|English subtitles Jobs||one month ago|
|English subtitles Jobs||one year ago|
|English subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Norwegian subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Spanish subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Spanish subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Chinese subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Chinese subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Chinese subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Bulgarian subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Indonesian subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Portuguese subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Italian subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Danish subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Dutch subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Malay subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Romanian subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Czech subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Finnish subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Polish subtitles Jobs||2 years ago|
|Vietnamese subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Turkish subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Hebrew subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Serbian subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Brazilian Portuguese subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Spanish subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|French subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Farsi/Persian subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Croatian subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Greek subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Indonesian subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
|Arabic subtitles Jobs||3 years ago|
A true mess of film making
3/10 Steve Jobs isn't a nice guy... he uses people like they are toilet paper... and he is a taker. It's a great set-up for a slammin' movie. Unfortunitely, this movie seems incomplete and without heart. More accurately, most of the scenes seem incomplete, disjointed and pointless. It all adds up to nothing.2 years ago
Problem #1) You don't care for Jobs and you leave the theater not knowing Jobs. There are few emotional moments in the movie - except when you want to spit on him. Fire this person unnecessarily; deny that loyal employee well-earned benefit; use your wealth to destabilize the company... it all describes someone you are glad you don't know personally or professionally.
Problem #2) The movie is paced slower than my Aunt Minnie in a walker. I've seen paint dry faster.
Problem #3) The acting... maybe I should say the affectations. Kutcher over-emphasized Jobs odd gate and stance as if it meant something. But why distract us with an antalgic back, hyper-extension of the knees, increased lordosis and anterior propulsion? It distracted from the story and took me out of the movie every time.
Problem #4) The editing was horrible. Scenes would start and finish randomly - with no emotional content. Many scenes had no relationship to the structure of the movie - taking valuable time and adding little to nothing; disjointed would be too nice of a word.
Problem #5) The strange arc of the story-line ended before it began in earnest. The writing didn't explain how the apple II was able to sustain the many, many years of subsequent failures. Do corporations really build stockholders via "image", not performance? Metaphysically, I know that untalented a-holes who use, abuse and throw people away deserve to suffer. But we didn't see suffering. We see a fabulously wealthy person, whose emotional system was M.I.A, slide through life on the efforts of others.
There is no teaching moment in this movie. There is no emotional content. There are no memorable lines or moments. This isn't a movie; it feels more like revenge, cold and pointless.
An utterly perfunctory retelling of the Apple founder's ups and downs in his early professional years that is good only for the completely ignorant
5/10 The first of what will surely be many biopics to come of one of the2 years ago
20th century's greatest innovators, 'Jobs' only draw is being first out
of the gate. Yes, if you haven't yet been acquainted with the
tumultuous early years of the Apple founder, then this perfunctory
retelling will probably be as good an introduction as any; but everyone
else who is familiar with the story will be disappointed with this
overly simplistic portrayal of a complex man whose ambition was both
his greatest gift as well as his most significant stumbling block.
Beginning in 2001 when he unveiled his masterpiece, the iPod, to
rapturous applause, Stern and his first-time feature screenwriter Matt
Whiteley rewind the clock thirty years ago to 1971 when Jobs was a
student at Reed College, Portland. An LSD trip, a journey to India and
a brief stint at Atari later, Jobs teams up with his buddy, self-taught
engineering wiz Steve Wozniak (Josh Gad), to build Apple computers in
the former's parents' Los Altos garage. Jobs had the inspired idea to
combine a typewriter with a TV, and the Apple II was born - but not
without the funding from entrepreneur and former Intel engineer Mike
Markkula (Dermot Mulroney).
To find a dramatic hook, Whiteley predictably focuses on the most
pivotal turning point in Jobs' life, as Jobs' launch of the Macintosh
computer in 1984 sparks off an internal feud with his CEO John Scully
(Matthew Modine) and the rest of the Board (including J.K. Simmons'
Arthur Rock) that leads to his ouster and the company's subsequent
decline. Of course, Jobs makes a return to the flailing company in 1996
upon then-CEO Gil Amelio's (Kevin Dunn) request, returning Apple to its
roots in the personal computer market and paving the way for its
Is there anything this dramatization adds to that true story which you
cannot glean from any text-based account? Hardly; if anything, it
merely puts a face to the disbelief, disappointment, indignation and
gratification Jobs must have felt when he was kicked out of Apple and
then presented with the golden opportunity to rebuild the company into
the vision he had for it at the onset. The storytelling is pretty
straightforward, covering the important events of his professional ups
and downs but providing little details beyond what is already public
Admittedly, to expect more would probably be a tall order, since the
man has passed away and the others who would be familiar with these
past events did not participate in the making of this film - including
the real-life Woz, who in fact has been a vocal critic of the movie.
But more disappointingly, Stern completely glosses over Jobs' personal
life and personality, both of which are essential to any
self-respecting biopic - after all, how can any biography be complete
without an insight into the person whose life story is being told?
