Hating a film can be just as engaging and possibly more entertaining than loving it. A movie that is notably foolish, inadequately conceived, or morally wrong can spark as much contemplation and conversation as one that is genuinely emotional. In both scenarios, there is at least something that elicits interest.

This disappointment arises when encountering a film like “The Social Reckoning.” The sequel, written and directed by Aaron Sorkin, to “The Social Network” — the remarkable 2010 Facebook origin story scripted by Sorkin and helmed by David Fincher — stands out as a rare and deplorable anti-artistic creation. It falls into the category of movies so vacuous and unoriginal that they evade serious disdain, despite attempting to assert their perpetual relevance. In essence, it is so uninteresting and uninspiring that it lacks the depth or viewpoint necessary to even disagree with, let alone generate productive animosity.

The film delves into Facebook’s era of boundless expansion, aiming to critique one of the three tech magnates of doom. The other two figures are portrayed in Alex Gibney’s documentary “Musk,” set for release on Oct. 16 in Canada, and Luca Guadagnino’s Sam Altman/OpenAI analysis “Artificial,” which recently premiered to enthusiastic acclaim at the New York Film Festival. The narrative revolves around Facebook’s exponential growth and the promise of exposing the negative impacts of tech oligarchs on society.

The core premise suggests that this movie is a sharp and timely work that will challenge perceptions and disrupt conventions. However, rather than offering profound insights like “Spotlight,” the audience is presented with Jeremy Allen White portraying Wall Street Journal reporter Jeff Horwitz and Mikey Madison as Frances Haugen, a disillusioned Facebook employee. Together, they uncover a hidden pattern of misconduct known as MSI (Meaningful Social Interactions), which has contributed to governmental destabilization and truth distortion.

The depiction of Mark Zuckerberg, played by Jeremy Strong, is a central element in the narrative. His character faces public scrutiny for Facebook’s role in undermining democracy and youth mental health globally. In comparison to Jesse Eisenberg’s intricate portrayal in the original film, Strong’s interpretation appears uninspired and underdeveloped, failing to captivate as effectively.

The narrative structure relies heavily on Horwitz and Haugen’s journey, as they confront the powerful figure behind the scenes. Despite Strong’s talent, the lackluster script diminishes the potential for a compelling character exploration. The responsibility for this narrative shortfall ultimately falls on Sorkin, whose stylized dialogue and contrived scenarios fail to engage viewers effectively.

The film’s conclusion is particularly trite, reminiscent of a superficial and clichéd storytelling approach. The lack of risk-taking, specificity, and purpose throughout the movie’s runtime underscores its shortcomings. Sorkin’s inability to infuse the narrative with depth or originality results in a film that is disappointingly bland and devoid of any meaningful critique or impact.

In summary, “The Social Reckoning” falls short of its potential, offering a lackluster and unconvincing portrayal of contemporary issues. The film’s failure to provoke strong emotions or critical engagement underscores its fundamental weaknesses and lack of artistic merit.