or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › 'Social Network' scribe 'strongly considering' Steve Jobs movie
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'Social Network' scribe 'strongly considering' Steve Jobs movie

post #1 of 47
Thread Starter 
Aaron Sorkin, an Oscar-winning screenwriter for his work on The Social Network, has said he is "strongly considering" writing a movie based on the life of Steve Jobs.

Sony has asked Sorkin to write the movie, it's an offer that he's currently weighing, he confirmed in a conversation with E! Online. He called him a "great artist" and "great thinker."

"Right now I'm just in the thinking-about-it stages," he reportedly said. "It's a really big movie and it's going to be a great movie no matter who writes it."

Rumors that Sorkin was asked to write the movie first surfaced last month, when it was said that he was the top choice for Sony. At the time, it was said that Sorkin was considering the project, but this week's comments by the screenwriter are the first official confirmation.

Sorkin tackled Silicon Valley in the film The Social network, an adapted screenplay based on the story of Mark Zuckerberg and his founding of Facebook. The movie earned Sorkin an Academy Award for best adapted screenplay.

Before the biography even went on sale to the public, Sony acquired the movie rights to Walter Isaacson's authorized take on the life of Jobs. The book has already gone on to become one of the best selling books of the year.



Previous films by Sorkin include Moneyball, The American President, and Charlie Wilson's War. He also worked on the TV shows The West Wing and Sports Night.

As for who might take on the role of Jobs, last week a rumor claimed that George Clooney and Noah Wyle were both in contention to play the Apple co-founder in Sony's big-screen adaptation. Wyle already played Jobs once in the 1999 TV movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley," which also featured Joey Slotnick playing Apple's Steve Wozniak.
post #2 of 47
So in the movie, everyone has to talk really fast, preferably while walking very fast down some corridors...

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #3 of 47
One of our greatest American screenwriters wants to write the movie about one of our greatest Americans?

Sold, American.
post #4 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

One of our greatest American screenwriters wants to write the movie about one of our greatest Americans?

Sold, American.

If Aaron Sorkin was one of my country's "greatest screenwriters," I would be ashamed.

He is a workman like guy who does a good job with pseudo-historical re-enactment drama.

None of his movies and shows are anything special. They aren't bad, but they aren't Oscar material or anything.
In the 70's he'd be the guy penning all those "movies of the week" on whatever the issue of the day was at the time.
post #5 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

If Aaron Sorkin was one of my country's "greatest screenwriters," I would be ashamed.

He is a workman like guy who does a good job with pseudo-historical re-enactment drama.

None of his movies and shows are anything special. They aren't bad, but they aren't Oscar material or anything.
In the 70's he'd be the guy penning all those "movies of the week" on whatever the issue of the day was at the time.

When you grew up and decided you didn't want to work in the movies. Well. All I'm saying is, Thanks.
post #6 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

When you grew up and decided you didn't want to work in the movies. Well. All I'm saying is, Thanks.

The right punctuation would make this make sense. Just a suggestion.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #7 of 47
"The Life of Steve Ballmer"

You can start and end it with the anti iPhone quotes.


I am glad we will get a movie about Steve Job
post #8 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The right punctuation would make this make sense. Just a suggestion.

Use of Word "right" wh[e]n you* meant "proper" made, this so; hard t' understand.



2bsrs4asec I would like to see Goldman write it. Mamet would also be a hoot. Sorkin also makes sense because it needs to be character and dialogue driven.
post #9 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

None of his movies and shows are anything special. They aren't bad, but they aren't Oscar material or anything.

The Academy disagree.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0815070/awards

censored

Reply

censored

Reply
post #10 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

Use of Word "right" wh[e]n you* meant "proper" made, this so; hard t' understand.

Right. Correct. Proper.

*fanfare*

SYNONYMS!



The difference here is that your WORDS don't make any sense on their own.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #11 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Before the biography even went on sale to the public, Sony acquired the movie rights to Walter Isaacson's authorized take on the life of Jobs. The book has already gone on to become one of the best selling books of the year.

I thought the biography was pretty bad. It was mainly human interest gossip about an eccentric fellow, when the real story should have been the passion, insight and abilities that let Jobs accomplish so much. Kind of like a book about music by someone who is tone deaf. I hope the script is only loosely based on this book.
post #12 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

If Aaron Sorkin was one of my country's "greatest screenwriters," I would be ashamed.