Whiteley's episodic script is utterly superficial in this regard - and
we're not talking about Jobs' drive, determination or innovation.
Instead, Jobs' crucial relationship with Wozniak is thinly sketched,
not only because it omits how they met and their chemistry, but also
because it barely explains why Woz quit Apple dissatisfied with the
direction the company was heading and the person that Jobs had become.
Other aspects of Jobs' character are given short shrift - for instance,
we see Jobs dumping his pregnant girlfriend Chris-Ann Brennan (Ahna
O'Reilly) and refusing to recognise his newly born daughter as his own
early on, but are given little explanation how and why he settles down
and turns into a family man later.
If the scripting is a part of the problem, then the acting is yet
another. Chiefly, while bearing more than a passing resemblance to
Jobs, Ashton Kutcher is not up to the part. To his credit, one can tell
Kutcher has put in a lot of effort into the role, emulating his
character's awkwardly hunched posture as well as to some degree his
voice and gestures; unfortunately Kutcher always looks like he is
playing the part, and never quite becoming the character he is supposed
to portray. It is an affected performance, and Kutcher's limitations as
a dramatic actor are all too apparent here. In fact, the supporting
acts steal the show, especially Mulroney's solid turn as Jobs' ally
Most of all, Stern's film rarely possesses the qualities that
characterised Jobs - it isn't bold enough to offer a balanced, or
critical even, perspective of the man (including his more unsavoury
personal aspects), nor unique enough to provide a distinctive look at
the early years of his storied career. What emerges is simply bland and
uninspired filmmaking, which in the context of Jobs' illustrious and
intricate life, is an unsatisfying tribute to a man who spent his time
being exactly the opposite.
If you want a good movie about Steve jobs watch Pirates of Silicon Valley
5/10 This Feelgood tragedy of the century isn't worth your money. Why the hell did they even make this movie in the first place!? Were there not enough documentaries and TV shows about Apple and Steve Jobs!? Did we really need a butchered version featuring Ashton Kutcher. They spent 8 and a half million dollars making a movie about a guy who already had a lot of movies already Why is Steve Jobsis portrayed here as some sort of hero? It just makes me so mad to think that they could get away with making something like this Spend your 14 dollars and get something to eat while you watch Pirates of Silicon Valley, a much better and much more accurate story of Steve Jobs and Apple's beginnings2 years ago
Kutcher is so wrong for this movie
1/10 Whoever thought the Kutcher could play Steve Jobs needs their head examined! He makes the movie so difficult to watch (where was the director for God's sake!).2 years ago
But the problems don't end there. Jobs' life is only partially portrayed, so if you only know about Jobs being at Apple--that is still pretty much all you know about him. Engineers are portrayed, as they typically are in "Hollywood" films--nerdy enough to be uncool.
Where is the story??!! Most people will be lost, there is not much continuity, and you are left at the end wondering why you came to the movie. You didn't learn anything new about Jobs, you are not sure what the point was, and yet you spent two painful hours trying to get something out of this film.
It's a shame this movie was so awful.
"Jobs" is a biopic with a very narrow focus, and without any sense of risk or adventure.
4/10 Joshua Michael Stern's "Jobs" is like an assembly line for the best moments in the career of Steve Jobs, but seriously lacking in depth, and without much significance. It is a truly unremarkable biopic of the "master of innovation" as you could possibly imagine. "Jobs" follows an overly safe, unimaginative course that clocks in at a tiresome 122 minutes. The storytelling is painfully straightforward, covering only the principal events of his professional trials and tribulations, and providing little else beyond what is already public knowledge.2 years ago
Developing his imagination for computer programming at Atari, Steve Jobs (Ashton Kutcher) brings in his friend Steve Wozniak (Josh Gad) to help with the hardware aspect, forming a partnership that would soon lead to the founding and development of Apple Computers, a force within the industry throughout the 1980s. Steve is not prepared for the financial demands and the ruthless business mentality, and is eventually forced out of the company he began, only to return in the 1990s with a fresh game plan on how to bring Apple back into the public consciousness, and to dominate the industry once again.
"Jobs" is a biopic with a very narrow focus, and without any sense of risk or adventure. It is so intent on covering Jobs' entire corporate career, that it simply reduces his personal life to a footnote. Stern completely glosses over Jobs' personal life, which is essential to any self-respecting biopic. The entire production feels rushed and slapped together simply to benefit from being the first one out of the gate.
To his credit, Kutcher puts forth a good effort, and he undeniably looks the part of Steve Jobs. Unfortunately, Ashton always looks like he is trying too hard to play the part, and never fully becomes the character he's portraying. His limitations on the big screen prove to be a major liability. He has developed a screen persona as likable character, which has served him well with numerous TV sitcoms. Not so much with movies.
What emerges is a movie that has "a made for TV" feel, which depicts a self-absorbed creep who stabs everyone in the back to simply to get his way that goes on for two plus hours. A thoroughly unsatisfying tribute, and we are still left none the wiser as to what made "The Father of the Digital Revolution" beyond what we already know.