Aaron Sorkin's 'Steve Jobs' flops at the box office

12346

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 124
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wvdirk View Post

     

    It's too soon to make a movie about Steve Jobs...


     

    The sooner the better. This might be the wrong movie about him, but if you wait too long, interest wains. Jobs' life was not interesting enough to make a popular modern movie without throwing in some significant fiction, and waiting for a long time just makes him less and less relevant.

  • Reply 102 of 124
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AaronJ View Post

     



    Oh, I will see it.  Whether or not in the theater, that's a different question, as I rarely get to the theater much anymore.  But frankly, I'm far more interested in pretty much anything by Sorkin and Fassbender than I am in your opinion.




    Sorkin writes fantasy - "The Social Network" was totally not true, but still an entertaining movie that I liked. I only became angry later, because seeing the movie (without any prior knowledge) had me believing that it was the real story. 

  • Reply 103 of 124
    elrothelroth Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

     

    Years ago when I first heard that Sorkin was doing the script, I made my views known on this site more than once, and I guess that the movie turned out to be pretty much how I predicted.:smokey:

     

    This is not some movie about a historical person who lived hundreds of years ago. This is about a person who passed away not that many years ago, and it's just dumb to make shit up, when the truth is far better and more interesting. Why even bother to call this movie Steve Jobs? Why not use a fictional character title for a fictional film?

     

    Many people who did know Steve Jobs well have come out and criticized this film. Besides Woz, who got paid hundreds of thousands to consult on the film, who knew Jobs well that likes this movie? The list of people who knew him well and who bash the film is far more numerous than the Woz's of the world I think.




    Woz loved the film artistically, but says it's all made up: https://screen.yahoo.com/popular/steve-wozniak-separates-fact-fiction-225820691.html

  • Reply 104 of 124
    Jobs was the Edison of our time. There will be plenty of interest in a few years when the right vehicle for his story will finally be written, imo. But the time is not yet ripe.
  • Reply 105 of 124
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,452member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by elroth View Post

     

    There's a lot more also. A very big one is that Lisa lived with Jobs and his new family while she was in high school - the movie makes a big point out of saying that Lisa and Steve didn't reconcile (or even speak) until much later. 

     


    I'm so glad you mentioned that because it was on my list to mention and somehow got missed.

    Thanks for the link to the Woz interview, too.

  • Reply 106 of 124
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post





    Some people mentioned the studio take but I doubt it is 50%. In any case the 3 weekends it's been on show garnered it $9m. It might have legs and it has yet to be shown abroad. Most importantly it will have Oscar nominations and that alone will give it a second wind early next year, to coincide with a limited re-release and the DVD, digital releases. ( Although Apple could cause problems there but I hope they don't).



    I doubt they spent $30M on advertising yet either. They just released a few trailers.

     

    At least here in Canada, somebody spent a bunch of money on prime-time advertisements on TV for it, as I've skipped past a bunch of them.  Not sure if the channels had ads from the US or Canada [as some shows are simulcast, so the US channel shows ads from the Canada feed].

  • Reply 107 of 124
    Thoroughly enjoyed the film. Top notch actors and a great script. Of course it flopped.
  • Reply 108 of 124
    john.b wrote: »
    Now ask your self how bad a writer Walter Isaacson must be to screw up a book that should have practically written itself.

    I don't buy this criticism. I've read the book twice, and I think he nailed it. Isaacson's grasp of the tech industry wasn't an issue. It was about as objective as a person could make it given the "reality distortion field." I didn't find it critical or mean-spirited as some Apple execs wait it was. It was not particularly sympathetic either. I think it is the definitive biography of Jobs. Especially since Jobs specifically asked Isaacson to write it and gave him unlimited access to his life, an unprecedented gesture of trust. Bad writers don't get that kind of distinction.
  • Reply 109 of 124
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wvdirk View Post



    Jobs was the Edison of our time. There will be plenty of interest in a few years when the right vehicle for his story will finally be written, imo. But the time is not yet ripe.

     

    I don't think you're making the comparison you think you're making. Unless you want to draw comparisons to the fight for DC power being the right solution to transmit current vs. the idea that you need fancy 1-off licensed cable technology to charge a battery.

  • Reply 110 of 124
    Originally Posted by wvdirk View Post

    Jobs was the Edison of our time.



    The Tesla. Calling him Edison is pretty mean.

