a brick based on lies? Even Sorkin admits he made up most of the dialog. Is it any wonder that almost every single person who knew Jobs says the movie is inaccurate? The only guy who said it was okay was Woz, who got paid $200k from the movie budget
First of all this is a piece of drama, I saw it yesterday and it is fantastic. No movie ever has been made about any topic to be 100% accurate, first it is not possible to tell a story from all vantage points therefore artistic liberty steps in to give something as complex as a person's life (or parts of a person's life) a focus and shape. The movie uses a framework (three product launches) as a device to put all the players in the same immediate area and it is their interaction which tells us the background story. It is a brilliant concept but those which lack the ability to think in the abstract will be disappointed by it not being a linear story, the kind told in history books.
First of all this is a piece of drama, I saw it yesterday and it is fantastic. No movie ever has been made about any topic to be 100% accurate, first it is not possible to tell a story from all vantage points therefore artistic liberty steps in to give something as complex as a person's life (or parts of a person's life) a focus and shape. The movie uses a framework (three product launches) as a device to put all the players in the same immediate area and it is their interaction which tells us the background story. It is a brilliant concept but those which lack the ability to think in the abstract will be disappointed by it not being a linear story, the kind told in history books.
Does the movie start with a title card that says, "Very loosely based on a book written by a biographer who was lost at sea, with most material invented from whole cloth."?
It really is nice to be a fish in a small pond. I suppose they had to do it that way to try and convince the rest of the distribution system to take a chance on them. But I don't see this beleaguered film lasting too much longer in theaters.
For what it's worth, there are around 40,000 movie theatre screens in the US. So this film occupied 0.01% of them.
Info from: natoonline.org/data/us-movie-screens/
Huh? This is not the launch weekend so not sure what your getting at.
This movie will make back its money no sweat and maybe Fassbender get nominated for an Oscar.
First of all this is a piece of drama, I saw it yesterday and it is fantastic. No movie ever has been made about any topic to be 100% accurate, first it is not possible to tell a story from all vantage points therefore artistic liberty steps in to give something as complex as a person's life (or parts of a person's life) a focus and shape. The movie uses a framework (three product launches) as a device to put all the players in the same immediate area and it is their interaction which tells us the background story. It is a brilliant concept but those which lack the ability to think in the abstract will be disappointed by it not being a linear story, the kind told in history books.
It's a piece of drama, alright, a piece of dipshit propaganda written by a guy with an infantile "understanding" of his subject, who was many times a broader and deeper character than the screenwriter.
First rule of doing something biographical of a man of great accomplishment: approch your subject with all your intellect engaged, and leave your TV-derived emotional chops in your basement-level reptile brain where they belong. If you can't do that, if you can't do the man honestly, don't do it. Of course, this would require some humility and self-awareness, qualities almost extinct in Hollywood.
Does the movie start with a title card that says, "Very loosely based on a book written by a biographer who was lost at sea, with most material invented from whole cloth."?
Does Snow white open with a card saying it is loosely based of a story written down from the Grimm brothers? I doubt few people posting here have enough imagination to understand the concept of this brilliant movie, it is just to abstract for their linear thinking minds. Jobs himself would probably like it more than 90% of Appleinsider's readers. This is a very artistic movie about a dynamic man that many call visionary and few that knew him called laid back. The movie hits on Job's eccentricities, show's glimpses of how his brain worked and tries to explain why Apple could not have been created by anyone other than Jobs. One cannot make a two hour movie about any person's life especially someone like Jobs without going for the essence of him and painting a portrait that is not bound by a timeline or even specific place. One more thing, I love how so many here have panned the movie although they have not seen it. This usually happens when a movie about a religious figure is made and religious organizations have banned it or condemned it and never ever having seen it. This makes me think the mainstream press is right about the "Apple cult" after all.
Does Snow white open with a card saying it is loosely based of a story written down from the Grimm brothers? I doubt few people posting here have enough imagination to understand the concept of this brilliant movie, it is just to abstract for their linear thinking minds.
Your points are well taken. But much of the confusion comes from calling this a bio-pic, from which most people would infer "documentary" when that's not necessarily the case.
Given the release date is relatively soon after Job's death compared to many other icons, I think it's a natural tendency to assume this is a documentary. The title Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Slayer is a pretty big clue that there's some distortion of historical fact. He's been dead long enough that we don't get too excited about artistic license. None of us ever really knew Abe all that well in the first place. Steve Jobs is different. Even though we didn't know him either, we think we did.
I doubt Sorkin had an agenda to propagate hate and loathing. He had a vision and followed it. Since it's about work Steve and not family man Steve I wouldn't expect any warm, fuzzy moments. I don't know Sorkin's work well but I was a big fan of West Wing and really liked the dialog. I may see this movie eventually, but for now it's on a back burner with no heat. I'm one of those who can't yet wrap my head around this as drama/fiction, especially knowing how much was just made up. Maybe one day...
This movie I don't believe is being called a "bio picture" by its creators those words are being used by reviewers and others in the press. Jobs is the center of this film and yes it shows the interactions he had with his baby mommy, daughter Lisa and his closest associates at Apple although this is not a "chick flick" with weepy scenes although there are touching moments.
