“The Social Network” and “Citizen Kane” bear significant resemblance with regards to Charles Kane and Mark Zuckerberg. Not only do these movies detail the lives of two wealthy, powerful men from before their rise to power to their zenith (and in Kane's case, to his eventual demise) and who are left alone at the end of each movie, they also depict the age-old problem of acquiring wealth without getting what they really want. Despite the similarities, there are some major differences which serve to differentiate Zuckerberg from Kane.
Both movies examine the lives of Charles Kane and Mark Zuckerberg, and both reveal their characters mainly through what others say about them. They both begin with the protagonists prior to becoming wealthy; for “Citizen Kane” this is Kane's childhood and subsequent upbringing by Walter Thatcher and for “The Social Network” this is Zuckerberg's experience making FaceMash. Kane then becomes a wealthy Newspaper Tycoon and Zuckerberg creates Facebook. Finally, we see Kane alone at the end of his life, calling out for the one thing he always wanted. Zuckerberg is likewise alone, habitually refreshing his Facebook page in hope of his friend request being accepted by Erica Albright. Both characters' motives are to get back what they had lost; for Kane it was Rosebud, his sled, and for Zuckerberg is was Erica. Despite their rise to power, neither character could get what he wanted. For all his wealth, Kane could not retrieve his lost childhood; Zuckerberg's success with Facebook could not fix his relationship with Erica.
Though Kane and Zuckerberg share many similarities, Zuckerberg is not a contemporary Kane; several serious differences stand out and define how and why they behave differently. Kane goes about his life trying to increase his wealth, power, and influence to the point that everyone will love him. He intends to mold the world to fit himself. Zuckerberg, on the other hand, is far more reserved and creates Facebook to impress Erica. Upon finding Erica uncaring at his accomplishment, Zuckerberg seems to retreat and continue work on Facebook alone. A major difference in the plots of the movies involves Kane's death. We know that Kane never gets what he wants, and the movie is about finding out what that is. In “The Social Network” we know what Zuckerberg wants, but the movie leaves the outcome open-ended.
“The Social Network” and “Citizen Kane” share many similarities; so much that one may be inclined to think of “The Social Network” as a modern re-telling of “Citizen Kane”, and that Zuckerberg is a computer networking version of Kane. There are, however, several large differences between the movies, and between the protagonists, which keep “The Social Network” as a unique movie in its own right.
Great character comparisons. I think it's ridiculous to compare these movies based on their characters however. Who would care to know about any part of Zuckerbergs life if he had not created the facebook phenoma, and still even after that he's an unlikable for the most part uninteresting figure. Kane though on the other hand I mean is a different story, both his figure, Orson Welles himself and the newspaper William Randolph Hearst that Kane was based on are larger than life characters that would influence and draw others too them by the force of their personalities alone even had if Kane and Hearst had not amassed communications empires.
ReplyDeleteWhile Kane says at one point "If I hadn't been very rich, I might have been a really great man." Zuckerberg does not have that quality and is pretty much as insufferable as he'll get even before he makes a dime of facebook. I think Kane's other line though of "There's only one person in the world who's going to decide what I'm going to do and that's me..." is spot on with Zuckerbergs manner in which he handles the lawsuits and starts building his company. Just some thought.