or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › 'Jobs' biopic disappoints at box office in opening weekend
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'Jobs' biopic disappoints at box office in opening weekend - Page 2

post #41 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by StruckPaper View Post

The best moment in the movie is the scene between Jobs and Ive. The actor playing Ive nailed him.

I thought that was, indeed, a wonderful part of the movie. But I also thought those scenes were a tad long (the whole movie itself could have been edited down a bit).

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Did anyone who saw it think Ashton nailed it? He did dissolve into the role and become Steve, or did it always feel like you were watching a performance by Ashton Kutcher?

Having read the mostly negative reviews (including the one on AI after its premiere at Sundance), my expectations were quite low. 

 

Just speaking for myself, I thought that Ashton (whom I really don't like at all; in fact, I can't stand 3.5 Men) nailed the role.

post #42 of 96

This is a made-for-TV movie.  So why are you disappointed it isn't a box office smash????

post #43 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider 

The film had a reported production budget of $12 million, meaning "Jobs" made most of its money back in the first three days.

When did a little more than half (6.7 million) become most?
post #44 of 96
Lack of advertising? I never recall seeing a commercial in the minute time that I watch TV.

Apple increments product features one bite at a time...hence the logo. Want the next big thing? You're gonna have to pick another fruit from the Apple Tree.

Reply

Apple increments product features one bite at a time...hence the logo. Want the next big thing? You're gonna have to pick another fruit from the Apple Tree.

Reply
post #45 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I thought that was, indeed, a wonderful part of the movie. But I also thought those scenes were a tad long (the whole movie itself could have been edited down a bit).

Agree. It came off a bit contrived, as if they were showing off this actor as much as possible. I still thoroughly enjoyed him.

 

 

Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

Did anyone who saw it think Ashton nailed it? He did dissolve into the role and become Steve, or did it always feel like you were watching a performance by Ashton Kutcher?

 


Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Just speaking for myself, I thought that Ashton (whom I really don't like at all; in fact, I can't stand 3.5 Men) nailed the role.

I found myself thinking Kutcher nailed it in some scenes, and overplayed it in others. But the overplayed scenes might be due to the choppy editing. Yes, I recognized Kelso here and there, but that's unavoidable. Overall, it was a credible performance. Frankly, the resemblance between Kutcher and young jobs is quite strong.

post #46 of 96

The moment these morons cast Kutcher, one of the least talented actors in history, they were doomed. It was an insult to Steve Job's legacy that they cast a clown instead of an actor. The director should be run out of town. 

post #47 of 96
Once upon a time (at least in the 80s), a movie had to earn $3 for every $1 of production to break even. Since the cost of movies has gone up, and if that holds true, it's gotta earn quite a bit more!
post #48 of 96
It will be ironic if it does well on Blu-ray.
post #49 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elian Gonzalez View Post

Once upon a time (at least in the 80s), a movie had to earn $3 for every $1 of production to break even. Since the cost of movies has gone up, and if that holds true, it's gotta earn quite a bit more!

So you're suggesting that a movie like Lone Ranger should have grossed more than ~$650M to break even?! Highly unlikely.

post #50 of 96
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
Released last Friday to mostly negative reviews, "Jobs" starring Ashton Kutcher earned less than its studio hoped it would over the weekend.

 

What's that? A biographic movie that ignores the actual events of the person's life did poorly? You don't effing say.

 

Originally Posted by rednival View Post
I am sorry but I think they overestimated how many people want to see a Steve Jobs movie.

 

Not one as inaccurate as this, at least.


There isn't mystery or legend or controversy around the man…

 

There is if they saw this film.


 People feel they already know his story.

 

They won't if they saw this film. 

 

Keep 'em coming; I can do this all day. lol.gif

post #51 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post
But please shut up about it if all you've done is read the reviews.

 

Allow me to turn your statement on its ear...

 

I don't have a lot of time to catch flicks, so I depend on either word of mouth, or certain critics whose values I trust.  Currently that falls to James Berardinelli.

 

So, for those of you that have seen this already, and have the patience to read his review (search for Reelviews)... how close is how he felt about it to your own experience?

 

Thanks, and no, I'm not shilling for his site, or trying to derail the thread.

post #52 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I don't even look at the critic's comments or ratings on Flixster. I rarely agree with them.

Critics are fine. The trick is to do the research and find a critic with your similar likes and dislikes in movies. Once you find one, it saves you a bunch of time on crap you would have watched and hated, and opens your eyes to movies you wouldn't have given the opportunity but loved.

