'Jobs' biopic disappoints at box office in opening weekend

1235

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 106
    evilutionevilution Posts: 1,399member
    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.
  • Reply 82 of 106
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member

    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.

  • Reply 83 of 106
    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.
  • Reply 84 of 106
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    maccherry wrote: »
    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.
  • Reply 85 of 106
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 2,475member
    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.
  • Reply 86 of 106
    jdsonicejdsonice Posts: 156member
    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.
  • Reply 87 of 106
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member

    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.

  • Reply 88 of 106


    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

  • Reply 89 of 106


    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.

  • Reply 90 of 106
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,094member


    I am looking forward to buying and watching on iTunes. Going to be something surreal about that.


     


    Going to a theater sucks.

  • Reply 90 of 106
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,094member


    I am looking forward to buying and watching on iTunes. Going to be something surreal about that.


     


    Going to a theater sucks.

  • Reply 92 of 106


    I saw the movie in the hopes of getting more details on Steve's time away from Apple where he learned a lot of skills in dealing with bean counters and boards of directors. Well that didn't happen as the script writer picked points of Steve's life that they thought were important to Apple, took brief snapshots in time and strung them together in a sequence that they thought would make sense and give you an idea of who Steve was.  Unfortunately the snapshots were too brief to provide any insights to Steve's motivations.


     


    They missed some events that were important to Apple and barely glanced over things they should have developed more.  Like Steve being so eager to have Microsoft products that would run native on the 128K Mac that he accidentally gave Microsoft full rights to develop products using the Macintosh interface for non-Mac Microsoft products.


     


    They totally missed when Steve visited Xerox park as saw the user interface that Xerox park was developing but had not put into a product. The Lisa was Apple's first attempt to bring these tools to the public.


     


    I think they could have made a very good movie if they went from the inception of Apple and finished with the introduction of the Mac II.  That could easily be a 2 hour movie right there.


     


    Apple is rich in untold stories any part of which could have made a good movie.  I would like to see one from the inception of the Knowledge Navigator through the successful implementations of most of it in the iPhone and iPad.  John became a strong believer in the Knowledge Navigator.  He funded a lot of research and that Newton was the first result.  Unfortunately the technology had not kept up with the vision and Newton was nowhere near the vision.  Apple lost a lot of money in Newton's development and the attempts to keep the product alive.  Apple had a group of engineers working on speech synthesis but it wasn't until Siri that the agent part of the Knowledge Navigator came into being.  iOS is still working on realizing the dream that is the Knowledge Navigator.  The AI technology is still not there.  Michael Spindler and Gill Amelio did not have the dream.  But a lot of the long time advanced technology folks still held onto it and so did Steve.  Once Steve got Apple switched over to Next technology he went back to the Knowledge Navigator roots for the iPhone and later the iPod.  I wonder if Steve had passed along the dream that is still waiting for technology to catch up.  Now that could have made a great movie.


     


    I think that it is interesting that the future of the iPad was first articulated in a knowledge Navigator video almost 25 years ago.  Following the dream would make a good movie.

  • Reply 93 of 106
    Didn't see this, but "Pirates of Silicon Valley" will always be the definitive fictional story for me...
  • Reply 94 of 106
    ipenipen Posts: 410member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post







    Playing on 2,381 screens across the U.S., "Jobs" took in an estimated $6.7 million this weekend, with Sunday totals projected. That's less than the $8 million to $9 million that distributor Open Road Films hoped it would earn, according to Box Office Mojo.



    ...



    Still, the movie has a good shot at turning a profit in theaters and through eventual DVD sales. The film had a reported production budget of $12 million, meaning "Jobs" made most of its money back in the first three days.

     



     


    What?  Production budget $12 million.  vs.  First three days: $6.7 million


    and the reporter says "Jobs" made most of its money back in the first three days.  6.7 is only 56% of 12, certainly not "most of it"


    Maybe first 3 weeks will be a lot closer to $12 million.
  • Reply 95 of 106
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member


    Ashton Kutcher is Steve Jobs.


    Faye Dunaway is Joan Crawford. 


    Enough said.

  • Reply 96 of 106


    You miss the point, as did the reporter. A movie has to gross more than twice the production budget. You forget that receipts are divided between the production company and the theater owners. So unless or until Jobs tallies over $24 million, there's nothing to discuss. That it was produced cheaply makes it very possible that, with overseas receipts, DVD and PPV, it may earn out. I expect that Apple could deliver that number if they posted the movie on iTunes.

  • Reply 97 of 106

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ex-evangelist View Post


    They missed some events that were important to Apple and barely glanced over things they should have developed more.  Like Steve being so eager to have Microsoft products that would run native on the 128K Mac that he accidentally gave Microsoft full rights to develop products using the Macintosh interface for non-Mac Microsoft products.



    You seem to have your history wrong. The agreement that gave Microsoft license to use Macintosh GUI elements in Windows was made by John Sculley in order to prevent Microsoft from discontinuing Microsoft Office for Mac.

  • Reply 98 of 106
    conrailconrail Posts: 489member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ex-evangelist View Post


     


    They missed some events that were important to Apple and barely glanced over things they should have developed more.  Like Steve being so eager to have Microsoft products that would run native on the 128K Mac that he accidentally gave Microsoft full rights to develop products using the Macintosh interface for non-Mac Microsoft products.


     


     


     



     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MikeJones View Post


    You seem to have your history wrong. The agreement that gave Microsoft license to use Macintosh GUI elements in Windows was made by John Sculley in order to prevent Microsoft from discontinuing Microsoft Office for Mac.


     



     


    You really want to a bio-pic to deal with stuff like this?  

  • Reply 99 of 106
    conrail wrote: »

    You really want to a bio-pic to deal with stuff like this?  

    LOL. Drama scripts written by Slashdot readers would be a celebration of geek trivia and nothing more.
  • Reply 100 of 106
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member

    Originally Posted by ex-evangelist View Post


    They missed some events that were important to Apple and barely glanced over things they should have developed more.  Like Steve being so eager to have Microsoft products that would run native on the 128K Mac that he accidentally gave Microsoft full rights to develop products using the Macintosh interface for non-Mac Microsoft products.



     


    Well, given that this didn't happen, I wonder why you'd want to see it.





    I think they could have made a very good movie if they went from the inception of Apple and finished with the introduction of the Mac II.  That could easily be a 2 hour movie right there.



     


    It was also already done. And you really want a movie from 1975 to 1977? Talk about glacial.

Sign In or Register to comment.