Which Steve jobs movie did you prefer?

[username:]

I actually preferred the one with Ashton Kutcher that came out in 2013. It's more fun and more interesting! And Ashton Kutcher was more convincing and easier to watch in the role than Micheal Fassbender.

I thought the 2015 one is bleh.. Nothing happens, it didn't give me any insight into Steve Jobs. And the whole thing is telling the story of Steve jobs through dialogue. I think Aaron Sorkin went a bit over the type with his "walk and talk" style. It's cool, but not for a whole movie.

Have you seen both movies? Which did you prefer?

 

[citizenzen]

Haven't (and won't) see any of the movies.

I read the book. That is enough.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Haven't (and won't) see any of the movies.

I read the book. That is enough.

As did I, and your post, @citizenzen expresses pretty much my thoughts, too.

I imagine that at some stage in the future, when the perspective of the passage of time will allow us to see Mr Jobs as he was - a man who was both a gifted visionary and an appalling human being - rather than a demigod - it might be possible to make an intelligent and thoughtful (and well shot) movie which will be a balanced and intelligent take on the man's life.

 

[tzhu07]

I've only seen the Aaron Sorkin one, and liked it a lot. But that film spent so much time on Steve's former girlfriend and first daughter.

 

[vkd]

Sorkin one better.

 

[username:]

Sorkin one better.

Why?
[doublepost=1452009308,1452009223][/doublepost]

As did I, and your post, @citizenzen expresses pretty much my thoughts, too.

I imagine that at some stage in the future, when the perspective of the passage of time will allow us to see Mr Jobs as he was - a man who was both a gifted visionary and an appalling human being - rather than a demigod - it might be possible to make an intelligent and thoughtful (and well shot) movie which will be a balanced and intelligent take on the man's life.

Why do you say he was an appalling human being?

 

[citizenzen]

Why do you say he was an appalling human being?

From the stories I've heard, as well as his biography, Jobs comes off as real jerk. You have to be able to separate his accomplishments as an innovator and businessman from his ability to relate to and interact with people. As much as I love the products he helped produce, there is no denying that he had appalling interpersonal skills.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Why?
[doublepost=1452009308,1452009223][/doublepost]

Why do you say he was an appalling human being?

From the stories I've heard, as well as his biography, Jobs comes off as real jerk. You have to be able to separate his accomplishments as an innovator and businessman from his ability to relate to and interact with people. As much as I love the products he helped produce, there is no denying that he had appalling interpersonal skills.

Thank you, @citizenzen for expressing exactly what was in my mind so eloquently.

I try not to post in any of the threads which attempt to discuss the person or character of Mr Jobs for fear of starting an online conflict for pointing out the fact that he was an extraordinarily unpleasant human being and thereby giving offence to those who tend to regard him as something akin to a demigod.

The problem with demigods is that those who admire them tend to react exceedingly adversely to any criticism.

I agree with @citizenzen that it is important to try to separate Mr Jobs the innovator, businessman, and creator of some stunning tech products which revolutionised how technology was used and viewed and which represented a design triumph in fusing form and function to create something transformational and useful, with Mr Jobs the profoundly unpleasant human being.

 

[username:]

From the stories I've heard, as well as his biography, Jobs comes off as real jerk. You have to be able to separate his accomplishments as an innovator and businessman from his ability to relate to and interact with people. As much as I love the products he helped produce, there is no denying that he had appalling interpersonal skills.

Okay. Do you know people that knew him?
[doublepost=1452012145,1452011986][/doublepost]

Thank you, @citizenzen for expressing exactly what was in my mind so eloquently.

I try not to post in any of the threads which attempt to discuss the person or character of Mr Jobs for fear of starting an online conflict for pointing out the fact that he was an extraordinarily unpleasant human being and thereby giving offence to those who tend to regard him as something akin to a demigod.

The problem with demigods is that those who admire them tend to react exceedingly adversely to any criticism.

I agree with @citizenzen that it is important to try to separate Mr Jobs the innovator, businessman, and creator of some stunning tech products which revolutionised how technology was used and viewed and which represented a design triumph in fusing form and function to create something transformational and useful, with Mr Jobs the profoundly unpleasant human being.

Okay. Do you know people that knew him? Just curious. Also this isn't a thread about his personality but specifically about which movie you liked better.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Okay. Do you know people that knew him?

Look.

Why is it so hard to accept that it is possible to be a great innovator, or artist, but a perfectly horrible human being at the same time?

Yes, it is sad that one's idols on a human level so rarely match their accomplishments, but why not settle for admiring and applauding the impressive accomplishments - while deploring the failings of the person? Is that so difficult to do?

The other argument that is often made - that one has the right to behave like a jerk precisely because one is a genius - does not hold water with me. Genius - as an artist, sportsman, tech innovator - does not - or, ought not, confer a pass from the basic requirement of having to behave like a normal half-decent human being.

 

[username:]

Look.

Why is it so hard to accept that it is possible to be a great innovator, or artist, but a perfectly horrible human being at the same time?

Yes, it is sad that one's idols on a human level so rarely match their accomplishments, but why not settle for admiring and applauding the impressive accomplishments - while deploring the failings of the person? Is that so difficult to do?

The other argument that is often made - that one has the right to behave like a jerk precisely because one is a genius - does not hold water with me. Genius - as an artist, sportsman, tech innovator - does not - or, ought not, bestow a pass from the basic requirement of having to behave like a normal half-decent human being.