My critic I follow is Martin Leiberman. That guy is dead on with my tastes 99.9% of the time. You just have to find the right guy/gal for you.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #53 of 96
When I think about Steve Jobs, I want to remember Steve Jobs, not Ashton Kutcher......
post #54 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by macdaddykane View Post

When I think about Steve Jobs, I want to remember Steve Jobs, not Ashton Kutcher......

When you look in the mirror, do you see yourself? Or macdaddykane?

post #55 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by macdaddykane View Post

When I think about Steve Jobs, I want to remember Steve Jobs, not Ashton Kutcher......

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

When you look in the mirror, do you see yourself? Or macdaddykane?

He sees Ashton Kutcher.

post #56 of 96

Only two people but myself and a friends son have no interest in seeing this movie soley because of Kutcher. He's not a good fit for that role to us, can't take him seriously as a serious actor. They went for the 'young and hip' fan base and blew it, pick a respectable young-ish actor or a unknown who can pull it off, not the guy who married a lady almost twice his age, does corny Nikon commercials, has never made a big budget hit movie, and did Punk'd. That all equals flop.

post #57 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by PScooter63 View Post

 

Allow me to turn your statement on its ear...

 

I don't have a lot of time to catch flicks, so I depend on either word of mouth, or certain critics whose values I trust.  Currently that falls to James Berardinelli.

 

So, for those of you that have seen this already, and have the patience to read his review (search for Reelviews)... how close is how he felt about it to your own experience?

 

Thanks, and no, I'm not shilling for his site, or trying to derail the thread.

I'd say that review is not bad at all, and certainly fair. 

post #58 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by mesomorphicman View Post

Only two people but myself and a friends son have no interest in seeing this movie soley because of Kutcher. He's not a good fit for that role to us, can't take him seriously as a serious actor. They went for the 'young and hip' fan base and blew it, pick a respectable young-ish actor or a unknown who can pull it off, not the guy who married a lady almost twice his age, does corny Nikon commercials, has never made a big budget hit movie, and did Punk'd. That all equals flop.

Why do you consider it a negative thing for someone to have an older spouse?

post #59 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I don't even look at the critic's comments or ratings on Flixster. I rarely agree with them.
 
How do you know you agree or disagree with comments you don't even look at?
post #60 of 96

Absolutely nothing about this movie looks appealing.  The cast alone causes me to cringe.  

post #61 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by StruckPaper View Post

Why do you consider it a negative thing for someone to have an older spouse?

It's not... If you're a girl. 1smile.gif

Kidding- my wife is 2 yrs older. Although 27 and 43 sounds like a big disparity for women being the older- men do it all the time. But I think both aren't good ideas. "Don't marry outside your demographic". Wise words.

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #62 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

So you're suggesting that a movie like Lone Ranger should have grossed more than ~$650M to break even?! Highly unlikely.

 

That person talking about $3 for every $1 hasn't a clue how the Movie industry has changed. The Theaters don't take in or get to demand a fraction of the percentage they once controlled with film distribution and showing.

 

It's been flipped on its head. Any film that matches its budget domestically is guaranteed a sequel if one is in the works. The foreign take typically matches domestic or greater.

 

However there won't be a sequel to The Lone Ranger. It did $217 Million World Wide on a $215 Million budget before marketing.

 

Man of Steel: $648.6 million World Wide on a $225 Million budget before marketing.

 

They announced the MoS sequel with Batman.

post #63 of 96
I haven't the faintest idea why anybody would want to see this. It looks about as well-made as your average 1980's TV movie of the week. It's a fucking embarrassment.
post #64 of 96

Saw the movie Friday. It's exactly what I was expecting (and I went in not expecting to be wowed but hoping to enjoy parts). Ashton looks the part but sounds like Kelso... all the time. Annoyingly so much so that I found myself paying more attention to the supporting cast more than the main character. Likewise I was annoyed by Joushua Gad's portrayal of Woz: while I appreciated his attempt at adding emotion to his portrayal, his voicing sounding like a cross between softspoken and out of breath (like he had just run a mile) was truly baffling. As was his GI Joe beard that looked ready to fall off due to poor gluing. As Woz alluded to, a lot of the more important interactions were left out of the film. The one nice touch I have to say (which added a human element to the cardboard cutout acting) is the closing of the film when they show original photos of each character alongside their actor counterpart.

