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.
'Steve Jobs' Disappoints in First Full Weekend With 7th-Place Box Office Showing
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The reason this movie didn't live up to expectations box office wise is that people for the most part don't go see these types of movies. They go see the slapstick comedies, most of which suck big time these days. It's that simple.
And a huge lol to all the people here who act like they knew Steve Jobs personally and know what he was really like and state 100 percent that everything in the movie is inaccurate.
And a huge lol to all the people here who act like they knew Steve Jobs personally and know what he was really like and state 100 percent that everything in the movie is inaccurate.
You're welcome.
Original Macintosh: Going down
https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=Original Macintosh
iPhone: Going up
https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=iPhone
Enjoy.
Case closed.
Goodbye.
Last edited:
Nope, they paid for access to PARC and hired away a bunch of their engineers:
Apple engineers visited the PARC facilities (Apple secured the rights for the visit by compensating Xerox with a pre-IPO purchase of Apple stock) and a number of PARC employees subsequently moved to Apple to work on the Lisa and Macintosh GUI. However, the Apple work extended PARC's considerably, adding manipulatable icons, and drag&drop manipulation of objects in the file system (see Macintosh Finder) for example.
That's how it's done. Apple's doing the same thing again by hiring automotive engineers from Tesla to work on the new iCar.
It isn't surprising that this is doing poorly at the box office. It may well be a great film. It is probably the best Steve Jobs film to date, and that is the problem.
This is, I think, the fifth film about Jobs. The fourth film in four years.
Pirates of Silicon Valley - 1999 (I know it is also about Bill Gates but it does cover the Steve Jobs story)
Billion Dollar Hippy - 2011
iSteve - 2013 (Yes, it is a parody, I know)
Jobs - 2013
Steve Jobs - 2015
Surely, this was always going to be overkill for all but the most diehard fans?
This is, I think, the fifth film about Jobs. The fourth film in four years.
Pirates of Silicon Valley - 1999 (I know it is also about Bill Gates but it does cover the Steve Jobs story)
Billion Dollar Hippy - 2011
iSteve - 2013 (Yes, it is a parody, I know)
Jobs - 2013
Steve Jobs - 2015
Surely, this was always going to be overkill for all but the most diehard fans?
What's that to do with "fascination"?
And he was a complete nightmare to work with/for..
Villan - Bill Gates, supports charities, gives billion in aide and good causes and copies from others.
Hero - Jobs, treats people like crap, disowns his daughter and copies from others
And he was a complete nightmare to work with/for..
Villan - Bill Gates, supports charities, gives billion in aide and good causes and copies from others.
Hero - Jobs, treats people like crap, disowns his daughter and copies from others
How can you say that Steve wasn't a nice man when he was even concerned about the feelings of our friends in the plant world?:
Jobs also spent some time as a fruitarian, a subset of veganism that means eating only fruits, nuts, seeds, vegetables and grains -- absolutely no animal products. "Basically, the reproductive parts of plants that can be consumed without doing any harm to the plant itself,"
As for Steve standing on the shoulders of others, what genius hasn't?! That quote is more than 300 years old and paraphrases Isaac Newton's "If I have seen further it is by standing on the sholders of Giants". If even Isaac Newton can't claim exclusive rights to his creations, nobody can, and so it's not a stinging criticism of Jobs.
Steve Jobs was that rarest of things: The Indispensable Man. With Steve, Apple revolutionized computing. Without him, Apple foundered. When Steve returned, Apple revolutionized the Music and Communications industries.
Fascinating man.
I'm just going to wait for the fourth one: "Steve".
But you know, I've heard the fifth release, "iJobs" will really conquer.
The reason this film failed is because: (A) People are tired of hearing about Steve Jobs movies that center on him yelling at his coworkers and disowning his daughter. We've seen enough of that stuff. I'm not paying to see it again.
(B) This film didn't even show the most important aspect of Jobs: his time at NeXT.
The defining timeline of Jobs' career was not at all attributed by his generation of 'iCanDoIt" products in the wake of his reentry as Apple's CEO in 1997 but rather, the 11 years prior that he spent with NeXT. The work performed with NeXT was so industry leading that it lives in all our Apple devices to this day.
Almost every one of these "biopics" tends to centralize their development on his parting ways with Apple and his return like some messiah of computer science and innovation, like he spent some time within himself and we don't even get to see that time.