I have followed Apple since 94' buying actual printed magazines and reading early Mac centric websites many of which are long gone. The movie hits upon many things I remember but this is not a bullet list of events played out in chronological order as so many bio pics do. Instead the 3 launch events have Jobs interacting with the most important people in his life at the same time, conversations which may have happened on a street corner, in a board room or his famous garage are all condensed at these three intervals.
You will miss a great movie is miss this one. Just don't go in thinking you know how this story should be told but let the actors, writer and director show you how Apple could have only been created by someone so unique to the tech world and how we have all benefitted from his incessant genius.
Comments
a brick based on lies? Even Sorkin admits he made up most of the dialog. Is it any wonder that almost every single person who knew Jobs says the movie is inaccurate? The only guy who said it was okay was Woz, who got paid $200k from the movie budget
First of all this is a piece of drama, I saw it yesterday and it is fantastic. No movie ever has been made about any topic to be 100% accurate, first it is not possible to tell a story from all vantage points therefore artistic liberty steps in to give something as complex as a person's life (or parts of a person's life) a focus and shape. The movie uses a framework (three product launches) as a device to put all the players in the same immediate area and it is their interaction which tells us the background story. It is a brilliant concept but those which lack the ability to think in the abstract will be disappointed by it not being a linear story, the kind told in history books.
Does the movie start with a title card that says, "Very loosely based on a book written by a biographer who was lost at sea, with most material invented from whole cloth."?
It really is nice to be a fish in a small pond. I suppose they had to do it that way to try and convince the rest of the distribution system to take a chance on them. But I don't see this beleaguered film lasting too much longer in theaters.
For what it's worth, there are around 40,000 movie theatre screens in the US. So this film occupied 0.01% of them.
Info from: natoonline.org/data/us-movie-screens/
Huh? This is not the launch weekend so not sure what your getting at.
This movie will make back its money no sweat and maybe Fassbender get nominated for an Oscar.
It's a piece of drama, alright, a piece of dipshit propaganda written by a guy with an infantile "understanding" of his subject, who was many times a broader and deeper character than the screenwriter.
First rule of doing something biographical of a man of great accomplishment: approch your subject with all your intellect engaged, and leave your TV-derived emotional chops in your basement-level reptile brain where they belong. If you can't do that, if you can't do the man honestly, don't do it. Of course, this would require some humility and self-awareness, qualities almost extinct in Hollywood.
Does the movie start with a title card that says, "Very loosely based on a book written by a biographer who was lost at sea, with most material invented from whole cloth."?
Does Snow white open with a card saying it is loosely based of a story written down from the Grimm brothers? I doubt few people posting here have enough imagination to understand the concept of this brilliant movie, it is just to abstract for their linear thinking minds. Jobs himself would probably like it more than 90% of Appleinsider's readers. This is a very artistic movie about a dynamic man that many call visionary and few that knew him called laid back. The movie hits on Job's eccentricities, show's glimpses of how his brain worked and tries to explain why Apple could not have been created by anyone other than Jobs. One cannot make a two hour movie about any person's life especially someone like Jobs without going for the essence of him and painting a portrait that is not bound by a timeline or even specific place. One more thing, I love how so many here have panned the movie although they have not seen it. This usually happens when a movie about a religious figure is made and religious organizations have banned it or condemned it and never ever having seen it. This makes me think the mainstream press is right about the "Apple cult" after all.
Does Snow white open with a card saying it is loosely based of a story written down from the Grimm brothers? I doubt few people posting here have enough imagination to understand the concept of this brilliant movie, it is just to abstract for their linear thinking minds.
Your points are well taken. But much of the confusion comes from calling this a bio-pic, from which most people would infer "documentary" when that's not necessarily the case.
Given the release date is relatively soon after Job's death compared to many other icons, I think it's a natural tendency to assume this is a documentary. The title Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Slayer is a pretty big clue that there's some distortion of historical fact. He's been dead long enough that we don't get too excited about artistic license. None of us ever really knew Abe all that well in the first place. Steve Jobs is different. Even though we didn't know him either, we think we did.
I doubt Sorkin had an agenda to propagate hate and loathing. He had a vision and followed it. Since it's about work Steve and not family man Steve I wouldn't expect any warm, fuzzy moments. I don't know Sorkin's work well but I was a big fan of West Wing and really liked the dialog. I may see this movie eventually, but for now it's on a back burner with no heat. I'm one of those who can't yet wrap my head around this as drama/fiction, especially knowing how much was just made up. Maybe one day...
This movie I don't believe is being called a "bio picture" by its creators those words are being used by reviewers and others in the press. Jobs is the center of this film and yes it shows the interactions he had with his baby mommy, daughter Lisa and his closest associates at Apple although this is not a "chick flick" with weepy scenes although there are touching moments.
I have followed Apple since 94' buying actual printed magazines and reading early Mac centric websites many of which are long gone. The movie hits upon many things I remember but this is not a bullet list of events played out in chronological order as so many bio pics do. Instead the 3 launch events have Jobs interacting with the most important people in his life at the same time, conversations which may have happened on a street corner, in a board room or his famous garage are all condensed at these three intervals.
You will miss a great movie is miss this one. Just don't go in thinking you know how this story should be told but let the actors, writer and director show you how Apple could have only been created by someone so unique to the tech world and how we have all benefitted from his incessant genius.