Less than 30 minutes in, I found myself laughing.

I was definitely skeptical of “30 Minutes or Less.” Even with the promise of Danny McBride (“Tropic Thunder,” “Pineapple Express”) and Jesse Eisenberg (“Zombieland,” “The Social Network”), it threatened to be just another dumb screwball comedy. But as soon as I saw Eisenberg’s pizza delivery boy, Nick, connive his way out of forking over a late pie for free, I was hooked.

The movie takes place in Grand Rapids, Michigan, a post-industrial town suffering from urban decay, A late-night call brings Nick to a scrap yard, where Dwayne (McBride) and Travis (Nick Swardson)—two deadbeats outfitted in gorilla costumes—jump him and knock him out with chloroform. Dwayne needs the cash that his ex-military dad (Fred Ward of “Tremors” fame) is holding hostage, and when Nick wakes up with a bomb strapped to his body, we learn that Dwayne isn’t willing to wait for his father to pass naturally; He wants the money now. To pay the hit man, he needs Nick to rob a bank—and there are only 10 hours until the bomb explodes.

At its heart, the movie satirizes Generation Y’s sense of entitlement and pokes fun at the plight of our recession-plagued world. Dwayne feels so entitled to his dad’s money that he’d kill for it. Nick is stuck in a dead-end job. His best friend, Chet (Aziz Ansari), has just begun his career as a teacher but is all too willing to abandon it  (“Teachers make shit money anyway”). Helping his buddy rob a bank is exciting and gives him a sense of purpose, even if it is in a backward, twisted kind of way. All of the characters feel entitled to a better life, and they’re scheming to get there—some with more success than others.

We’ve seen this kind of premise before—dopey young man needs to get out of an impossible situation before he unintentionally kills everyone within a 50-foot radius—and the jokes aren’t the most original. However, the acting sells the story, and Ansari and Eisenberg both have impeccable delivery.

The movie’s only real failing is in the relationship between Dwayne and his partner in crime, Travis. Their friendship does not resonate authentically like Chet and Nick’s does. Travis’s only really funny bit is when he is pretending to fix a banister while trailing the bomb-clad Nick. McBride’s Dwayne is humorous enough, but the character comes across as more thuggish and mean I would expect from a comedy.

Overall, “30 Minutes or Less” is an excellent movie to close out the summer. It’s not wholly unpredictable, but it accomplishes its goal: a laugh a minute for the audience. Even the end is satisfying—except for one major plot point left dangling. If you notice it, comment below or write to me jess@jesshuckins.com. We can commiserate together.

Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg appeared on “Saturday Night Live” and met actor Jesse Eisenberg, who portrayed him in “The Social Network.”
Also, Andy Samberg, who got dressed like Zuckerberg, came onstage wearing hoodie and a curly-haired wig.

Nicki Minaj also appeared the show as the musical guest that night. She appeared in the “SNL” digital short with Andy Samberg’s Lonely Island group, “Do The Creep,” and performed “Right Through Me” and “Moment 4 Life.”

The National Society of Film Critics on Saturday selected “The Social Network” as the best picture of 2010.

Also, Jesse Eisenberg was named best actor for his role as Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook. David Fincher was chosen for best director and Aaron Sorkin won for best screenplay as well.

The National Society of Film Critics was founded in 1966 and is composed of 61 film critics from across the country. “The Social Network” was voted on by 46 critics.

It wasn’t all that long ago I swore to my friends that I would never join Facebook.

It was 2004. I was a freshman in college, in a new city. Facebook was only available to college students, and only some colleges had a network. It was maybe not in its infancy, but definitely in its childhood, not yet ubiquitous, and I was certain I would never need it. I thought it was a grasping ploy at popularity, an excuse to count how many friends you have, stalk that guy in your French Literature class, and yak about your love of soccer, politics and "The Boondock Saints". I thought it was creepy, and a flash in the pan besides. I was too cool for Facebook.

I joined before my first semester ended.

Now I read my boyfriend’s Twitter page and link to my colleagues on LinkedIn. My mother is my Facebook friend, and writes comments on my status updates. You’re not really friends with someone unless you’re friends on Facebook.

Does Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg know what he hath wrought? He has publicly claimed that he will not see "The Social Network," about the formation of Facebook and the making of his riches and household name. But how could he not see that the very fact that the film exists says volumes about the importance of what he created?

