Hmm...alright first off, I think I need apologize...I was in a very very very bad/spiteful mood last night, reasons for which include alot of things but among them a 30 minute argument with a facebook prophet bringing the light of civilization the heathens of the world. (I'm talking about their view on the movie, I do have a facebook, I don't need to be sold on it).

Secondly...now that I'm in a cooler head.

@Dorkman:

I did/do know that Mark Zuckerberg/facebook had nothing to do with the movie, I think that's one of the driving factors that make me not want to see this movie. It just seems like a particularly good example of the way hollywood seems intent on screwing with everything.
This idea of making a film about something that only came into existence not even 10 years ago and then to try and sell it as the "true" story of the conception of it (I'm not saying it is, I'm saying that every single marketing element I saw, was trying to convince me that this is a movie about the true way facebook got started) without even having the ACTUAL people involved in the making of it, but more than that seeing the actual people speak out against the portrayal of the events.

Everything about this movie seems wrong and disgusting.

So Dorkman that's where this movie differs from those you listed. The fact that it's advertising that it's a true depiction of events that happened a very very short time ago comparatively, when everything else I know about the movie screams that that can't be true.

PS. My reference to the pop culture machine was misused. What I meant was this fad of movies being made solely about pop culture icons in an attempt to make as much money of it while they can without even a thought to whether or not it's an idea worth making a movie about.

And yes I fully understand that that has always been a thing in hollywood and always will be, so I guess I'm just using TSN as my milk carton to stand on and preach my message of the evils of hollywood to the crowds once again. I'll freely admit that.

I had read the script a few months back and saw it, as Teague mentioned.   I really enjoyed it.  At it's core, it's about a kid that wants to outthink the social contract in order to join it, and while becoming wildly successful in life, is ultimately stuck in the same place he started. 
There are parts of the film that deal with what happens when you create something with somebody, and the idea grows too fast for one of them to keep up.  It's not a matter of who's right or wrong: any creative pursuit takes a life of its own at some point, and your job is to stay one step ahead of it.  Some folks can't and the relationship with Mark and Eduardo is indicative of this.

I love Sorkin's writing here, Fincher takes a measured hand, and performances are really solid all the way around.

Oh...and even in the little you see of her, Roony Mara is a PERFECT choice for Fincher's Lisbeth Salander.

off topic: I still think you guys should just see the original Swedish films of the millenium-trilogy. Instead of waiting for Fincher's version of it.
I'm not saying it'll suck, I'm just saying the originals are DAMN good, and I see no point in remaking it.

I understand why people say it's boring but if you get that it's all about the suspense of what comes next, it's a great story. It's been a while but i seem to remember one of the astronauts was a polygamist or something. Good luck putting that in a Hollywood movie today.

Fincher's choice of Morgan Freeman is a little odd. He's in his mid-70s, who's he supposed to play?

Ah, good info. Maybe he should just produce. On the other hand with Freeman acting it's less likely to turn into a Will Smith or Tom Cruise vehicle, which isn't what i'd like to see from that movie.