No that's just paranoia
Especially since several people have already suggested someone like Ashton Kutcher - who I can't imagine a WORSE actor for the role. My post was in response to him and others people are naming because of likenesses.
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.
Sony Courting Aaron Sorkin to Write Screenplay for Steve Jobs Movie?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No that's just paranoia
Especially since several people have already suggested someone like Ashton Kutcher - who I can't imagine a WORSE actor for the role. My post was in response to him and others people are naming because of likenesses.Where's the hero worship? I don't worship Steve Jobs. But I admire what he did. He was an ******* & didn't give a frack about much. Let the world see he was flawed but brilliant. Let them see he was unkempt but created such elegance. Let the world see he hated but brought people to love a wonderful products. It might inspire more people to start innovating again & break conventions once again.
I always thought that Wyle looked to young and didn't have that intensity. He's a fine actor, but looks wise I'm not sure. I'd like to see Daniel Day Lewis in the mix. Him, Bale, and Depp immerse themselves into a role unlike any A-list actor.
Of course, I'm not sure an A-list actor is what is exactly needed, but Jobs had a lot of mannerisms and a distinctive voice that need to captured well for the character to be believable.
Have you even read the book? Jobs had praise for a lot of the early innovators. He had praise for the people of HP, Intel (at least admiration for their founders), Allan Kay, and more.
Of course, I'm not sure an A-list actor is what is exactly needed, but Jobs had a lot of mannerisms and a distinctive voice that need to captured well for the character to be believable.
Have you even read the book? Jobs had praise for a lot of the early innovators. He had praise for the people of HP, Intel (at least admiration for their founders), Allan Kay, and more.
I don't know how they'll pull this off. Steve's life story/800 pages of Issacson's book, condensed into 120 minutes? That means his early life covered in 40 minutes....the rise of Apple, Steve's fall from grace and his rebirth in 40 minutes, and the domination of Apple and death of it's leader in the last 40 minutes. Sounds like it would be pretty superficial.
Pirates of Silicone Valley made the first part of the story into a movie in itself. The Social Network covered a mere 5 years on screen. To cram 50 years of a man's life into a couple of hours seems ludicrous.
Pirates of Silicone Valley made the first part of the story into a movie in itself. The Social Network covered a mere 5 years on screen. To cram 50 years of a man's life into a couple of hours seems ludicrous.
Well these days - movies can easily be 3+ hours long. In addition - they could also split it up with the beginnings through his getting outed and part two could be his rise back to the top through his death.
I thought about a 2 parter, but I don't see Hollywood going for it. Outside of the hardcore fans, who's gonna go see 2 separate movies?
The Facebook film shows people are willing to see movies about the stories behind tech, but it was a relatively short, condensed, and highly stylized dramatization about a short period of time. A 2 part movie about a man's life is a big commitment for movie goers, especially since word will get out to those who don't know the story about what a big jerk the guy was. Non-fans will not get it.
No that's just paranoia
Absolutely, 100% correct.
I worked with Noah on "Pirates", he was intent on getting the part right and to not use any lingo incorrectly. He took the role seriously, and this was at a time when Steve Jobs was NOT considered in the same hallowed light he later attained.
A few years later I was the Art Director for the original Promo for "Punk'D"
I was given like $1,500 as a budget, basically NOTHING. I gathered a few spy camera looking things and other high tech items the director requested. When Ashton showed up, he was furious that nobody had consulted him. He thought the props were all cheesy and stupid. He behaved as any High School football star might., putting down the people who couldn't possibly stand up to him.
He was so displeased that he made the actual commercial carry a text disclaimer that the products used were NOT the real things he was using on the show. The fact is, unless you were a PI, how would anyone know that we didn't have the "Stalker 3000" spy camera or "Eavesdropper Supreme" microphone.
He could not seem to understand that nobody but him cared or could tell the difference.
After the shoot, I was wrapping up and carrying things out to my car. Typically celebrities are the first ones to leave a set. It frequently feels like mingling with people who work for a living makes them feel dirty.
Ashton had left, but only gotten as far as the parking lot. He and his buddies were hanging out in a blinged up SUV listening to Hip Hop in the parking lot. They gave me dirty looks as they banged their heads to the music. I felt like I was back in High School and the "cool kids" hated me. NOT professional.
So, having met both of these actors, I would say that Noah gave a damn, and Ashton was having fun. I saw no depth or understanding in Ashton, just a very pretty man who has had a very easy life. The roles he plays are him, not acting.
I vote for Noah, but I am biased. I would rather see the CEO of Sony play Jobs before having dimwitted Ashton do it. The man had all the depth of a rain puddle on a desert highway. Though I suppose he could do the "self centered jerk" bits properly.