Well in any case I think it’s Zuckerberg’s loss. Because "The Social Network" is a beautiful, intricate drama that defies expectations and portrays not just the making of a web site, but the steel, pulsating core of my generation.

It would have been easy for the film to falter. How do you create a movie about a bunch of guys who sit in front of a computer screen and then sue each other? How do you write a drama about one morally ambiguous nerd who writes code the whole movie? Thank God we have the masterful team of director David Fincher and writer Aaron Sorkin, who brings his patented rat-a-tat dialogue and relentless wit.

Sorkin and Jesse Eisenberg (who plays Zuckerberg) portray the Harvard student as incredibly intuitive about the cultural and social structures of Ivy League institutions, but completely clueless as to how to navigate them, or any social structure. At the beginning he’s dumped by his girlfriend Erica (Rooney Mara), who’s had enough of his egotistical ramblings. "Having a relationship with you is like climbing a StairMaster!" she exclaims, after he taunts her about going to Boston University.

After he wanders home and gets himself good and drunk, Zuckerberg codes a web site in one night, a nasty little piece called Facemash which takes pictures of female Harvard students and pairs them, asking young Harvard men to judge who was hotter. Though his prank gets him in trouble with the school and makes him a pariah to the young ladies of Harvard, it also gets him an assignment from upper-echelon Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss (both played by Armie Hammer), twins who want to create a dating and social site specifically for Harvard students.

The movie tries to remain as open as possible to whether or not Zuckerberg actually stole the brothers’ idea to make Facebook, or simply improved on their half-baked plan- my own uninformed opinion leans towards the latter, though he was certainly not forthright about what he was doing.

He partners with his best friend Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield), a financial brain who eventually sued Zuckerberg after he was pushed out of the company. Garfield takes what could be a one-note role, a gives a nuanced and delicate performance. He delivers each of Sorkin’s lines like he’s tasting them, feeling their textures and shapes.

As a minor character says in the film, every creation myth needs a Devil. This one takes the delightful form of Justin Timberlake as Sean Parker, creator of Napster and Internet playboy who both takes Facebook public and destroys its soul. Timberlake has limited range as an actor, but what he does he does well. He’s a pied piper in this movie, a maniacal ghoul who knows just what to say to hook Zuckerberg and push away the more cautious Saverin, though the movie also makes the point that Zuckerberg was well on his way to being corrupted all by himself.

The Winklevoss brothers (or the Winklevii, as Zuckerberg hilariously calls them) got a $65 million payout from their own lawsuit (small potatoes when you consider the billions that Facebook is now worth). Saverin, who’s painted as the far more wronged party, received an undisclosed settlement. These facts are less important in the movie than the idea of money itself, and of worth. It’s stated several times that Zuckerberg doesn’t care about money- he cares only for his creation, that he’s made something cool that people like. His longing for human connection, even as he spurns it with cynicism and condescension, was what inspired Facebook.

Fincher understands, and is able to convey, our brave new world in a way I don’t think any other director has. And he’s able to balance both the central themes of greed and alienation and the need to make a movie about computer programmers…you know…interesting. "The Social Network" moves at a good clip, and even has a few action-esque sequences, but Fincher never jumps off the cliff of melodrama. I don’t think that all of the events in the movie actually happened, but I can believe that they might have happened. His delicacy with the plot is matched by a truly wonderful score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, which keeps the pacing and adds a lyrical quality to Sorkin’s dialogue.

The entire point of Facebook is to create a low-pressure way of becoming someone’s friend — of making a connection with them. You reach out, you "poke" them, then retreat to see if they return the sentiment. Your profile states your existence in the world. Here I am. This is what I like. These are my friends. This I what I have to say. That sense of simultaneous connection and separation colors everything in my generation’s social world. We move along together, parallel, but rarely touching in any real way.

Though the words "best movie of the year" stick in my throat as trite and kind of silly (how does one rank these things, anyway?) I will say that this was my most enjoyable experience at the theater this year.

In fact I plan to write a status update about it after this publishes.

After all, everyone needs to know.

Reviews are starting to trickle in and “The Social Network” is looking like a hit. Metacritic and Rotten tomatoes are showing that critics have given the film extremely high marks. (Look for Blast’s review of “The Social Network” Thursday).