He is a workman like guy who does a good job with pseudo-historical re-enactment drama.

None of his movies and shows are anything special. They aren't bad, but they aren't Oscar material or anything.
In the 70's he'd be the guy penning all those "movies of the week" on whatever the issue of the day was at the time.

Oh you're right. Maybe Bill O'Reilly is available. He's all about the 'facts.'
post #13 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Oh you're right. Maybe Bill O'Reilly is available. He's all about the 'facts.'

Political talk remains in PoliticalOutsider.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #14 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The right punctuation would make this make sense. Just a suggestion.

I have no idea what was meant by that myself.

My only point was that the kind of movies this guy writes are fine, but the quality is about the level of what used to be called a "movie of the week" in the 70's (to differentiate it from a "real" movie which at the time was assumed to be an attempt at dramatic art).

Anyone who was alive in the 60's and 70's probably knows what I'm talking about, those born later will assume that such bio-pics are valid movie art in and of themselves and not realise the difference.

It won't be a "real" movie that tells a story with dramatic impact and has some kind of meaning. It will be a workman like re-enactment of some aspects of Steve's life so we can all feel like flies on the wall and understand him a bit better.

It will be a "dramatisation" instead of a real drama.

There is a difference, and movie audiences today will be satisfied only because today's standards are so low.

No one should ever win an oscar for this kind of writing. "The Social Network" was enjoyable enough to watch, it's just an abomination to imply that this kind of thing is worthy of an Oscar or is anything like a real drama.
post #15 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I have no idea what was meant by that myself.

My only point was that the kind of movies this guy writes are fine, but the quality is about the level of what used to be called a "movie of the week" in the 70's (to differentiate it from a "real" movie which at the time was assumed to be an attempt at dramatic art).

Anyone who was alive in the 60's and 70's probably knows what I'm talking about, those born later will assume that such bio-pics are valid movie art in and of themselves and not realise the difference.

It won't be a "real" movie that tells a story with dramatic impact and has some kind of meaning. It will be a workman like re-enactment of some aspects of Steve's life so we can all feel like flies on the wall and understand him a bit better.

It will be a "dramatisation" instead of a real drama.

There is a difference, and movie audiences today will be satisfied only because today's standards are so low.

No one should ever win an oscar for this kind of writing. "The Social Network" was enjoyable enough to watch, it's just an abomination to imply that this kind of thing is worthy of an Oscar or is anything like a real drama.

Here, I'll spell it out:

YOUR THOUGHTS ON MOVIES ARE JEJUNE
post #16 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

Here, I'll spell it out:

YOUR THOUGHTS ON MOVIES ARE JEJUNE

Yours are just rude (shouting) and a tiny bit pretentious (jejune).
post #17 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Oh you're right. Maybe Bill O'Reilly is available. He's all about the 'facts.'

My point was kind of the opposite of that. *Sorkin* is actually "all about the facts."

What I'm suggesting is wait a few years and produce a movie about Steve Jobs that is a work of art and not just "about the facts."

Do the man justice and think about the product being produced instead of just rushing out some biopic movie of the week crap and then giving it an undeserved Oscar so everyone can pat themselves on the back.
post #18 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Yours are just rude (shouting) and a tiny bit pretentious (jejune).

My 'shouting' and use of the word jejune (how is using a word that exists in the dictionary any more pretentious than grand statements about dramaturgy and ageist comments about the quality of movies today?) were not in relation to thoughts on movies. Reading comprehension FTW.

Now, i'll assume we're done.

What did you find so lacking about the Social Network, which was more fiction than fact, more drama than dramatisation, according to most critics
post #19 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

Here, I'll spell it out:

Fine, since you won't clarify your post, I'll make my own assumptions about what it says below. Please feel free to correct me if I misinterpret your meaning.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Original

When you grew up and decided you didn't want to work in the movies. Well. All I'm saying is, Thanks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Modified

I thank you for deciding to forgo your childhood ambition of working in the movie industry.

