The protagonist in Steve
Jobs is seemingly as unpleasant as any individual can be for someone not in
prison. For many years he attempts to
deny paternity concerning his daughter Lisa (played at differing ages by Makenzie Moss,
Ripley Sobo and Perla Haney-Jardine) and only grudgingly pays support after
first publicly humiliating Lisa’s mother.
Steve Jobs (Michael Fassbender) fails to publicly acknowledge the debt
he owes to his early partner, Steve Wozniak (Seth Rogen), and the designers
behind the scene that make Apple Computers possible. And he is extremely defensive about any
information that may taint his professional reputation, and holds lasting
grudges against any real or imagined slights.
Yet somehow his beleaguered assistant, Joanna Hoffman (Kate Winslet)
manages to hold onto her position during three product launches including the
release of the Macintosh in 1984, the NeXTcube in 1988, and the iMac in 1998. Hoffman only does so by sacrificing her
entire personal life.
Frankly, certain movie reviews were more interesting than
the film itself – though not necessarily for the right reasons. Reviewer Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles
Times, for example, goes so far as to compare this film to a rendering of
Shakespeare’s Macbeth. Yet like the products that Steve Jobs
launches, Hollywood will replace Steve
Jobs with another biopic concerning some other technology mogul. After all, we had a film biopic about Mark
Zuckerberg just five years ago.
A.O. Scott, of the New York Times, does a better job than
Turan of summing the film up. While
calling it a “less perfect movie” than The
Social Network, Scott refers to Steve
Jobs as “a more credible character study, and it leaves behind a
fascinating residue of ambivalence.” Yet
even Scott can’t resist inflating the importance of this film. He states in his review: “The accuracy of
this portrait is not my concern. Cinematic biographies of the famous are not
documentaries. They are allegories: narrative vessels into which meanings and
morals are packed like raisins in an oatmeal cookie; modern, secular
equivalents of medieval lives of the saints; cautionary tales and beacons of
aspiration.” While accuracy may not be
his concern, it still needs to be a concern of film studios that may at some
point face a libel suit for films like this.
Both reviewers, carried away by their willingness to make a
point, speak in too great urgency about what is not a great film. Unlike the film biopics of T.E. Lawence or
George S. Patton, few movie viewers are going to want to see Steve Jobs a second time. This movie has its faults. Steve
Jobs says little that is engaging about its lead character. Also, the dialogue is almost too perfect to
be believable with each insult and cutting remark leading into a culminating
scene. The roles played by Seth Rogen and
Jeff Daniels are barely even supporting parts.
And the movie, transparently directed by Danny Boyle as a three-act play,
begins and ends in circular fashion concerning Jobs’ relationship with his
daughter.
Nevertheless, this is mostly an intelligent film
(intelligence being a relative term whenever speaking about movies). The attributes of the movie include the
acting of Fassbender, Winslet, Moss, Sobo and Haney-Jardine. Whatever else its faults, the dialogue,
written by Aaron Sorkin, generally advances the story. The seminars that Jobs leads help the
audience understand his popularity, which is much like the popularity of a cult
leader. The ending of the film, at first
seemingly to be on too much of an upbeat note, is suitably ambiguous leaving us
with neither a happy or sad ending. The
122-minute film is also a compelling critique of American success when it
wonders aloud whether it’s possible in corporate culture to be “decent and
gifted at the same time.”
November 29, 2015