal of Zuckerberg as an Aspergian genius. Sorkin gives him a wide range of emotions to go through, with moments of self-doubt and smart, witty zingers throughout. Eisenberg handles every line of dialogue like a pro and masterfully sells himself as a brilliant programming mind who knows or cares about precious little outside the confines of his skull. In true genius fashion, he seems incapable of understanding or appreciating anyone who isn’t of equal or greater intelligence and accomplishment. That role, believe it or not, goes to Justin Timberlake.

Sean Parker, perhaps best-known as the founder of Napster, is played as — how do I phrase this? — “a huge prick,” we’ll put it that way. He’s broke and he knows it, since Napster was built around delivering content for absolutely zero profit, but this doesn’t stop Parker from partying, womanizing and drug-abusing whenever he can. Nevertheless, Parker did completely change the way music is consumed in this country and Timberlake effectively plays him as a suave and shrewd businessman. It’s easy to understand how Zuckerberg could see the smart and successful entrepreneur while overlooking Parker’s many character flaws. Until, inevitably, Parker starts drowning in his flaws.

Another prominent character is Eduardo Saverin, played by Andrew “Spider-Man” Garfield. I’d heard a lot of hype about this guy, though I’d only seen him in Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus. I didn’t see in that role what made him such a rising star. Now I fucking get it. Garfield plays the CFO and co-founder of Facebook. He’s the guy that puts up the seed money and tries to pound real-world sense into Zuckerberg’s head, getting ignored and ultimately double-crossed for his trouble. Garfield and Eisenberg play two best friends on opposing ends of a multimillion-dollar lawsuit. Saverin makes for a very meaty role and it’s amazing what Garfield does with it.

Also in the category of “pleasant surprises” is Rooney Mara. Again, here’s an actor who had previously underwhelmed me (this time, it was the Nightmare on Elm Street remake). Again, she’s been picking up accolades left and right recently. Again, Mara proves in this movie that the hype is worth it. She does an incredible job with Sorkin’s dialogue and she acts beautifully off of Eisenberg. Alas, Mara doesn’t get a lot of screen time — in fact, the lion’s share of it is before the opening credits. Still, her character is a constant off-screen presence, as we frequently see that she’s never completely left Zuckerberg’s mind.

Her symbolic importance is multi-faceted, at once representing all the negative side effects of social networking and also of Zuckerberg’s many social failings. I don’t know if their first date is the only mistake that Zuckerberg wishes he could take back, but it’s definitely the one he regrets the most. However, that failure and its entire fallout were the direct catalysts for every success that followed and I think Zuckerberg knew that. He goes through the entire movie wishing he could make it up to Erica while keeping everything else the way it is, though he can’t have it both ways. It’s a damn shame that Mara couldn’t get more screen time, though she made enough of a great impression that her character was just as meaningful in absentia. And anyway, I’m sure Fincher will give Mara a lot more time in their next movie.

It’s interesting to note that the movie doesn’t really have any villains. Some are more of a douchebag than others and they all have moments of stupidity, but it’s hard to say that any of them are completely in the wrong. Nevertheless, if any of them were to be considered the villains of the piece, it would probably be the Winklevoss brothers and their business partner, Divya Narenda. Of the three, Narenda is the truest bastard, the fastest one to start screaming “Lawsuit!” and the least transparent about his true intentions (you’ve probably heard his line in the trailer. The one about watching over Zuckerberg’s shoulder as he writes Narenda a check). Still, though Max Minghella plays Narenda with just the perfect amount of slime, his work pales in comparison to that of the unfortunately-named Armie Hammer. After all, it’s hard enough for one actor to play twins, but it must be some other kind of challenging to play twins who are as divided on their opinions as Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss. One wants to do things the honorable way, the other’s out for blood (“I’m 6’5″, 220 pounds and there’s two of me!”) and they both act wonderfully off each other. And they’re the same actor. Amazing.

Further kudos are due for the score. The music in this film — composed by Trent Reznor, of all people — is a strange mix of mundane and powerful, evening out to wonderfully subtle. I found it quite surprising how well the score complemented the action onsceen. An honorable mention goes to this awesome cover of “In the Hall of the Mountain King”and its placement in the movie.

The only problem I had with this movie when it first ended is that I thought it was too short. The story pretty much ended as Parker fell out with Eisenberg and I wanted to see more of the litigation that the story had been leading up to. I thought the film had lacked a proper ending. But then I thought about it and remembered that I had already seen the litigation: It was being used as a framing device throughout the movie. That was a rather clever way of showing us the court process without making all the talking seem redundant, now that I think about it. What’s more, the trials’ outcomes were all explained by a text epilogue and the story itself continues with the ongoing success of Facebook.

The Social Network is a very unique kind of good. It’s not just “go pay to see it” good. It’s not just “guaranteed to win some Oscars” good. This is the kind of good that only comes along once in a generation. This film is enjoyable and superbly crafted in every possible way. Go see it at your earliest opportunity.