How's that? Is that what you meant? And if it is, do you know that he had a childhood ambition of working in the movie industry? If not, don't make nonsensical assumptions about others.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #20 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Yours are just rude (shouting) and a tiny bit pretentious (jejune).

rofl

CNN: Obamacare largest tax increase in American history

 

FORBES: ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Middle class

Reply

CNN: Obamacare largest tax increase in American history

 

FORBES: ObamaCare's 7 Tax Hikes On Middle class

Reply
post #21 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt View Post

My 'shouting' and use of the word jejune (how is using a word that exists in the dictionary any more pretentious than grand statements about dramaturgy and ageist comments about the quality of movies today?) were not in relation to thoughts on movies. Reading comprehension FTW.

Now, i'll assume we're done.

What did you find so lacking about the Social Network, which was more fiction than fact, more drama than dramatisation, according to most critics

Let's just agree to disagree on this one.

I don't think we are even arguing with the same basic assumptions so there is no possibility for this to come to any reasonable conclusion.

I would argue that you are conflating "popular" with "good," and thus will never agree with me that Sorkin isn't actually so much a good dramatic writer, as he is a popular writer of historical psuedo-dramas.

I don't agree that "popular" equals "good." Therefore we won't really ever agree on this.
post #22 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Let's just agree to disagree on this one.

I don't think we are even arguing with the same basic assumptions so there is no possibility for this to come to any reasonable conclusion.

I would argue that you are conflating "popular" with "good," and thus will never agree with me that Sorkin isn't actually so much a good dramatic writer, as he is a popular writer of historical psuedo-dramas.

I don't agree that "popular" equals "good." Therefore we won't really ever agree on this.

Sorkin was a good dramatic writer on the west wing and A Few Good Men (though the ending with the salute in the courtroom was cliched)...

Also his work on Sports Night while not at all popular was in fact good
post #23 of 47
Sorkin will start working on the script right after he finishes Steve's commencement speech.
post #24 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

If Aaron Sorkin was one of my country's "greatest screenwriters," I would be ashamed.

He is a workman like guy who does a good job with pseudo-historical re-enactment drama.

None of his movies and shows are anything special. They aren't bad, but they aren't Oscar material or anything.
In the 70's he'd be the guy penning all those "movies of the week" on whatever the issue of the day was at the time.

I for one, totally agree with you, I didn't find any of his work special, and I found Social Network to be on the boring side.
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #25 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by NormM View Post

I thought the biography was pretty bad. It was mainly human interest gossip about an eccentric fellow, when the real story should have been the passion, insight and abilities that let Jobs accomplish so much. Kind of like a book about music by someone who is tone deaf. I hope the script is only loosely based on this book.

First, that's a clever analogy -- 'a book about music by somebody who is tone deaf' -- and I know what you mean, but I don't think it applies to Isaacson's book. By the way, I think the book is great for what it intends to be, which should be clear in the following.

I've been wondering about readers like you and most famously John Siracusa, who seem to be deaf to what Isaacson gives us about the "passion, insight and abilities that let Jobs accomplish so much." I think you are missing it because you can't imagine -- or relate to through experience -- the baptism into the mysteries of deep vision that Jobs went through early in his life. And you skip over these passages mentally and don't put them into the foreground or background of your Jobs picture.

You know what I'm talking about, yes? Isaacson sympathetically reports on Jobs's self-indoctrination without enlarging on the significance for you, but I sense that he, Isaacson, was either a fellow traveller or a genuine LSD immolate himself, in order for him to report without the slightest trace of judgment. The best passage bears repeating, p. 41 of the hardcover, in the chapter "Dropout."

"I came of age at a magical time," [Jobs] reflected later. "Our consciousness was raised by Zen and also by LSD. . . . Taking LSD was a profound experience, one of the most important things in my life. . . . It reinforced my sense of what is important -- creating great things instead of making money, putting things back into the stream of history and of human consciousness as much as I could."

Throughout the book, Isaacson refuses to editorialize, except in a few embarrassing instances that stand out by their rarity and are noted by Siracusa on "5by5." It's up to us to draw the conclusions. There are only four references to LSD in the book's weak index. I wrote down six more, some that include "acid" (pp. 31, 33, 58, 93, 142, 384, plus one on Ram Dass, p.34, which might as well be about LSD, since that is what got Richard Alpert to go to India and become Ram Dass. And Steve to go to India, and the whole culture of the 60s and 70s to get out of the tyranny of the rectilinear cubicle culture of the 50s and into the liberating visions of the computer as bicycles for the mind. Read What the Dormouse Said, if you haven't already.

