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.
Universal Releases Official Full-Length Trailer for 'Steve Jobs' Movie
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yup, completely missing it and still pointlessly trying hard to go into some nonexistent direction. Good luck with that.
Why are people so obsessed with "looking the part"? An actor portrays the character, physical likeness are not that important.
Sorkin, like Tarantino, are very much dialogue driven movies, and if the actors knows their craft then you don´t care if the actor doesn´t look the part because your too lost in the dialogue.
I don´t know about you but the intro of Inglorious basterds was 20 minutes of two guys talking in a kitchen. I was on the edge of my seat at the end of that scene.
The Kutcher Jobs movie flopped because the script was horrible, and Ashton Kutcher thinks acting means saying...things..really..slow. Him having a likeness to Jobs actually made the movie worse for me, because I felt the only thing he prepared for was having Steves swag..
I am very much looking forward to "Steve Jobs", because Sorkin is a solid screenwriter and Fassbender knows his craft.
Sorkin, like Tarantino, are very much dialogue driven movies, and if the actors knows their craft then you don´t care if the actor doesn´t look the part because your too lost in the dialogue.
I don´t know about you but the intro of Inglorious basterds was 20 minutes of two guys talking in a kitchen. I was on the edge of my seat at the end of that scene.
The Kutcher Jobs movie flopped because the script was horrible, and Ashton Kutcher thinks acting means saying...things..really..slow. Him having a likeness to Jobs actually made the movie worse for me, because I felt the only thing he prepared for was having Steves swag..
I am very much looking forward to "Steve Jobs", because Sorkin is a solid screenwriter and Fassbender knows his craft.
Last edited:
Not many people here are hung up about the looks, it's the completely out of character portrayal that puts people off.
Everyone here has seen and heard Steve Jobs on stage, at Stanford and probably other occasions – Sorkin and Fassbender apparently haven't.
Yes, funny how the same recipe doesn't work across genres...
The script was arguably second rate, however Kutcher's disappearance into the role was so good it was downright spooky at times.
Just a pity they picked the wrong genre.
.."here", on Macrumours? Are you stating that as a fact? I´d find it more feasible that two renowned figures in the entertainement business, like Sorkin or Fassbender, have seen Jobs live, than the whole of a forum.
Also, didn´t Sorkin help Jobs write that commencement speech at Stanford? I´d assume Sorkin was in that crowd at Stanford, or maybe discussed a finished draft beforehand..
This week I watched all 3 seasons of 'The Newsroom' on DVD..
If anyone doubts or is not aware of Sorkin's ability to write compelling scripts, then take a watch of that show.
And 'The West Wing'.
Oh, and then watch the movie 'A Few Good Men'. He wrote that script too.
Sorkin is a genius screenwriter.
If anyone doubts or is not aware of Sorkin's ability to write compelling scripts, then take a watch of that show.
And 'The West Wing'.
Oh, and then watch the movie 'A Few Good Men'. He wrote that script too.
Sorkin is a genius screenwriter.
I like Michael Fassbender. He's a very good actor.
Have you ever seen a decent movie about JFK where the actor playing him didn't at least halfway nail the accent and his mannerisms?
Me either.
Ever see a decent movie about JFK where hair and clothing styles appeared to be chosen largely on a whim rather than with an eye toward historical accuracy?
Me either.
An actor doesn't need to look EXACTLY like the person they are portraying. But, they do need to have enough of the other attributes in common with the person they are portraying to allow an audience that is at least SOMEWHAT familiar with the character to suspend disbelief.
This trailer does not convince me that this has been accomplished with this film.
Apply the same to Woz, because I'm not feeling Seth Rogen here. At all. At least Fassbender is a good actor.
Have you ever seen a decent movie about JFK where the actor playing him didn't at least halfway nail the accent and his mannerisms?
Me either.
Ever see a decent movie about JFK where hair and clothing styles appeared to be chosen largely on a whim rather than with an eye toward historical accuracy?
Me either.
An actor doesn't need to look EXACTLY like the person they are portraying. But, they do need to have enough of the other attributes in common with the person they are portraying to allow an audience that is at least SOMEWHAT familiar with the character to suspend disbelief.
This trailer does not convince me that this has been accomplished with this film.
Apply the same to Woz, because I'm not feeling Seth Rogen here. At all. At least Fassbender is a good actor.
Excited how this scene is going to pan out. It´s only couple of frames in the trailer, but seems like somethings gon wrong, he´s cussing out a audience member or something. If anyone can pitch angry monologue it´s Sorkin. Check out the opening scene of "the newsroom"
View attachment 566304
Excited how this scene is going to pan out. It´s only couple of frames in the trailer, but seems like somethings gon wrong, he´s cussing out a audience member or something. If anyone can pitch angry monologue it´s Sorkin. Check out the opening scene of "the newsroom"
Maybe the time when the iPhone demo wasn't working because too many people in the audience were using the same internet access?