 

As an Atari fan I was interested in this pre-Apple period as well. And I have to say the Atari scene was a completely made up and nonfactual scene, just horrible. They somehow have him joining up after his trip to India (which actually came during his time at Atari, and in fact Atari helped with the transportation), and they combine his two terms at the company (between 1973 and 1976) into one brief time in 1976. They have Atari still manufacturing the original PONG arcade machine in 1976 (false), and they have Jobs complaining about a game not being in color with an unknown Atari engineer stating it’s impossible to do…when in fact Atari (via Kee) had released it’s first full color game in 1975 – Indy 800, designed by Steve Bristow. They portray Jobs as a game designer/engineer when he was just a tech at Atari. Likewise, they have Al Alcorn assigning Breakout to Jobs when it was Nolan and Steve Bristow that did… Al didn’t even know it had been assigned to anyone, he suddenly saw Woz’s proto several days after the original game design discussion with Nolan and Bristow. They also present Breakout as being “programmed” (they need Jobs to “fix the bugs in the program”) when there’s no cpu or code in the game. Breakout was one of the last of Atari’s “state machine” games, the original method for creating arcade video games (where all of the game’s logic is done directly by discrete components on the pcb. The game is enineered, not coded). And even then, the scene where they have Jobs showing it off has a final glaring error: they used an actual Breakout game for the scene complete with scoring. Woz’s proto didn’t have onscreen scoring, he used separate LEDs. That and several other issues (it’s use of RAM, it’s lack of support for a coin mechanism, etc.) lead to that prototype not being used and Breakout having to be redesigned. They also left out the third co-founder (Ron Wayne from Atari), the fact that Rod Holt was from Atari (thanks to Al), and that a lot of the parts for the manufacturing of the Apple 1s came from Atari as well.

 

I understand the need to compress those three years because of the time constraints of the film, but to have that much factually wrong is horrible.

post #65 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack View Post

It's a bit weird that the worms haven't even finish eating him, yet he's already being portrayed as an historical hero. Would have been better to wait a few more years at least.

You didn't see The Social Network?

"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 #66 of 96
The problems abound.

Poole wanted a docudrama on Steve jobs. With a healthy helping of apple legend.

But that's not what this was.

This was Ashton kutcher trying to be more than he is.

Jobs was a legend. A very serious man, passionate about perfection.

Kutcher is a buffoon. He was the perfectly wrong choice for this film. And the single biggest reason for its failure. He might do well in some genres, but not this.

He may have done a decent job acting like Steve, but no one will know because they won't go after seeing his name as the headliner.

Then there are the huge innacuracies and woeful portrayals of everything else.

It's a movie not at all worthy of its namesake.

Hopefully a real, true movie comes out based on isaacsons book. And it would be great if Steve's bride would be consulted on the new one.
post #67 of 96

I'll would watch it on Netflix. If it's as bad as the previews... I don't have to feel I got burned and can just switch to another movie.

post #68 of 96
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post
Hopefully a real, true movie comes out… …based on isaacsons book.

 

I'm getting a mixed message here.

post #69 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post


You didn't see The Social Network?

 

downloading now

post #70 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by StruckPaper View Post

The movie was meh overall. It wasn't terrible, even for this geek who has read all the books on Jobs and Apple. It wasn't great either. There were some interesting moments and some that make you wish they had done better.

The best moment in the movie is the scene between Jobs and Ive. The actor playing Ive nailed him.
Did anyone else from Apple 2.0 make it in the movie? Seems a bit odd that they'd throw Ive in there but no one else.
post #71 of 96

Mediocre all the way!
 

post #72 of 96
Not many people are going to go to the movies to see it when there are plenty of other good films about. Most who would consider seeing it will have heard the poor reviews and wouldn't want to suggest to other people that they went to see it, and they wouldn't go on their own.

I reckon it'll do OK on DVD sales.
post #73 of 96
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
Did anyone else from Apple 2.0 make it in the movie? Seems a bit odd that they'd throw Ive in there but no one else.

 

Ive was there by at least '96, though. The eMate 300 was one of his earliest designs and turned into the first iBook.

post #74 of 96
I didn't see he movie and I won't see the movie. Steve was virtually private as well as what Apple did behind the scenes.
This movies seemed to take the highs and lows of Apple and just filter it until there was just Jobs!
Moreover this movie looks like a freaking vanity piece for Ashton. I corny a**, overthetop Hollywood fluff piece for a for a former male run way model. He's cool though. I like him and he killed it in the the Butterfly Effect.
post #75 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by maccherry View Post

I didn't see he movie and I won't see the movie. Steve was virtually private as well as what Apple did behind the scenes.
This movies seemed to take the highs and lows of Apple and just filter it until there was just Jobs!