Admittedly, when word of a Facebook movie came out, I was beyond skeptical. My thoughts were pretty similar to when they announced movies coming out about “Stretch Armstrong” and “Battleship.” It seems like a blatant attempt to cash in with a franchise that has built-in appeal. With 500 million users, most of the world is affected by Facebook. But a movie? Boring.

My ears perked up when it was announced that Aaron Sorkin was writing the film. Sorkin is known for writing “The American President,” “A Few Good Men,” and winning about a dozen Emmy Awards for creating “the West Wing.” So the man’s got cred.

Then came David Fincher. Yeh, the one that directed “Fight Club,” “Zodiac,” and “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.” So now the movie’s got tons of appeal.

The film also sports an impressive cast. Justin Timberlake needs no introduction; Jesse Eisenberg starred in Zombieland and Andrew Garfield is the next Spider-Man. So that adds to the pie.

But impressive reviews, a great writer and director and an appealing cast–is that enough to lure viewers to a film about Facebook? We’ll find out next weekend.

The film has an attractive marketing campaign that has me intrigued every time I see the trailer, and now that critics are calling it “this generation’s ‘Network,” so I’m in, when a year ago I thought it was a lame idea. Has the finalized “Social Network” got you in its grasp yet?

What should you expect when you’re going to see a movie called “Zombieland?” Obviously, expect some zombies. And in this new comedy starring veteran actor Woody Harrelson and veritable newcomer Jesse Eisenberg, expect to laugh the whole way through.

When Mad Cow Disease becomes Mad Human Disease (after a long series of unfortunate events occur that the movie never takes time to explain), a zombie apocalypse occurs and we join Tallahassee (Harrelson), Columbus (Eisenberg), Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin) as they make their way to Pacific Playland and kick some zombie ass along the way.

My primary fear before viewing this film, among all the excitement and anticipation, was that “Zombieland” was going to make the classic mistake of waxing too sentimental in what should rightfully be a straight, no-tears-allowed comedy. If Lloyd Christmas had any real reason to fall in love with Mary Swanson in “Dumb and Dumber,” the movie just wouldn’t have been as funny. “Zombieland” avoided that landmine. While we have enough pathos included to connect us to the characters, the director leaves the rest of the time to laugh till our sides hurt. As he should.

The film succeeds by relying on its lovable characters and its delightfully gory slow-motion scenes. Tallahassee (none of the characters reveal their real names for fear of getting “too personal”) provides the majority of laughs as an outrageous, gun-toting, whiskey-drinking, zombie-killing, Twinkie-seeking cowboy. The whole time, you’ll probably be rooting for Columbus, the loner and a lovable geek, who has survived the apocalypse thus far by living by a solid set of rules. (Examples: Don’t be a hero, and always check the back seat.) Eisenberg does an excellent job of delivering his dry sarcasm with a knowing smile without making you think that perhaps Michael Cera turned this role down first. If he keeps on turning out comedies like this one and “Adventureland,” he’ll go far.

Wichita (Stone) and Little Rock (Breslin) are two conniving sisters with trust issues who dupe Columbus and Tallahassee time and again, but end up joining them in their travels. Stone plays the perfect teenage bad girl with a soft side (I predict her being the next Bond girl) in leather boots and heavy eyeliner, who has an extra gun in her boot and would give her life for her little sister. Breslin is hilarious and adorable, as usual.

In effect, when you go see “Zombieland” (and I think you should) just follow Columbus’ rule number two: Buckle your seat belt.

In his new film, “Zombieland,” actor Woody Harrelson portrays a bulky, tan zombie-killing hick named Tallahassee whose aggressive personality fills up the screen. But when I had the chance to sit down with Harrelson and his co-star Jesse Eisenberg, I was surprised to find that he couldn’t be more different from the character he portrays. Instead of ordering me to “Nut up or shut-up,” he greeted me with a calming Southern drawl. And instead of talking about his search for the last Twinkie on earth, he told me about his vegan diet and how the filmmakers had to make him a Twinkie out of Styrofoam… or something.

