It must be a horrible script and/or switching studios slashed the budget and salaries. And I can't stand Seth Rogan so if I do see this movie, if it gets made, it will be when it gets to Netflix.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Natalie Portman Passes on Aaron Sorkin's Steve Jobs Movie
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There's a key difference. The hobbit movies are successful and are an offshoot of a very successful Lord of the Rings trilogy. A SJ movie won't see that level of success, this is likely to be the last one, if it even hits the big screen.
Why does Sorkin need these overpaid celebrities anyways?
I mean . why does he need an actress like Natalie anyways? Does he need her to do a nude scene?
I mean . why does he need an actress like Natalie anyways? Does he need her to do a nude scene?
Because more people will watch a boring movie with super stars than a boring movie with people you've never heard of.
Ok, these guys missed the "window" a Jobs movie would have done well within. Now, only us Apple geeks would think of seeing this, and with all the bad "pre" press surrounding just the casting, some of us I think will wait until we can "freely" stream this one. I guess I'll go watch Pirates of Silicon Valley again...
If you are familiar with Sorkins work, I would't be surprised if many actors/actresses wouldn't want to take on these roles.
You know what this movie needs? It needs Rogan, Franco, ....... oh wait, no it doesn't. Let it die peacefully and move on.
What is it about this movie ?
Nothing. This is movies. This is "out of development" because they have a script and a director attached. Maybe two leads. The rest? Maybe the schedules don't work out or the actor figures out he/she can't play this part. Maybe something else comes along that is right down their alley. Maybe the schedules for the next thing they've already signed onto actually do conflict.
And this is why for every Academy Award-winning actor, probably six in ten were cast in a part that the director wanted somebody better or sexier, but they ended up at the end of game of musical chairs with a great part. This was their shot.
The amount of turn-downs by A-list actors is pretty staggering, because they love nothing more than playing a juicy dramatic role to reign in the the awards. So it really points to something being very wrong with the production.
If MR is anything like 9to5 when I was there then they're just a bunch of random people of various professions from around the world. They all write stories on their MacBook while in their underwear and get a share of the ad revenue for their stories. There are no meetings.
The readers and commenters are the worst. There was this one guy who would email me after every story about the nit-pickiest crap that literally nobody cares about. So sorry I didn't use a semicolon on line 4 instead of a comma. Whoops I guess I spelled it XBox instead of Xbox. This isn't a dissertationit's a tech blogand if I don't finish this in two seconds then Mark is gonna scoop it because he is a machine. Fun times.
What is it about this movie ?
It's been said, done and is on it's last leg of it's journey. I don't think actors/actress' are interested anymore. Sad. I was looking forward to a higher budget movie-doc.
This is how a good number of movies progress in the industry, it's a form of developmental hell (look it up). Actors sign on, some drop out, directors, sign on, some drop out. Studios change, budgets decrease, scripts get rewritten etc. A movie with this many changes is not uncommon at all. And my guess is it's being updated here relentlessly because MacRumor's editors don't have a clue about the film industry.
I actually enjoyed "Jobs" - perfect for a hungover sunday afternoon. It gave me some insight in the man and the goings on during the ups and downs of Apple and Kutchers performance was impressive.
I honestly dont feel I need another one though, regardless of who its starring.
I honestly dont feel I need another one though, regardless of who its starring.
That's really it too. It's just not that interesting of a movie idea. Everyone knows the Steve Jobs "story". And, even if you don't...who cares? It's just not that intriguing.
Yawn.
It's a common scenaristic device. It's a problem writers always struggled with when it comes to biopics. Trying to fit an 80 year long life into an 90 minute movie often leads to unsatisfactory results. So, an often used scenaristic trick is to focus on only a very short episode of a character's life, and thru that to paint a bigger picture of what this person is all about.
There are many biopics that adopt this "formula", and I guess this is what Sorkin is aiming for.
Everyone here criticizing the "three 30-minutes product launch" concept: I may be wrong and maybe Sorkin already confirmed somewhere in an interview that it will indeed SOLELY focus on this, but I am pretty damn sure that the movie will work with flashbacks to Jobs whole career span and only use these three product launches as a "framework" for the movie. Anything else, considering that this isn't an experimental indie production, but aimed to become a commercial success like "The Social Network", would be simply crazy.
Just give it up already, its not a project anyone seemingly wants to do, and other then apple fans, I don't think there's much consumer interest to see such a movie.
The one reason I'd go to see the movie is now gone, she saw the writing on the wall and smartly walked away.
The one reason I'd go to see the movie is now gone, she saw the writing on the wall and smartly walked away.
just like other than Facebook fans, there's not much consumer interest to see such a movie about Facebook .........