Imagine that. A movie entitled "Jobs" that centers on Jobs.

I suppose you'd be upset if they made a movie called "Apple" and didn't talk about BMW or Walmart, too.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #76 of 96
It was a really good movie, and surprisingly enough, Ashton Kutcher did a very convincing Steve Jobs. I would have liked to see less long dramatic scenes and more NeXT, Xerox, and post iPod days.
bb
Reply
bb
Reply
post #77 of 96
While many of us love and admire and almost worship Steve Jobs not all people do it. Most of friends who have gobs of Apple stuff have no intentions of seeing the movie. They are no technology folks and don't care about Steve Jobs (the horror of it!!!!).

I think that Steve Jobs admirers and worshippers will find this move great while others will say it stinks. To each his own.

While the movie will not do well at the box office I bet, good or bad, it will be part of every "Jobbie's" collection.

It will certainly be in mine.
post #78 of 96
Originally Posted by jdsonice View Post
I think that Steve Jobs admirers and worshippers will find this move great while others will say it stinks. To each his own.

 

The opposite is true, if you had read any of the posts (or seen the movie or known anything about the man). People who know anything about Jobs' life have said the movie is completely wrong.

post #79 of 96

I saw 'Lincoln' and 'Jobs'

 

I enjoyed 'Lincoln', primarily because of my interests in US politics and history. I have the book and a copy of the "Team of Rivals" on my iPhone and iPad. As well as a slew of 'Government apps' and relative 'iTunes U' podcasts.

 

I enjoyed 'Jobs', primarily because of my interests in everything he did. I have a copy of every available Jobs' keynotes and YouTube interviews…and many are on my iOS's.

 

From what I have read, 'Lincoln' was truer than what 'Jobs' was. But then I never met, seen or heard Lincoln, everything I know about the man is virtually hearsay, while Jobs has always been in my face.

 

When it comes to Lewis and Kutcher, admittedly the former is a great actor. But for me, Lewis's movies are a once-to-be-seen. I watch Kutcher for entertainment, for his philanthropy, and his ideals.

 

As such, I doubt I will watch 'Lincoln' again. I doubt I will not watch 'Jobs' again and again.

 

As posted elsewhere:

 

Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do. 
Bejamin Franklin


Edited by OakhamMD - 8/19/13 at 7:33am
post #80 of 96

Ashton Kutcher was great, the supporting cast too, but I was disappointed with the movie.  I was expecting the movie to be reflective of the original title of "Jobs: Get Inspired", but it was not inspirational at all.

 

I was really looking forward to this one, so maybe my expectations were too high, but it just felt like there was no storyline. The movie is nice collection of well acted vignettes.  We get to see dramatized versions of some Jobs legend, but virtually no character insight. I actually would've appreciated a little more hollywood embellishment or exposition to make it an interesting tale.  For example, his daughter is introduced, denied, then he works on the Apple Lisa, and later the kinder, gentler Steve is waking up a young woman named Lisa in his home.  I would've loved to see some dramatic speculation as to his thoughts/motivations at rejecting his daughter, his motivation for calling the project Lisa, his later marriage and connecting with his daughter.  Instead, those things just happen, but you don't know why, and if you didn't know the story/timeline going into it, you would have a hard time following it.  My GF connected the Lisa dots, but didn't understand that the kinder/gentler Steve's wife was not Lisa's mother.  She wondered if there was a reconciliation that occurred off screen, and wanted to know more about how that happened.  The film doesn't even make it clear that Steve was adopted.  Some of the folks in our group who are unfamiliar with Jobs' life, didn't get that from the film.  Steve makes a wise ass reference to his birth parents in one scene, but it isn't made clear that he was adopted.  People who didn't know thought he was talking about Mom and Dad Jobs.

 

In a nutshell, Chris Kutcher did a really nice job portraying Steve Jobs, the cinematography and sets were great, but I believe the movie was either poorly edited or poorly written. Great scenes, but there is no story thread to connect them, and the film has no message overall, inspiring or otherwise.  Definitely wait and stream it on NetFlix.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › 'Jobs' biopic disappoints at box office in opening weekend