Jobs (2013)

One of my all time favorites.

Absolutely the worst movie.

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

There is no much to say about this. After only 3 minutes in you realize this is going to suck! the first couple of minutes should set the tone for the movie. should tell you what to expect from the rest. Good examples for this are "Scream". The Intro with Drew Barrymore totally gets you in the mood and tells you what to except the remaining 90 minutes or so. Here the first couple ob Minutes are boring as hell. Bad Camera. Mediocre Acting and it already feels totally boring. thats exactly how the movie continues... Your best bet would be to ignore this movie and go straight to watching the 2015 Steve Jobs Movie instead

The entrepreneur is one of the incarnation of the new American Hero in movies, and it is not surprising that the people who made the Personal Computer and the Internet part of the basic fabric of our lives, and turned Silicon Valley in the center of the technological Universe are getting more and more attention from the Southern neighbors in Hollywood. Steve Jobs has his turn as one of these heroes, his premature death in 2011 made of his character an easier to deal with. Easier because he is no longer here to sue anybody, and also because his malady and than death gave an implicit tragic substance to a life of full of achievements but also of personal controversies. As I have seen in one weekend days both feature films dedicated lately to his biography I have the feeling that none of them would have been possible if Jobs had been still with us.At first sight 'Jobs' directed by Joshua Michael Stern would be the most conventional of the two biographical movies. It starts with one epic moment of success (the launching of iPod which changed forever the music industry) to go back in time to the late 60s when the young Jobs was searching his ways in life among music, India, some drugs, girls. He was different, he was thinking a creative way, but we never get a real glimpse of his technology or design insights. The script written by Matt Whiteley seems rather to emphasize his astonishing business skills, doubled by recognition of talent that can be used in other people, and a set of no-prisoners tools which guided him in his career as well in his personal life. The Steve Jobs in this 'Jobs' is almost a persona we are invited to hate.What keeps him away from the ugly negative characters space is the acting of Ashton Kutcher. I have read so many bad things about him that his performance in 'Jobs' comes as a real surprise. He succeeds not only to recover many of the physical characteristics of the character, but also gave substance and charm to many of the moments of the film, especially in the first part that deals with the early years. Do we come closer to understanding the real Steve Jobs? I do not think so, but I believe that the problem is in the script and not in the acting, which did not walk the extra mile of trying to discover and explain the motivation of the man and the secrets of his extraordinary skills. Yet, while dealing only with the external strata, the film is quite successful in my opinion in retracing the atmosphere of a time where the flower power revolution resulted not only in fabulous music but also in a wave of inventiveness which changed the world in a different place than intended.Would Steve Jobs have liked this film? I doubt it, and not only because he personally comes out as the rather jerky character in the story. He may also have said - 'I have already seen this', fired the team and go deal with the next thing. That was Steve Jobs.

It must be difficult for an actor to convincingly portray a world famous person whose death only two years before means that his image is still relatively fresh in the public consciousness. It must also be pretty tough for filmmakers to portray the life of an iconic figure in the space of two hours. I give "Jobs" (PG-13, 2:02) credit for accomplishing one of those two tasks. (In addition, there was the pressure of knowing that another version of the film was being written by the highly-esteemed Aaron Sorkin.) When it comes to portraying the legend who co-founded Apple computers, Ashton Kutcher does an excellent… Jobs. The actor uses his natural resemblance to the computer genius and adds just enough of Steve Jobs' voice, mannerisms and walk to help us (mostly) forget that we're watching Ashton Kutcher, but he doesn't overdo it by trying to do a perfect impression which could have crossed over into caricature. This film represents some of Kutcher's best work to date, but not quite award worthy.Unfortunately, the script isn't strong enough to give us the whole picture of Steve Jobs' remarkable life. As the film traces the rise, the fall, and then the beginning of the resurrection of Apple the computer brand, the focus is divided too much between the company and the man. If you know more about the life of Steve Jobs, you'll be disappointed when you realize you're not getting to see the full arc of his life. The film would have been better off calling itself "Apple", but even then, I would have found it lacking.This film reminded me of "The Social Network", but without the same level of entertainment in its storytelling. The supporting actors, including Josh Gad as Apple's other founder, Steve Wozniak, Dermot Mulroney, as initial Apple financier and eventual CEO Mike Markkula, and Matthew Modine as John Scully, Markkula's successor as CEO, show the passion that those closest to the company have for Apple, but the film is supposedly about Steve Jobs. While the script does touch on some of Jobs' personal life, it seems much more concerned with the company that he helped start. "Jobs" may give us a measure of the man, but doesn't do the best job at telling his STORY. Doing the best job I can as a reviewer (while still doing my other… jobs), I give this one a "B".

I stayed away from this movie for a long time in part because Ashton Kutcher was in it, and his past movies haven't exactly been satisfying, and Kutcher's performances in them even less so. But when I found a copy of this movie at my local library, I decided to give it a chance because I could see it for free. After watching it, I must confess I was kind of surprised by the Kutcher part of the movie - he actually isn't that bad in the role. Not fabulous, but he plays the role completely straight enough so you don't think of his goofball past roles while watching him here. But while Kutcher is okay, the script is unfortunately not. If you really want to learn in depth about Steve Jobs, you'll have to read a biography (or see the new upcoming Jobs biopic). The movie leaves a LOT out of his life. For example, in the opening of the movie, we learn he's a college dropout who seems aimless in life. Then all of a sudden, he's programming games at the Atari corporation. Huh? How did that happen? We never learn how that happened. Later in the movie, we learn that he's more or less abandoned and neglected his daughter. Then years later, out of the blue, we see he and his grown daughter together. Huh? How did they reconnect? We never learn that as well.I will admit the movie is never boring; it moves swiftly, it looks fairly slick, and has a wonderful soundtrack. But it simply doesn't go into enough detail about Jobs. In the end, I didn't know what to make of this man.