They need a director that has a strong eye for detail.
Tarantino will give you the foul language, but I don't mind seeing Robert Zemeckis or Martin Scorsese. Back To The Future I/II, Forrest Gump, GoodFellas, and Casino are some of my favorite movies ever. Zemeckis knows the time period. If you watch Forrest Gump, that was from the 1950's to early 1980's. Baby boomer generation that Steve Jobs greatly represented. Scorsese simply has a great eye for detail. Great cinematography, music, and costume design. The Aviator was shot beautifully about another innovator like Howard Hughes who had even greater OCD than SJ. As long as Marty isn't using Leo as SJ. And Chris Nolan seems to be great at making anything. As long as they aren't using James Cameron or Pete Jackson, I can stomach it. Only Scorsese can I tolerate watching a movie at 3 hours as it can go by fast. Cameron and Jackson tends to drag on. Cameron is the new George Lucas for PG-13 movies while tacking another hour. And Return Of The King had like a 20 minute ending and King Kong dragged too long at the end. Not perfect for a ADD generation that SJ helped pleased like he was Santa Claus, Houdini, and Willy Wonka all rolled into one. The tone of The Social Network was great. And the Facebook story was probably highly inaccurate. Hollywood needed to dramatize things. But SJ had a very interesting life than anything Mark Zuckerberg ever had. Just quotes from the books is script-worthy enough for a movie.
Call it iSteve like what the book should have been called and the movie will make more money and awards than The Social Network. The story and screenplay shouldn't be too hard to do. It will boil down to the actual performance portraying Steve, the production values, the score, and cinematography. They need a director with an attention to detail just like Steve had and be great all-around on how movies are judged or it won't work. No weaknesses.
Tarantino will give you the foul language, but I don't mind seeing Robert Zemeckis or Martin Scorsese. Back To The Future I/II, Forrest Gump, GoodFellas, and Casino are some of my favorite movies ever. Zemeckis knows the time period. If you watch Forrest Gump, that was from the 1950's to early 1980's. Baby boomer generation that Steve Jobs greatly represented. Scorsese simply has a great eye for detail. Great cinematography, music, and costume design. The Aviator was shot beautifully about another innovator like Howard Hughes who had even greater OCD than SJ. As long as Marty isn't using Leo as SJ. And Chris Nolan seems to be great at making anything. As long as they aren't using James Cameron or Pete Jackson, I can stomach it. Only Scorsese can I tolerate watching a movie at 3 hours as it can go by fast. Cameron and Jackson tends to drag on. Cameron is the new George Lucas for PG-13 movies while tacking another hour. And Return Of The King had like a 20 minute ending and King Kong dragged too long at the end. Not perfect for a ADD generation that SJ helped pleased like he was Santa Claus, Houdini, and Willy Wonka all rolled into one. The tone of The Social Network was great. And the Facebook story was probably highly inaccurate. Hollywood needed to dramatize things. But SJ had a very interesting life than anything Mark Zuckerberg ever had. Just quotes from the books is script-worthy enough for a movie.
Call it iSteve like what the book should have been called and the movie will make more money and awards than The Social Network. The story and screenplay shouldn't be too hard to do. It will boil down to the actual performance portraying Steve, the production values, the score, and cinematography. They need a director with an attention to detail just like Steve had and be great all-around on how movies are judged or it won't work. No weaknesses.
Christian Bale would be a perfect fit for Jobs
Among others, in "The Prestige", Christian Bale played a highly ingenious preeminent magician obsessed with creating the ultimate breakthrough illusion. Quite Jobsian.
Besides, his perfectionism, passion, charisma and the infamous angry outburst are very Jobsian as well.
Among others, in "The Prestige", Christian Bale played a highly ingenious preeminent magician obsessed with creating the ultimate breakthrough illusion. Quite Jobsian.
Besides, his perfectionism, passion, charisma and the infamous angry outburst are very Jobsian as well.
I agree Christian Bale could do a nice job with modern day SJ, but what about 70s-80s Steve, looks wise? Bale isn't exactly what I'd describe as fresh faced. Not sure he could pull off 25.
While it might be great to get a "Star" to play Jobs - it's also a great opportunity to find an "unknown" - a breakout star to take on the role. Jobs is so iconic - that it might be better to not have a star who audiences already "know" because that could detract from the focus - which is Jobs. Jobs and his story are the stars of a film like this - casting someone unfamiliar with audiences could pay off very well.
Yes. What's your point?
Two completely different projects with completely different "voices"