The truth is, what turned Jobs from a proverbial screaming infant into an industry leading conqueror was the time he spent building NeXT. That's the Jobs that most of us want to see. 20 minutes of build-up, start the film from him already being in Apple and showing how difficult he was to work with and then the shareholders meeting with his forced exit. And then focus on the real Steve Jobs. He designed a corporate climate that wasn't like "corporate" climates, compensating his employees a month in advance with health insurance that even covered their non-married partners. He changed OOP in a huge way, to a point where Apple (who tried to sue NeXT before but dismissed its suit) was even trying to COPY NeXT's OOP structure and OS system. Jobs built a platform so successful that Apple wanted it and Jobs badly enough to buy them out. The stupidest thing I hear from people is when they say Apple bought NeXT to acquire Jobs. That couldn't be any more false. Apple bought NeXT because Apple wanted NeXT and Jobs.
The stuff that made Jobs go from someone who Apple's board didn't want around to him having a product and personal leadership quality worthy of a $430 million buyout and share gift, is the stuff we want to see on film.
But you know, I've heard the fifth release, "iJobs" will really conquer.
The reason this film failed is because: (A) People are tired of hearing about Steve Jobs movies that center on him yelling at his coworkers and disowning his daughter. We've seen enough of that stuff. I'm not paying to see it again.
(B) This film didn't even show the most important aspect of Jobs: his time at NeXT.
The defining timeline of Jobs' career was not at all attributed by his generation of 'iCanDoIt" products in the wake of his reentry as Apple's CEO in 1997 but rather, the 11 years prior that he spent with NeXT. The work performed with NeXT was so industry leading that it lives in all our Apple devices to this day.
Almost every one of these "biopics" tends to centralize their development on his parting ways with Apple and his return like some messiah of computer science and innovation, like he spent some time within himself and we don't even get to see that time.
The truth is, what turned Jobs from a proverbial screaming infant into an industry leading conqueror was the time he spent building NeXT. That's the Jobs that most of us want to see. 20 minutes of build-up, start the film from him already being in Apple and showing how difficult he was to work with and then the shareholders meeting with his forced exit. And then focus on the real Steve Jobs. He designed a corporate climate that wasn't like "corporate" climates, compensating his employees a month in advance with health insurance that even covered their non-married partners. He changed OOP in a huge way, to a point where Apple (who tried to sue NeXT before but dismissed its suit) was even trying to COPY NeXT's OOP structure and OS system. Jobs built a platform so successful that Apple wanted it and Jobs badly enough to buy them out. The stupidest thing I hear from people is when they say Apple bought NeXT to acquire Jobs. That couldn't be any more false. Apple bought NeXT because Apple wanted NeXT and Jobs.
The stuff that made Jobs go from someone who Apple's board didn't want around to him having a product and personal leadership quality worthy of a $430 million buyout and share gift, is the stuff we want to see on film.
Last edited:
Lest we forget, one of the first courses of action Jobs took upon being seated as Apple's CEO in 1997 was to cut their philanthropic efforts. But charity is a very small picture of what either of these men represent to the world. While Bill Gates is certainly an honorable man, a film about a computer science industry leader shouldn't focus on their humanitarian efforts.
Pirates of Silicon Valley was a TNT TV movie - so there you go. I would have made "Steve Jobs" for Netflix or HBO.
Yeah, he cared more for food more than people or employees..
The music industry had already started been revolutionised, he simply made it cool while attempting to re-write history..
Besides the obvious flaws of factual inaccuracy and hiring a leading man who doesn't have much pull, what the movie really lacked was a significant villain (Jobs had to do double duty as hero and villain!). The movie reminds me of "Tucker", a decent enough pic but a box office bomb that didn't break even. (And "Tucker" had plenty of villains for screenwriters to work with: dirty politicians, greedy industrialists, etc., and yet they couldn't make the story compelling enough to bring in the crowds.)
MSN Headline "Jobs film Bombs"
"The new big-budget movie about Apple founder Steve Jobs has tanked in its opening weekend. Starring Michael Fassbender and directed by Danny Boyle, Steve Jobs had been expected to triumph at the box office and go on to clean up during awards season.
But it only made $7.3m on its first weekend of release, well below the projected forecast of $19m. In fact, it only did marginally better than Jobs, 2013's universally derided biopic starring Ashton Kutcher, which made $6.7m in its first weekend.
It's proof that big-name celebrities, talented directors and huge budgets don't guarantee a hit. Check out some of Hollywood's biggest flops..."