Jesse Eisenberg, who is swiftly dominating the”geeky-and-smart-yet-adorable-and-funny male lead” category in Hollywood, plays, you guessed it, the geeky and smart, yet, oh-so-hilarious-and-adorable male lead in “Zombieland.” And he seemingly can play that role so well because of personal experience. Throughout the interview, he stumbled and revved over his words like speed bumps, liberally inserting “like” and “ya know” and occasionally dropping a word like “pratfall,” and rushed on while I stayed back and tried to define the word by context. But you see why girls drop like flies for him when, after making a wry, witty comment, he flashes those dimples for which his younger sister, Hallie Kate Eisenberg, is more famous. (Remember the little Pepsi girl?)

Harrelson and Eisenberg spent a lot of time talking about how hard they’ve worked on this film, which is not, they protest, the next “Shaun of the Dead.” But as they spent most of the interview hurling comedic one-liners at each other, laughing in their own world at things I couldn’t understand, it became apparent that being funny isn’t hard work for them.

“I take (my role) three-quarters seriously,” Harrelson said.

“Yeah, like most of your work,” Eisenberg shot back without missing a beat.

This chemistry, which is as natural in the movie as it is in person, was apparently developed a lot on set.

“The fun things to film,” Eisenberg said, “are improvising with Woody. That’s, like, amazingly fun. We would be improvising for, like, several minutes, and we’d all end up laughing and he would just stare at us in character like, ‘Why are you laughing at me?’ Like that look he was just giving me now as I was explaining it.”

Harrelson, quick to return the compliment, talked about the scene where his and Eisenberg’s characters meet.

“This is the last take,” Harrelson said, “and then he says ‘Oh, one and done, I always say. I mean, I said it once.’ It’s like, really clever! Or, ‘Hey watch out, you almost knocked over your alcohol with your knife.’ Things that I couldn’t have known that was gonna be funny. There’s a lot of that stuff.”

Unfortunately for us, however, Eisenberg said much of the improv won’t make it into the movie.

“They’re usually so absurd,” he said, “because they’re just actors trying to make each other laugh, not the characters actually speaking. Uh, yeah, there was a lot of…pratfalls.”

So, perhaps the hard work they’re talking about is running from zombies for hours at a time.

“I mean, it’s difficult to make,” Eisenberg said. “Like, a little fight scene that is, like, 30 seconds, takes a long time to film and, like, a lot of preparation and, you know, you’re running all night and whatever. You have fake blood and puke on you and…it’s, like, really fun to watch, but you know, definitely the least fun thing to film.”

Although “Zombieland” isn’t marketed as a horror film, it doesn’t spare the blood. Director Ruben Fleischer’s zombies aren’t the typical plodding-with-arms-outstretched zombies. In fact, they’re quite fast, and incredibly persistent. Viewers get the opportunity to see a mother get run down in a minivan by her own toddler zombie daughter. The scene ends with you watching mom slide face-first for 10 feet on hot asphalt.

A lot of the carnage got thrown in post-production, Eisenberg said.

“(Fleischer) just became desensitized,” Eisenberg said. “When you edit a movie and you’re sitting there for just days and days and days…he would just stop seeing the blood splatter and they’d end up just putting more in. And now…the whole movie’s just…like sepia-toned.”

When audiences go to see “Zombieland” this Friday, many will be holding it up in comparison to the similar 2004 flick “Shaun of the Dead.” Eisenberg and Harrelson insisted, however, that the films aren’t comparable.

“We’re not a competition,” Harrelson said.

Eisenberg felt a little more strongly about the comparison. He had this to say to those who are critical of “Zombieland”:

“You don’t want to see my movie? Fuck off,” he said, laughing. “I worked so hard on this! If you don’t want to go because there was another movie 10 years ago that had a slightly similar tone…It’s one of the funniest movies you’ll ever see ever. The zombies are, like, almost secondary. So if you don’t want to go see it because you’re, uh, precious about the genre, or whatever, fuck off.”

The film, which actually started out as a television show, definitely lends itself to having a sequel. If it does as well as expected, that very well may be a possibility. The end leaves us wanting to see what happens to our post-zombie-apocalypse characters. Does Columbus come up with more rules to live by? What other shenanigans do he and Tallahassee get themselves into?

“The moment (‘Zombieland’) ended,” Eisenberg said, “I was like ‘We gotta do another one tomorrow!’ It’s so much fun to watch. You want to see another one. You want to see like more rules. You want to see, like, what these people are gonna do. Like, it’s just the most fun experience.”

Look tomorrow for our review of “Zombieland,” which comes out October 2.

Photo credit: Blast staff photo/Aram Boghosian