Too many of us have experienced the real events depicted in this movie (at least the parts where Jobs is onstage) so that's why not looking or acting like the real people is going to put us off. None of us saw Lincoln in real life and only know him from portraits. How would a movie about Lincoln be with an actor who looks nothing like him? It would suck. People get into an uproar when a BOOK character doesn't look in the movie like what they pictured in their heads while reading the book so it's no surprise people would have an issue with a well-known person not looking right. All Fassbender has is the right clothes and glasses. Not enough.
Yes, Sorkin knows how to write drama but everything you point to has scenes that are over-the-top compared to real life. Which is fine for fictional drama. But for an attempt to accurately portray historical events, not so much. We will have to accept that this is a dramatization of what actually happened and it's more fiction than fact. Not really what Apple fans want but may be good for all the Apple haters who WANT all their nasty myths about Jobs and Apple confirmed.
I guarantee you I would NOT be able to create motion graphics with a phone cpu. And no phone is going to have the fast storage I need. Yes, people whose jobs consist entirely of writing short text documents and some minor spreadsheet work could get away with it but they would need an external keyboard and monitor. How mobile is THAT? There are different form factors for different situations and mobile people need those in-between solutions like laptops and tablets. How is someone going to work on their slide presentation while on the plane to the meeting?
Considering how few people own a Windows phone there doesn't appear to be a market for your solution. Docking stations have been around for decades and have always been a niche product. Just don't see it happening.
I thougt the premiss of this movie is that it´s a fictional story based on real events and people. Just like"the social network" was based off a book about Zuckerberg, Sorkin claimed it was a purely fictional tale. I kind of shutter when you use the term "historical events" about the launch of consumer products, that would mean the launch of the iphone would be in line with other historical events like ww2 or the cold war. A launch of a consumer product, and events which involving tragedy-bravery and huge loss of life. I guess your correct, it just doesn´t sound right to me.
Wow, you are quite dramatic. Try to stifle your shuddering. Guess by your measure, nothing in my life constitutes "history" because it didn't involve killing anyone...yet. To people who care about this topic, the launch of pivotal Apple products DOES constitute "real" history and call us crazy but we would like to somehow experience what it was actually like to have been there.
Well, if Sorkin admitted that this movie is basically just an Apple-hater wet dream, then ok. It's all good. It's unfortunate because so many people have a hard time distinguishing between dramas and documentaries and they will think real events actually happened however Sorkin chooses to portray them. Guess he's the next Oliver Stone, lol.
Last edited:
I enjoy my Apple products. They make daily work much more efficient. But do they change lives the same way GE, Dräger, Siemens etc does? I think not.
Maybe the term "shudder" wasn´t the right choice of word. Then again im seventeen and english is not my native tongue. Maybe I do come off somewhat dramatic, I´ll blame that on teenage hormones and excitement for a new Sorkin flick. If I have offended you I appologize, that was not my intent.
Kinda like smartphones and tablets. Apple fans should be the first to know not to confuse the idea because of past implementations.
A small cradle that attaches to a larger screen, allowing your smartphone to act more as a desktop is a great idea in theory. If it's implemented smoothly enough, I could see it catching on...
Course you gotta get people to buy Windows Phones first...
Sorry, your english is very good so that's why I felt alright with correcting you. If I had known it was your second language I would have cut you some slack. So, good on you and bad on me! It was the heat of the moment.
Yes, military companies have certainly influenced all our lives but I guarantee you, as someone who had to use computers before Mac and Windows existed, Apple profoundly changed my life when the first Apple computer entered my life in 1985. More directly than any of those companies you listed. And I have to wonder what ANY computing (including whether mobile devices would even exist) would be like now if Jobs hadn't identified the potential in that GUI that Xerox management didn't feel the need to put any effort into developing further. He's the reason Microsoft found out about it and stole it from Apple to create Windows. Up until then, people muddled through with text-only computers and computations on huge mainframes. Being just 17, you have missed a TON of real computing history that has changed the world as much as any war has. You take being able to see what you are doing on a computer while you do it for granted. I don't.
Yeah, but like I said, many people still need a computer that is usable during the time when they are away from their docking station and you can't do typical "Office" work on a phone comfortably. At best, a docking solution for a laptop or tablet, which is the most common docking station situation in use, is the replacement for a traditional desktop that still offers decent mobile computing.
Commodore started designing the Amiga around the same time Apple was making their first steps with the Macintosh, and released it not long after. Apple was far from being the only company to see the appeal of the GUI, or the potential of the PC.
But that's the thing, even if a story was completely fictional ("Steve Jobs' visit at the Buran launch site in Kazakhstan", for example) it would still have to capture the personas of the actual people referenced in the title.
If the word had been "historic" you may have had reason to shudder, even though any number of people would disagree, but "historical" simply refers to actual events in the past.