Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
So let me get this straight. The people that "took down Scientology" are now going after Steve Jobs?

Doesn't occur to anyone that these people aren't even making the vaguest attempt at being accurate or truthful!?!

To call any of the garbage they put out a "Documentary" is a complete and utter fallacy!

They are as accurate as Reality TV is truthful.


Their entire goal is to make a "Shocking" and "entertaining" film and are as real as Donald Trump's campaign.

The sad and most unfortunate part is that people watch any of their "works" and really believe it.

No one will ever "waste" their time seeing who Steve Jobs really was. Just as no one looks to see what Scientology is about. "I saw the "documentary" on it and now I know!"

The saddest invention offered this society is TV and the Writers, Directors, and Producers that claim to be telling truths and lie!

Guess many who actually want to know about the real Steve Jobs never will. Because "You can always believe what's shown on TV!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: thomasfrdavis
So for anyone keeping track of the various Steve Jobs books and films since his passing, here's a recap:

Movies
  • Jobs starring Ashton Kutcher (2013)
  • iSteve parody starring Justin Long (2013)
  • Steve Jobs: The Man in the Machine (September 2015)
  • Steve Jobs starring Michael Fassbender (October 2015)
Books
  • Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson (2011)
  • Becoming Steve Jobs (2015)
Full list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artistic_depictions_of_Steve_Jobs
 
Can make way more money and create way more hype by bashing Apple and Jobs. Either way, I didn't think it was that mean.
 
Cue is a prime example of someone who works while having their hand be held through everything. So when something is released that he doesn't like he spins it to make it seem worse then it is. The trailer for this is all accurate, there's no actors here.. the dude just doesn't get.. ah well to bad for him.
 
As for Eddie Cue's response, the thing is, as with all people, those around you have different views about you based on their own experiences. For Eddie to come out and attack this documentary is simply blindly holding on to what his lasting impression is of Jobs. I personally liked Isaacson's book and found it neutral. Even Woz wouldn't have a full. rounded picture of Jobs as he and Jobs parted ways for several years (and having been personally burned by him). Even Job's wife would have a totally different view of the man.
 
I don't understand why him being an ******* sometimes is perceived to be a bad thing. Sometimes it takes a$$holes to get things done in this world. This man changed the world multiple times in his lifetime and he died early. After reading Isaacson's book, I became a bigger fan than I already was. Outside of screwing Kotke out of those shares, his day to day work ethic was got things done and every single person reading this article would have a different life if it wasn't for Steve's "bad attitude".
 
Anybody else want there to be a movie about Woz? I mean, yes Steve Jobs was very important to Apple, but so was Steve Wozniak.

Just a friendly reminder:

steve-jobs-vs-dennis-ritchie.jpg
 
Anybody else want there to be a movie about Woz? I mean, yes Steve Jobs was very important to Apple, but so was Steve Wozniak.

Yes, I would like to see that movie. One movie should be enough with Woz though. In fairness, Steve Jobs needed to have a Trilogy to tell his story. One as the kid in the garage to when he left Apple and started up NeXT. The second movie would be from NeXT and Pixar to returning to Apple. The third movie to cover the process of getting Apple from ruins, his health issues, to Apple's success up to his death.

The documentaries are nice but with a traditional movie there could be some creative story telling behind the scenes that documentaries don't have coverage.
 
I wonder if this will be any good or if it will just be a stereotypical Steve Jobs profile.
 
That trailer looks pretty accurate to me based on what I've read in the past. Let's face it, Cue and others on the Executive Team will likely always look at Steve through rose-colored glasses. That's only natural. To be in the position Jobs was in with the amount of influence he had, he was bound to have plenty of enemies and people he pissed off. And, like most people who have positions similar to the one he had, he didn't give a damn about those people.
I agree with you to a point. However "Becoming Steve Jobs" doesn't try to portray him "through rose colored glasses" but had plenty of negative things to say about him. I feels like a pretty honest assessment of the man.
 
As for Eddie Cue's response, the thing is, as with all people, those around you have different views about you based on their own experiences. For Eddie to come out and attack this documentary is simply blindly holding on to what his lasting impression is of Jobs. I personally liked Isaacson's book and found it neutral. Even Woz wouldn't have a full. rounded picture of Jobs as he and Jobs parted ways for several years (and having been personally burned by him). Even Job's wife would have a totally different view of the man.
Just curious if this film asked for Cue, Cook or Ive to participate. Just because some people had a good relationship with Jobs doesn't mean their perceptions or experiences aren't worthwhile. There needs to be balance. That's why I enjoyed Becoming Steve Jobs. You got the perspective of Avie Tevanian and Jon Rubinstein, who eventually Jobs just wrote out of his life, and Cook, Cue and Ive who were extremely close with Steve right up to the day he died (Ive was actually in the room with Steve's family when he died). Different perspectives to show the good and bad sides of Steve.
 
This trailer shapes the documentary as a more human and compelling story than that gross Sorkin docudrama that features a Jobs character that does nothing but rant and berate but apparently bereft of an actual story.
 
GREAT! So if his impact on computing was as significant as we know, WHY then does he not get the same recognition?

The same can be said about many involved in research that are not public figures. That's not a reason to use the death of two men to make rediculous statements, that aren't even correct, just because they happened to pass away the same month.
 
The same can be said about many involved in research that are not public figures. That's not a reason to use the death of two men to make rediculous statements, that aren't even correct, just because they happened to pass away the same month.

Dennis Ritchie's work is seen in basically every computer on the planet, almost ever. Dude gets almost ZERO coverage compared to a marketing genius like Steve Jobs. The complaint is valid. Dude deserves much more recognition.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.