Steve Jobs is not only one of
the most fascinating people of the 20th and 21st
centuries but also one of the most influential. Co-founder of Apple Inc., his
technological innovations have affected the very fabric of society. Just think
about how omnipresent iTunes, iPads, iPods and iPhones are in our lives. He was
a visionary with ambition to burn and a carefully crafted and distinctive
public persona. It would seem only natural that his life would be ripe for
cinematic treatment. Shortly after his death in 2011, Ashton Kutcher portrayed
the man in a biopic entitled Jobs
that performed modestly at the box office and was savaged by critics.
It only took a couple years
for Hollywood to try again with Steve Jobs (2015), but this time with considerable pedigree in front of and
behind the camera with Danny Boyle (Slumdog
Millionaire) directing a screenplay written by Aaron Sorkin (The Social Network) and starring Michael
Fassbender (Shame) and Kate Winslet (Revolutionary Road). The film opened
wide and failed to meet its lofty projections despite going up against weaker
movies. How could a film with that much artistic power fail to connect with
audiences? Post-mortems done after it was pulled from theaters after only two
weeks felt that the studio should have released it gradually, letting
word-of-mouth build, that Fassbender wasn’t enough of a mainstream draw, that
Jobs fatigue had set in, and that the nature of the film was difficult to
market.
The film’s structure eschews
the traditional biopic formula of a cradle to grave telling by adopting a
three-act format with each one taking place right before the launch of a key
product. The first act thrusts us immediately into crisis mode as Jobs (Fassbender)
and his team are about to launch the Apple Macintosh in 1984. He wants the
computer to say, “Hello,” but engineer Andy Hertzfeld (Michael Stuhlbarg) tells
him that it can’t be fixed in time, much to his boss’ chagrin.
The stakes couldn’t be any higher
for the fledgling company as Jobs points out that two days prior they ran an
television advertisement during the Super Bowl that more people remembered than
who won the actual game. “Look at their faces when they see what it is. They
won’t know what they’re looking at or why they like it but they’ll know they
want it.” This key line of dialogue spoken in the first act demonstrates one of
the man’s key strengths – knowing what people wanted even before they did. He
was able to do this because he was a master manipulator, both on a large scale,
and on a personal level, like how he browbeats his staff to do the seemingly
impossible.
For example, there is a scene
where Jobs chastises Hertzfeld for being unable to fix the Mac before launch:
“You didn’t have seconds you had three weeks. The universe was created in a
third of that time.” His employee responds without missing a beat, “Well, some
day you’ll have to tell us how you did it.” Jobs lays into the man and
threatens to humiliate him publicly. This scene is indicative of the kind of
scintillating dialogue that Sorkin populates Steve Jobs with and the cast delivers it with blistering intensity.
The second act takes place
four years later with Jobs launching the NeXT Computer, the crown jewel of his
new company NeXT, which he founded after being fired by Apple when the Mac
failed to sell. This act is less about the launch then it is about how Jobs was
fired from Apple. His ego was out of control and his refusal to compromise was
severely damaging the company. Through the rhythm of editing and the increasing
tempo of music on the soundtrack, the film gradually builds to a crescendo as
the hammer comes down on Jobs.
The third act takes place in
1998 as Jobs has rejoined Apple as CEO and is about to launch the iMac in what
becomes a personal and professional triumph for the man. This final segment
also attempts to humanize Jobs a bit and shed more light on his personal
relationships with co-workers and loved ones.
Michael Fassbender jumps full
on into the role as he portrays a brilliant, arrogant man that expects to get
his way, like when he tells an assistant that they must turn off the exit signs
in the room where the product launch is to take place. When she informs him
that the fire marshal will not allow this he replies, “You explained to the
fire marshal that we’re in here changing the world,” to which she tells him, “I
did. But unless we can also change the property of fire he doesn’t care.” Jobs
comes back with a very Sorkian response: “If a fire causes a stampede to the
unmarked exits it’ll have been well worth it for those who survived. For those
who don’t, less so but still pretty good.” Fassbender’s timing is on fire and
this exchange is hilarious.
The film doesn’t shy away
from Jobs’ less savory aspects, like his ugly confrontation with ex-girlfriend
Chrisann Brennan (Katherine Waterston) who claims that he is the father of her
daughter Lisa. He is cold and cruel to her and Fassbender is unafraid to go
there. Jobs’ solution with his ex is to continually throw money at her until
she goes away. While the actor doesn’t look like the real man he finds a way to
convey the essence of him in a way that Kutcher didn’t. Of course, he had much
better material to work with thanks to Sorkin’s exceptional screenplay.
Kate Winslet as Joanna
Hoffman, marketing executive for Apple, and Jobs’ confidant, matches Fassbender
beat for beat. She is the voice of reason (“Do you want to try being
reasonable, just, you know, see what it feels like?”) that keeps him in check
when his ego threatens to take over. She also acts as his therapist and his
sounding board. The actress portrays Joanna as extremely patient and
strong-willed – she has to be going up against someone like Jobs. Winslet
utilizes a nicely understated Polish accent and disappears into the role with
her customary passion. Joanna serves as the film’s anchor for she is the
constant through-line in all three acts as Jobs’ most loyal ally.
In a rare dramatic turn, Seth
Rogen portrays Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple. He pops up briefly in the
first act asking Jobs to acknowledge the people responsible for the Apple II,
the company’s best-selling product at the time. He gets much more substantial
screen-time in the second act when Woz confronts Jobs over his failings at
Apple and the problems with the NeXT Computer. He tries to appeal to their
long-time friendship and Rogen digs deep, demonstrating some terrific dramatic
chops. He also deftly handles Sorkin’s rapid-fire dialogue and the technical
computer jargon with ease.
For a film that is very
dialogue-heavy, Danny Boyle covers a lot of ground with his restless camera,
which conveys Jobs’ agile mind and his demanding nature. Finally, this
energetic filmmaker gets to do Sorkin’s trademark walk and talk scenes and
nails it. If there was ever a filmmaker born to do them it was Boyle. That
being said, he tones down his trademark hyperactive kinetic energy in favor of
a more poised approach. It is nice to see him change things up and let the
actors and their dialogue have a greater emphasis. That’s not to say Steve Jobs is boring to look at – far
from it – but he lets the actors provide the fireworks with their riveting
performances.
It is a ballsy choice not to
show the actual launches as that would be the traditional thing to do. The
launches are well-documented – what happened before is not so widely known and
ripe for dramatic interpretation. Steve
Jobs is a fascinating portrait of a complex man. In many respects, it would
make a good double bill with The Social
Network (2010), also penned by Sorkin, as both films are about distant, megalomaniacal
geniuses that made hugely influential advances in technology to feed their
gigantic egos and in the process changed the world by affecting peoples’ daily
lives.
It is easy to see why Steve Jobs wasn’t a commercial success.
It doesn’t play by traditional biopic rules and features an unlikable
protagonist. It eschews ingratiating itself for taking an unflinching look at a
genius. The film sheds light on the man who was cruel to those around him. He
was brilliant and didn’t care about what people thought of him and his
inability or unwillingness to make personal connections ultimately makes him a
tragic figure.
