But this antsiness helps create an atmosphere of nervous, almost absurd suspense.
#Watch steve jobs 2015 movie movie#
Boyle’s tireless kineticism.Īt times the camera seems agitated to the point of distraction because it’s trapped in a movie that consists almost entirely of rushed conversations in enclosed spaces. The usual Sorkinian rhythms - walk and talk stand and shout quip and parry - are sped up and syncopated by Mr. The collision of their styles is fascinating and sometimes disorienting to watch. Sorkin, in contrast, are fervent maximalists, prone, respectively, to busy, breakneck visual effects and roiling torrents of verbiage. Jobs was a minimalist and a control freak, a proponent of closed systems, streamlined construction and conceptual simplicity. That should be enough.īut of course there’s more. They are all, as you might expect, really good. Mostly, though, it is a formally audacious, intellectually energized entertainment, a powerful challenge to the lazy conventions of Hollywood storytelling and a feast for connoisseurs of contemporary screen acting. even as it tries to peek behind the curtain at the gimcrack machinery of omnipotence. The movie burnishes the image of this visionary C.E.O. “Steve Jobs” is a rich and potent document of the times, an expression of both the awe that attends sophisticated new consumer goods and the unease that trails in the wake of their arrival. 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. Cinematic biographies of the famous are not documentaries.
The accuracy of this portrait is not my concern. Sorkin’s screenplay, and the film, though it takes the usual liberties with facts and characters, basically upholds the book’s account - disputed by some members of Jobs’s family and by some executives at Apple - of Jobs’s temperament, his foibles and his talent. The first of these, authorized by Jobs himself and written by Walter Isaacson, is the credited source of Mr. Since his death in 2011, the Jobs cult of personality has spawned, among other products, a prior biopic (starring Ashton Kutcher), a documentary (directed by the prolific Alex Gibney) and two prominent biographies. “ Steve Jobs,” directed by Danny Boyle from a script by Aaron Sorkin, isn’t the first such movie, of course. A cold rationalist who is certain he knows what the public wants, Jobs remains a mystery to those who know him best, and a brilliant, steely-eyed enigma at the center of the new movie that bears his name. He inspires loyalty and resentment, often from the same people. Jobs’s behavior also confirms equally deep assumptions about the ultimate virtue of ruthlessness in the capitalist economy. The fact that Jobs, the co-founder of Apple, in the course of his rise, has betrayed his friends, alienated his allies and mistreated his loved ones challenges some deeply cherished myths about the correlation between virtue and success. Jobs is not a designer, an engineer or a coder - he relies on other people to do all of that, among them his “little buddy” Woz - but he has somehow risen to the top of the computer business.
Those questions, put to Steve Jobs by his erstwhile partner Steve Wozniak in the middle of a heated argument, are both practical and rhetorical.
0 kommentar(er)
