First Reviews of Ashton Kutcher's 'Jobs': Entertaining But Safe, "Fails to Think Different", Apple Fans Will Be Very Mixed

[Pigumon]

CNET
Quote:
Others will write of the things "jOBS" omits, gets wrong, or simply avoids. My primary disappointment was in how shallow the film felt..."

In other words, what "jOBS" omitted, got wrong, or simply avoided.

I love when people act like they're different, while their actions prove they're the same. Well done CNET.

[tekno]

Originally Posted by jlgolson

It used to be called 'jOBS' in homage to the iPod naming style. They have since changed it to 'Jobs'.

So shouldn't that have been "jObs"?

[alexgowers]

The litmus test is comparing it to pirates of silicon valley and when it finally comes the sorkin version of the last 20 years.

The title is horrible which suggests the same weird decisions have been made with the film.

Having read iWoz you can understand how the clip they showed was just balls, woz, was and is a person who cares about everyone being happy and rules his life by logic because thats what he understands best. The clip is just showing a really illogical train of thought and woz being argumentative which i'm sure he was only with illogical beliefs like religion or politics. Woz is the guy who designed computers on paper because he dreamt at making a cheap, efficient computer that everyone could use. Steve Jobs really stole woz's mantra, Woz needed no convincing at all.

[cgc]

Originally Posted by Lancer

They should have used Noah Wyle

Anyone but Ashton Kutcher...heck, Joe Pesci would have done a better job at portraying Steve Jobs then put Robert Deniro as The Woz. I'd pay to see that.

[molingrad]

Typography on that is pretty lame....

[SPUY767]

Originally Posted by jlgolson

It used to be called 'jOBS' in homage to the iPod naming style. They have since changed it to 'Jobs'.

Except, that's NOT the naming style of the iPod. That's the naming style of the iPod according to retards on the internet who call it the iPOD or iMAC.

----------

Originally Posted by ihuman:D

I think 'iJobs' would've suited better myself.

Yes. It has rustled my jimmies from day 1 that the title wasn't in proper Jobsian camel-case.

[Shearwater]

Straight to DVD!

[jlgolson]

Originally Posted by SPUY767

Except, that's NOT the naming style of the iPod. That's the naming style of the iPod according to retards on the internet who call it the iPOD or iMAC

Which is why the changed it. Relax.

[sbrhwkp3]

Haste makes waste.

[simplemind]

Ashton Kutcher is a terrible actor (in my opinion)

Could be surprised, but I doubt it.

[Bubba Satori]

Originally Posted by Shearwater

Straight to DVD!

Straight to SNL skit.

[1Alec1]

Originally Posted by Aidan5806

*facepalm* DID YOU NOT READ THE ARTICLE A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO.

Here I'll help you out.

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/01/24/...as-steve-jobs/

Now will you cool it with the ignorant comments.

Yes, it says that it is an homage to the "i" naming scheme of Apple. I don't care what their intention was because they failed. Good thing they changed the name.

[SockRolid]

"Bad movies show people talking.
Good movies show people thinking."
- old Hollywood saying

Ashton Kutcher really does talk a lot, doesn't he?

[xionxiox]

Originally Posted by BillyBobBongo

The correct homage would have been 'jobs', all lower case, since he always signed his name that way.

No. jOBS is perfect, because everyone is talking about it.

[Moopy Sac]

Originally Posted by Lark.Landon

I really don't trust critics any more. I'd prefer to see the film and make my own judgement.

I ignored the critics and saw Movie 43. Best (and funniest!) movie I've seen in ages. So I agree with your policy.

[See Flat]

Originally Posted by jlgolson

It used to be called 'jOBS' in homage to the iPod naming style. They have since changed it to 'Jobs'.

...and they didn't even get that right. If they wanted to be cute it should have been jObs.

[coolfactor]

Originally Posted by 1Alec1

So, someone who watched the movie: Why is it called "jOBS"??

Yah, it's a lame name, and doesn't even adhere to the proper naming convention. That's like writing iTUNES, iPOD, iPHONE, but that's not how they are written, so it shouldn't be jOBS either. The name iJobs may have worked well.

[eyebye]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/f...13-review.html

[Lark.Landon]

Originally Posted by macs4nw

Two sound policies, that I also like to stick to. Go in with an open mind and without any pre-conceived notions, and make up your own mind after. It seems some people have very high expectations from this 'fairly modest budget' film. Disappointment all but guaranteed.

Having said that, I wonder how closely it follows reality, and if there are going to be some interesting little-known facts revealed.

From what I read on Gizmodo, Wozniak is already discounting the validity of Job's as well as Wozniak's personas in the "Jobs" movie. It could have been a move to boost sales for his own book. But it's never easy to discern the truth in these kinds of situations.

That being said, I'm definitely interested in this movie. Though in the clip I saw here on MR, Ashton Kutcher's voice sounds very much like Ashton Kutcher and he tends to make me think, " Kelso! " when I hear his voice. However, it's not really his fault. It's my own association to *his* voice that is the problem. The same problem would occur if I watched Kevin from the 'Wonder Years' in a movie. ( Oh wait, I have the same type of association! Hrhr! )

----------

Originally Posted by Moopy Sac

I ignored the critics and saw Movie 43. Best (and funniest!) movie I've seen in ages. So I agree with your policy.

The same happened with "Battleship" for me. All the critics from iTunes/Rotten Tomatoes/IMDB rated it like 2.5/5 stars... heck even people that purchased and downloaded the movie rated it horribly. But when I did see it, I had a blast watching it and I have not had that much fun watching a movie in quite some time.

On the flip side, there' s a movie called, " Compliance " that was HIGHLY rated by MANY critics and I watched it...and absolutely HATED the movie. I walked away quite literally depressed and frustrated. I heavily recommend avoiding that movie.

[skellener]

Pirates of Silicon Valley trailer preview

[1Alec1]

Originally Posted by coolfactor

Yah, it's a lame name, and doesn't even adhere to the proper naming convention. That's like writing iTUNES, iPOD, iPHONE, but that's not how they are written, so it shouldn't be jOBS either. The name iJobs may have worked well.

He was called the iCEO for a while, but "i" stood for "interim".

[NightFlight]

I wouldn't even go see it if it were free.

If it isn't an accurate representation of the history of Jobs, or Apple, then what is the point of this movie? I absolute despise Ashton Kutcher, and personally feel he is a terrible actor. In the history of the world, there are far better people to make a movie after other than Steve Jobs and I like Apple products.

[powers74]

Originally Posted by FrankieTDouglas

Probably in the rush to be first, the depth of the script wasn't pushed.

'tswhat it sounds like.

[Macrolido]

The best description of the critics was "saccarine".