Jobs's vision of deep aesthetics, deep simplicity and changing the world all derive from the psychedelic vision that has been under prohibition for lo these many years. You guys don't have to undergo the baptism, maybe, but you have to make a mental effort to understand it and place it in historical context, because you benefit by it every time you pick up your iPhone. Not your Android phone, your iPhone.

If only Bill had . . . no don't go there. Anyway, not to single you out so much, I'm really taking about a general tone deafness to the countercultural background that includes the Siracusas and even the Grubers out there who are short selling this very important book.

Edit: Maybe something on topic: I wonder how, in fact I dread, how they're going to handle all the tripping in the movie. And the confusions drawn therefrom. Edit 2: I meant "conclusions," but maybe the autocorrect got it better. Edit 3: Caution! In those times, there was a whole supportive stream of consciousness that doesn't exist now. You could get through difficult moments of a trip by drawing on all sorts "Let It Be" messages embedded in the music and the folklore that surrounded you. Not so now. You gotta look for your friendly local shaman or trip partner. And mushrooms are probably more trustworthy these days.
post #26 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

I for one, totally agree with you, I didn't find any of his work special, and I found Social Network to be on the boring side.

Sorkin is a dialogue guy. He is also a 'hot' and respected writer. And he clearly is very intelligent.

But any writer who likes character driven drama would seriously consider an offer to write the SJ story. The man was all character and drama and a screen writer's dream protagonist.
post #27 of 47
It will be a challange to take Jobs' life and narrow it down to about 2 hours.

Early life 15 minutes
Start Up Apple 20 minutes
Meteoric rise of Apple 15 minutes
Fired from Apple 10 minutes
Next, Pixar, Disney years 15 minutes
Return to Apple 10 minutes
Family life 15 minutes
Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes
Illness and death 15 minutes
post #28 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

My point was kind of the opposite of that. *Sorkin* is actually "all about the facts."

Hardly, here is quote from a Sorkin interview he did with the New Yorker...
Quote:
I dont want my fidelity to be to the truth; I want it to be to storytelling,.....

I liked the "Social Network,", it was an entertaining movie, but it missed the truth by a wide margin. His concern is not facts but entertainment. The only reason he might be wanted for a movie about jobs is because the "Social Network" did well financially and hey, if you can write one tech movie you can write them all.

Sorkin would be a horrible choice if you want the facts. On the other hand, if you prefer an entertaining fictionalized story about Steve Jobs, then he's your man.

-kpluck

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply
post #29 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphajack7 View Post

It will be a challange to take Jobs' life and narrow it down to about 2 hours.

Early life 15 minutes
Start Up Apple 20 minutes
Meteoric rise of Apple 15 minutes
Fired from Apple 10 minutes
Next, Pixar, Disney years 15 minutes
Return to Apple 10 minutes
Family life 15 minutes
Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes
Illness and death 15 minutes

LOL you're right it does seem ridiculous!!! Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes!!! Looks like SJ had his 15 minutes of fame...about 10 times.
post #30 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphajack7 View Post

It will be a challange to take Jobs' life and narrow it down to about 2 hours.

Early life 15 minutes
Start Up Apple 20 minutes
Meteoric rise of Apple 15 minutes
Fired from Apple 10 minutes
Next, Pixar, Disney years 15 minutes
Return to Apple 10 minutes
Family life 15 minutes
Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes
Illness and death 15 minutes

And there you'd have his complete life chronologically listed in the most boring movie ever made...

I think you'd need to make some choices before you set out making this movie.
post #31 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphajack7 View Post

It will be a challange to take Jobs' life and narrow it down to about 2 hours.