Okay I was just curious

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Okay. Do you know people that knew him?
[doublepost=1452012145,1452011986][/doublepost]

Okay. Do you know people that knew him? Just curious. Also this isn't a thread about his personality but specifically about which movie you liked better.

Well, any movie that wants to engage with an audience - even an audience comprised of technically proficient people - is going to have to have some sort of focus on the individual character of Mr Jobs.

And, to be perfectly honest, while I'll read articles about the man, and even a book or two, I have no intention of spending two hours watching an actor play a guy - some of whose whose products, yes, I like and use - whom I know to have been a jerk. Jerks on screen, tortured genius on screen, genius behaving like a jerk onscreen, I don't need it and I don't want it. Basically, it does nothing for me. If I want to know more, I'll read a book.

 

[username:]

Well, any movie that wants to engage with an audience - even an audience comprised of technically proficient people - is going to have to have some sort of focus on the individual character of Mr Jobs.

And, to be perfectly honest, while I'll read articles about the man, and even a book or two, I have no intention of spending two hours watching an actor play a guy - some of whose whose products, yes, I like and use - whom I know to have been a jerk. Jerks on screen, tortured genius on screen, genius behaving like a jerk onscreen, I don't need it and I don't want it. Basically, it does nothing for me. If I want to know more, I'll read a book.

It seems many people feel the same as nobody has replied to this thread. Which is fine, I didn't really expect many people to have seen both films.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

It seems many people feel the same as nobody has replied to this thread. Which is fine, I didn't really expect many people to have seen both films.

Well, I have been a member of this forum since 2008.

I joined because I had just 'switched' to Apple, as the parlance puts it, and wanted to find out more about Apple computers and the Apple universe.

When I joined the forum, I was struck not just by the pleasure (and joy) taken in Apple products, - which was entirely expected and welcome - but also by the - sometimes - uncritical adulation afforded The Founder, Mr Jobs, by some posters, which, to be honest, I long found somewhat unsettling.

 

[kupkakez]

I've seen both and I watched the documentary that was on CNN this past Sunday night, which actually wasn't too bad.

But, between the two movies I preferred the 2015 one.

 

[username:]

I've seen both and I watched the documentary that was on CNN this past Sunday night, which actually wasn't too bad.

But, between the two movies I preferred the 2015 one.

Why? (I should put that question in the original post)

 

[kupkakez]

Why? (I should put that question in the original post)

Well for one I do not care for Ashton Kutcher so that automatically makes the Sorkin one slightly better.

I think with the original one I just couldn't get over the fact it was Kutcher as Jobs, it was all I could see the whole time.

The other thing was I felt the Sorkin movie just felt like you were watching Steve Jobs himself, it's hard to explain. Michael Fassbender, in my opinion did a great job of portraying Jobs despite not looking anything like him. It just felt really real. If that makes sense.

 

[citizenzen]

Okay. Do you know people that knew him?

No. But I read his biography that quotes people who knew him.

 

[bigchrisfgb]

I saw them both, I actually liked both, but the Ashton Kutcher one was far better. I'm not a fan of Ashton Kutcher, this is probably the only role that I like him in, he played it so well, he really got into the role, right down to Steve's mannerisms, he even started eating the diet Steve had before Dr's advised him to stop.

Fassbender was just a biggish name role really to try and lure people in, Christian Bale was going to portray him, but quit and they quickly went to Fassbender and others. There was no real attempt to play him, I think Jeff Daniels did a better role in playing Sculley than Fassbender did playing Steve. The Sorkin film was too focused on everyone else a little, and problems in Steve's life, there was not enough character about him portrayed, however I think it's a good movie in how it does gives some people credit in Steve's life, and it also shows how Steve thought that people are shouldn't over shadow what they were doing at Apple.

 

[username:]

I saw them both, I actually liked both, but the Ashton Kutcher one was far better. I'm not a fan of Ashton Kutcher, this is probably the only role that I like him in, he played it so well, he really got into the role, right down to Steve's mannerisms, he even started eating the diet Steve had before Dr's advised him to stop.

Fassbender was just a biggish name role really to try and lure people in, Christian Bale was going to portray him, but quit and they quickly went to Fassbender and others. There was no real attempt to play him, I think Jeff Daniels did a better role in playing Sculley than Fassbender did playing Steve. The Sorkin film was too focused on everyone else a little, and problems in Steve's life, there was not enough character about him portrayed, however I think it's a good movie in how it does gives some people credit in Steve's life, and it also shows how Steve thought that people are shouldn't over shadow what they were doing at Apple.

I agree. I could not buy into Fassbender at all. It seemed like he put minimal effort into the character. And he is so short and skinny, completely unlike Steve Jobs at the time. Christian Bale would have owned it and possibly would have made the movie a lot better.

The scenes with Woz were unbelievable because I have seen woz speak publicly and he isn't the most eloquent man. He doesn't seem the type to stand up in the front of a crowd and have a yelling match like in the movie.

Also the Sorkin film was a bit dry for me.

 

[sliceoftoast]

I liked Pirates of Silicon Valley

 

[Savor]

I liked Pirates of Silicon Valley

Yup. Same here.

I think Ashton looks the closest to a young Steve Jobs but Noah Wyle's performance was more charismatic and felt more like a younger SJ would be. Noah was just far more convincing for me than any other actor who portrayed him.

 

[Spectrum Abuser]

Pirates of Silicon Valley.

 

[vkd]

Why?
[doublepost=1452009308,1452009223][/doublepost]

More actual character insight.

 

[ruck]

I liked Pirates of Silicon Valley

Same.

Kutcher is not believable as Steve Jobs. Haven't seen the Sorkin one yet.