"The new big-budget movie about Apple founder Steve Jobs has tanked in its opening weekend. Starring Michael Fassbender and directed by Danny Boyle, Steve Jobs had been expected to triumph at the box office and go on to clean up during awards season.
But it only made $7.3m on its first weekend of release, well below the projected forecast of $19m. In fact, it only did marginally better than Jobs, 2013's universally derided biopic starring Ashton Kutcher, which made $6.7m in its first weekend.
It's proof that big-name celebrities, talented directors and huge budgets don't guarantee a hit. Check out some of Hollywood's biggest flops..."
If Steve cared so little about people, why is it so many of them followed when he got booted out of Apple? Giving up secure jobs (ha!) to take a chance on his success.
Also, if he didn't care about people, surely he wouldn't have been able to motivate them to do their best work as he is so often remembered for doing.
As for revolutionizing the music industry, I'll let Billboard explain:
Seven Ways iTunes Changed the Music Industry
1. iTunes created the first legitimate digital music store that competed effectively with piracy.
2. iTunes + iPod turned digital music into a fashion statement.
3. Digital music became ubiquitous through the combination of iPods and iTunes.
4. iTunes leveled the playing field for independent labels and artists.
5. The 99-cent download became a standard price.
6. The economics of the single rose in importance.
7. Labels got paid faster – much faster.
1. iTunes created the first legitimate digital music store that competed effectively with piracy.
2. iTunes + iPod turned digital music into a fashion statement.
3. Digital music became ubiquitous through the combination of iPods and iTunes.
4. iTunes leveled the playing field for independent labels and artists.
5. The 99-cent download became a standard price.
6. The economics of the single rose in importance.
7. Labels got paid faster – much faster.
You are quoting iTunes, but you said "he revolutionised music industry"..
I would say Napster did that long before he even thought about it. iTunes was a program by soundjam, Apple copied the Rio in terms of the wheel and controller that was to become iconic for the iPod and which made it easy to use..
The only thing Apple did was legalise the consumption and shoe-horned it into a music player called iTunes - that was the turing point, so his real and only genius was the consumption model, not technology. That said, it was something the studios have been wanting and looking for for a while,
You can have the best idea in the world, but the only ones that succeed are the ones that happen at the right time.
In terms of people, most people within apple didn't like him or his methods. Even his closet friend like Woz hated the way he was.
No doubt you or others will say that's part of being a genius - Hmmmm.
How many genius would have tech support guys knock on the door of his suite and if he answer run off because they knew how overbearing he would be if he was home. Or the employees that would not get in the lift if he was in it, or walk the other way if he was coming down the corridor. He was not a nice person.. Thats black and white.
I would say Napster did that long before he even thought about it. iTunes was a program by soundjam, Apple copied the Rio in terms of the wheel and controller that was to become iconic for the iPod and which made it easy to use..
The only thing Apple did was legalise the consumption and shoe-horned it into a music player called iTunes - that was the turing point, so his real and only genius was the consumption model, not technology. That said, it was something the studios have been wanting and looking for for a while,
You can have the best idea in the world, but the only ones that succeed are the ones that happen at the right time.
In terms of people, most people within apple didn't like him or his methods. Even his closet friend like Woz hated the way he was.
No doubt you or others will say that's part of being a genius - Hmmmm.
How many genius would have tech support guys knock on the door of his suite and if he answer run off because they knew how overbearing he would be if he was home. Or the employees that would not get in the lift if he was in it, or walk the other way if he was coming down the corridor. He was not a nice person.. Thats black and white.
Last edited:
It's only a few paragraphs above, how could you misquote me?! I said "Apple revolutionized..."
Napster changed the music industry by making downloading high quality music practical. Which led to rampant piracy.
That's a revolution, but going in a negative direction.
Let me give another, more broad-reaching example of Apple's huge impact on the music industry:
4 Ways Steve Jobs and Apple Changed the Music Industry
1. Musical Consumption Patterns
It’s hard to imagine life without the iPod today. Although it wasn’t the first portable MP3 player released, the iPod extracted the best elements from its early competitors, and morphed them into a product that defined portable technology and changed the way listeners experience music.
2. Accessibility of Recording and Production Tools
To put it simply, Apple leveled the playing field. The barrier between writing songs, recording and production lessened with the advent of affordable, easy-to-use software programs like Logic and GarageBand. The former became an industry standard for professional audio engineers, while the latter offered an entry into the recording and production world for amateurs. As these programs became available, the lines blurred between professional recording artists and bedroom musicians.