  • Reply 111 of 124
    I was thinking about the impact of Edison's inventions on society. IMO, Job's had a similar impact.
  • Reply 112 of 124
    The major issue I had with the film was that Michael Fassbender neither looks or sounds like Jobs. And that makes it really hard to believe in the story.
  • Reply 113 of 124
    Are you clairvoyant enough to guess what I am currently thinking? See my reply to Tallest Skil for a hint...
  • Reply 114 of 124
    Originally Posted by wvdirk View Post

    I was thinking about the impact of Edison's inventions on society. IMO, Job's had a similar impact.



    Fair enough. There’s certainly a case to be made for that.

     

    Originally Posted by wvdirk View Post

    Are you clairvoyant enough to guess what I am currently thinking?

     

    I can do this, but only in person. It terrifies people. The facial expressions are the best.

  • Reply 115 of 124
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,718member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post



    I doubt they spent $30M on advertising yet either. They just released a few trailers.

     

    There was a huge ad buy over the weekend, basically all of the college football games on Saturday and again for the pro games on Sunday.  We're talking all of the major networks:  CBS, ABC, Fox, ESPN.  Serious money was spent trying to generate traffic at the box office.

  • Reply 116 of 124
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,718member

    I just love the AI accounts with about a dozen posts over the course of a decade.

  • Reply 117 of 124
    prolineproline Posts: 188member
    nathanimal wrote: »
    I don't buy this criticism. I've read the book twice, and I think he nailed it. Isaacson's grasp of the tech industry wasn't an issue. It was about as objective as a person could make it given the "reality distortion field." I didn't find it critical or mean-spirited as some Apple execs wait it was. It was not particularly sympathetic either. I think it is the definitive biography of Jobs. Especially since Jobs specifically asked Isaacson to write it and gave him unlimited access to his life, an unprecedented gesture of trust. Bad writers don't get that kind of distinction.
    Someone who refers to NeXT as "UNIX warmed over" because that's what Bill Gates told him has no grasp of technology whatsoever. NeXT made very real contributions to object oriented programming and user interface. Isaacson squandered his time with Jobs- he wasn't able to ask any questions at all about the history of technology because he didn't know it well enough to ask an intelligent question on the subject. He spent most of his time on Jobs relationships and feelings. For a guy who spent most of his life at work that's a pretty weird way of looking at things. As an example of his incompetence, Isaacson wasn't able to get any real details about why Antennagate happened, so he made up his own assertion that it was all driven by the desire to look good. In fact, history has shown that external antennas do have better reception and they are now industry standard. The first one just wasn't perfect. The list of his tech fails goes on forever... like his "I've finally nailed it" TV thing that never happened.

    As for his lack of sympathy for Jobs, sure, you can applaud that he went out of his way to not trust his number one source. But he didn't fill that in with good scholarship- he just let people like Gates and Woz say whatever they wanted and wrote it in as if it were Gospel. Face it, the bio was garbage.
  • Reply 118 of 124
    The sooner the better. This might be the wrong movie about him, but if you wait too long, interest wains. Jobs' life was not interesting enough to make a popular modern movie without throwing in some significant fiction, and waiting for a long time just makes him less and less relevant.

    I guess only time will tell how lives will have changed due to the foundations he lay. If the impact is significant, a movie about the "historic" person may be of different interest than now. As I stated before: currently this topic appeals o lay to a very small group within the general public that will give you the look like "Steve who? Ah. Uhum. What's next, a movie about the creator of this toaster or lampshade?"
  • Reply 119 of 124
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,283member
    elroth wrote: »

    Sorkin writes fantasy - "The Social Network" was totally not true, but still an entertaining movie that I liked. I only became angry later, because seeing the movie (without any prior knowledge) had me believing that it was the real story. 

    The main theme of the movie was that Zuckerberg was love lorn but he had a gf in college. That's a huge misrepresentation.
  • Reply 120 of 124
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by John.B View Post

     

    I just love the AI accounts with about a dozen posts over the course of a decade.


    Thanks, John.  Not all of us have the time to incessantly bloviate via blog, or feel the necessity to point fingers at others to bolster our know-it-all self esteem.  

     

    I am 65, and have owned a myriad of Apple machines starting with the //e I purchased in 1983.  I have 5 macs distributed throughout my home; the oldest being a 3.06 24" iMac, the newest a 2014 MBP.  I still fire up the //e on occasion just to remind myself how far we have come from Prodos and 6502 assembler.

Sign In or Register to comment.