Early life 15 minutes
Start Up Apple 20 minutes
Meteoric rise of Apple 15 minutes
Fired from Apple 10 minutes
Next, Pixar, Disney years 15 minutes
Return to Apple 10 minutes
Family life 15 minutes
Ipod, Iphone, Ipad 15 minutes
Illness and death 15 minutes

Nah. Sorkin didn't waste screen time on the first 22 years of Mark Zuckerburg's life; his movie The Social Network starts more or less around the year he created Facebook, then jumps ahead to the year they are giving depositions for the Winklevoss lawsuit. Sorkin has to find the story of within Steve's life and discard the rest. Otherwise, it would be a documentary series.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #32 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Nah. Sorkin didn't waste screen time on the first 22 years of Mark Zuckerburg's life; his movie The Social Network starts more or less around the year he created Facebook, then jumps ahead to the year they are giving depositions for the Winklevoss lawsuit. Sorkin has to find the story of within Steve's life and discard the rest. Otherwise, it would be a documentary series.

And that's one of the things I didn't appreciate about Social Network, the timeline confusion, it seems like writers or producers do this to make their movie seem advanced, or "intelligent".
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #33 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

If Aaron Sorkin was one of my country's "greatest screenwriters," I would be ashamed.

He is a workman like guy who does a good job with pseudo-historical re-enactment drama.

None of his movies and shows are anything special. They aren't bad, but they aren't Oscar material or anything.
In the 70's he'd be the guy penning all those "movies of the week" on whatever the issue of the day was at the time.

I agree.
It was pretty obvious that the Academy was bought off to award 'The Social Network' or even acknowledge it. It's a pretty bad movie and rated B by most critics.
I've tried to get through it a few times but keep getting bored and switch to watching Golden Girls reruns or infomercials.

I'd like to see M Night Shyamalan or Stephen King take a stab at the movie to add some intrigue.
post #34 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

It's a pretty bad movie and rated B by most critics.
I've tried to get through it a few times but keep getting bored and switch to watching Golden Girls reruns or infomercials.

Yep, I too thought that it was not a great movie, and who cares if it won an Academy Award? That doesn't make a movie great. I actually thought that it was a pretty boring movie.

It seems like people are looking for the Steve Jobs movie to be a sort of Social Network PT. 2. I can't think of anything worse than that actually. That would be extremely lame and not worthy of Steve Job's legacy.
post #35 of 47
Boy, for a bunch of nobodies, we have some pretty self-important, dumbass opinions don't we.
post #36 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by NormM View Post

I thought the biography was pretty bad. It was mainly human interest gossip about an eccentric fellow, when the real story should have been the passion, insight and abilities that let Jobs accomplish so much. Kind of like a book about music by someone who is tone deaf. I hope the script is only loosely based on this book.


I agree with you!! From the very first I felt it was penned by the wrong writer. I keep telling myself it's just a matter of fact unembellished true story, no hyperbole.

But the stories chosen for inclusion, and the general lack of sync with the tech world really shows. I think the author was tone deaf to technology. Has he ever even used a Mac anything? You're right, it come across as a few behind the scenes gossip stories about how eccentric Jobs was.

Maybe someone else will write a new synthesis of his life and it's impact on the world.
I would want more than that book for source material for a movie script!
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
What is really factored into the price is a kind of perpetual sense of disbelief that any company could be as good as Apple is. ~Retrogusto
Reply
post #37 of 47
Here's what needs to happen in this biopic. The actual guy needs to be the one who plays himself. Not literally, of course, but visually.

Motion capture, expression capture and computer texture mapping all need to be used to flesh out the character of Steve Jobs. To make the movie as real for the viewer as the book is for the reader.

Nothing short of this will do.
post #38 of 47
With all the talk about a possible bio pic i was wonder who id want to play Jobs. Noah Wyle has played him on TV though I wasn't too impressed at what I saw. I have to laugh at the suggestion of George Cloney. I can't think of too many that could pull it off however I would suggest that if anyone has the physical presence it would be Jeff Bridges (he probably too old now) or Bradley Cooper who shone in 'Limitless' this year.
post #39 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Yours are just rude (shouting) and a tiny bit pretentious (jejune).

I thought he was just stuttering
post #40 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by rain View Post

I'd like to see M Night Shyamalan or Stephen King take a stab at the movie to add some intrigue.

M. Night Iamasham shouldn't be allowed within a thousand miles of anything to do with any movie ever again!

"Be aware of wonder." ~ Robert Fulghum

Reply

"Be aware of wonder." ~ Robert Fulghum

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › 'Social Network' scribe 'strongly considering' Steve Jobs movie