3. Online Retail and Distribution Models
While many of Steve Jobs and Apple’s services revolutionized the music industry over the past decade, few have made as profound an impact as now eight-year-old iTunes.
In 2003, Apple launched iTunes and sold single MP3s for $0.99 each. From that point forward, Apple grew the platform into a widely successful and profitable effort, eventually becoming the number one music retailer in the United States.
iTunes stood out among the early online music retailers and has continued to serve as a model for all other Internet media distributors. By being the first online distributor to secure deals with all four major corporate record labels (Universal, Sony, Warner Music Group and EMI), iTunes effectively legitimized digital music sales following the proliferation of illegal sharing sites like Napster.
4. Live Electronic Performance Becomes Reliable
Before Apple, reliable processing for live electronics was a crapshoot. Granted, PCs have long been used to process effects, sample instrumentation and help electronic artists perform their music live. However, Apple computers like the PowerBook and MacBook became staples at shows, garnering a reputation for their reliability.
1. Musical Consumption Patterns
It’s hard to imagine life without the iPod today. Although it wasn’t the first portable MP3 player released, the iPod extracted the best elements from its early competitors, and morphed them into a product that defined portable technology and changed the way listeners experience music.
2. Accessibility of Recording and Production Tools
To put it simply, Apple leveled the playing field. The barrier between writing songs, recording and production lessened with the advent of affordable, easy-to-use software programs like Logic and GarageBand. The former became an industry standard for professional audio engineers, while the latter offered an entry into the recording and production world for amateurs. As these programs became available, the lines blurred between professional recording artists and bedroom musicians.
3. Online Retail and Distribution Models
While many of Steve Jobs and Apple’s services revolutionized the music industry over the past decade, few have made as profound an impact as now eight-year-old iTunes.
In 2003, Apple launched iTunes and sold single MP3s for $0.99 each. From that point forward, Apple grew the platform into a widely successful and profitable effort, eventually becoming the number one music retailer in the United States.
iTunes stood out among the early online music retailers and has continued to serve as a model for all other Internet media distributors. By being the first online distributor to secure deals with all four major corporate record labels (Universal, Sony, Warner Music Group and EMI), iTunes effectively legitimized digital music sales following the proliferation of illegal sharing sites like Napster.
4. Live Electronic Performance Becomes Reliable
Before Apple, reliable processing for live electronics was a crapshoot. Granted, PCs have long been used to process effects, sample instrumentation and help electronic artists perform their music live. However, Apple computers like the PowerBook and MacBook became staples at shows, garnering a reputation for their reliability.
You'll need to back that claim up with a source or two, because none of the Rios I've seen had anything like the iPod's rotating wheel.
Who likes to give the boss bad news? Anybody? Helloooooo!
All the examples you mention say less about whether Jobs was a grouch, and much more about employees who weren't getting the job done to Steve's satisfaction, and thus wanted to avoid him.
I dont get where you are going, you agree the revolution was napster but then follow it up with diatribe about how apple did it. They copied!!! Even amongst hard core apple fans iTunes is lambasted as the worst thing ever.
Sept 1998? see the middle!!
or the later ones...
Or the B&O’s Beosound from the year before the iPod release - wow, that looks erm.... kinda like a??
Hell i can't be bothered to paste the images, so take a look..
http://anythingbutipod.com/2008/03/10th-anniversay-of-the-mp3-player/
Credit where credit is due, he made it legal, but that was based on the timing as i hinted at above and the musics industries desire to save itself.
I get on well with all my bosses and can sit down and express issue and opportunities, and yes i work in tech that's also based in the valley.
Sept 1998? see the middle!!
or the later ones...
Or the B&O’s Beosound from the year before the iPod release - wow, that looks erm.... kinda like a??
Hell i can't be bothered to paste the images, so take a look..
http://anythingbutipod.com/2008/03/10th-anniversay-of-the-mp3-player/
Credit where credit is due, he made it legal, but that was based on the timing as i hinted at above and the musics industries desire to save itself.
I get on well with all my bosses and can sit down and express issue and opportunities, and yes i work in tech that's also based in the valley.
I would have to agree. The first one was meh and this one wasn't looking any better no matter how much the media wanted to hype it up. The disapproval of the family and friends aside, Steve's life just wasn't that interesting to begin with. Decent man, great products, amazing company, etc etc etc, but nothing worth watching even snippets about on the big screen.