Reusing code makes you efficient. Reusing dialogue makes you the literary equivalent of Thomas Kinkade.I thought that successful coders strive to maximize code reuse all the time!
Reusing code makes you efficient. Reusing dialogue makes you the literary equivalent of Thomas Kinkade.I thought that successful coders strive to maximize code reuse all the time!
Haven't we already had a lame movie about Jobs?
Yes Steve Jobs turned Apple around and led the creation of some very cool consumer products. But lets get real, these products have a shelf life of a couple years, are made by exploited workers China, not upgradable, overprice, and Apple hoards its profits overseas to avoid paying taxes. At the same time Jobs, while driven, was not a very good person and by many accounts a complete *******.
Unless you load in a whole bunch of fictional content, there isn't much meat for an interesting plot.
Let the man rest in peace. Enough with these garbage movies.
Reusing code makes you efficient. Reusing dialogue makes you the literary equivalent of Thomas Kinkade.
Prople who are interested in this.Really , who cares . Slow rumor day
sounds exciting. Introduction of characters - Mac Introduction of conflict - NeXT Resolution of conflict - iPod
Focusing on three business moments and his daughter sounds like a hot mess.
sounds exciting.
Introduction of characters - Mac
Introduction of conflict - NeXT
Resolution of conflict - iPod
Sounds dull.
Im not feeling it.
How can an appropriate macro thesis be extrapolated from such a limited scope of Steve's life?
The film should really have the iPhone launch.
Based on the quotes in the story, it seems like the character of Lisa isn't so much the heroine in the actual movie, but that the person, Lisa Jobs played a major role in getting the production of the film headed in a good direction.
I was worried for a moment.
You know, for as much flak as the Ashton Kutcher version Steve's story gets here on MacRumors, I actually enjoyed the film. I own the Issacson biography and found the movie to be very entertaining.
I love Sorkin's work (especially Sports Night and The Newsroom) and hope that it will focus more on accuracy and entertainment and not too much on pithy dialogue. I am a little worried about it "Only revolving around the three events", but I bet Sorkin will pull off something just as entertaining.
What's the over/under on how many moving Steadicam shots the film uses?
You just summed it up, and it sounded as boring as ever.
The film should really have the iPhone launch.
Because the timing doesn't matter. They make good and interesting movies about people who are still alive even. There is no paticular timing that needs to be in place for something in paricular.Why do they keep trying so soon? Wait a decade or 2 for this guy to be dead. All they want to do is cash in.
It's important and all but more of a sequel to iPod essentially as that was what truly revolutionized it all for Apple and the industry really with the iPhone and iPad being important and game changing but more of evolutionary professions from that iPod revolution.I agree. I always wondered why none of these films include the iPhone launch. That's the product that most Apple fans of today are most familiar with.
I didn't say it wasn't. It just sounds boring. These major actors are pulling out for a reason, and honestly it's comedic to think it's because of the "sheer demands of the role."This is the standard storytelling format of all movies.
You just summed it up, and it sounded as boring as ever.
That' pretty much exactly it. Just because the premise focuses on one situation or in this case three doesn't mean that a whole lot of storytelling won't be involved and tied into it all creating a much bigger world with a whole lot more in it that that one singluar situation (or three).Is no one familiar with Aaron Sorkin or Danny Boyle's work??
This movie will focus on 3 product launches the way Slumdog Millionaire was focused on one episode of Who wants to be a millionaire and the way The social network was focused on a single deposition hearing.
That' pretty much exactly it. Just because the premise focuses on one situation or in this case three doesn't mean that a whole lot of storytelling won't be involved and tied into it all creating a much bigger world with a whole lot more in it that that one singluar situation (or three).
Im not feeling it.
How can an appropriate macro thesis be extrapolated from such a limited scope of Steve's life?
As long as it's interesting and people enjoy it, what's the issue again?yaaaaaaaawn...
sounds really boring. But hey! you've gotta milk and monetize Job's early age death... to death, right?
Hopefully/thankfully?... the family gets its cut...?
Because... since there's a heroine in the movie, which makes it more of a drama, or a dramatized version of reality aimed to entertain (because, Aaron Sorking) - rather than a tribute/biography movie aimed to educate - that would be only fair. Specially when some media company will make money off of it.
And in the same way Apple used Steve's image and personality as a marketing tool, I guess the family can/should benefit from it also after his death.
SO...Start preparing yourself for an over acted, over produced, Steve Jobs drama-mentary, in the vein of The Newsroom.
Ahhhh... American modern capitalism at its finest !!!
Cheers...?