Review: Steve Jobs

Moments in the life of Apple founder Steve Jobs (Michael Fassbender), primarily focussing on product launches, as well as the occasional flashback. Katherine Waterston is ex-girlfriend Chrisann, whose daughter Lisa (played at various stages by Makenzie Moss, Ripley Sobo and Perla Haney-Jardine) Jobs refuses to acknowledge is his. Kate Winslet plays Jobs’ long-suffering PR rep Joanna. Seth Rogen plays Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, whose pleas to have Jobs publicly recognise the team behind the Apple II continually go ignored (Jobs doesn’t see he point in ‘going backward’). Jeff Daniels plays soft drink mogul turned Apple CEO John Sculley.

I haven’t seen “Jobs”, but at least that film managed to get someone who looks like the late Steve Jobs in Ashton Kutcher. Some of the photo comparisons are uncanny, especially the younger Jobs. Whether it’s any better than this 2015 walk-and-talker from director Danny Boyle (“Sunshine”, “Slumdog Millionaire”) and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin (“The Social Network”), I cannot say. What I can say, though, is that the walk-and-talk trademark of Sorkin’s “The West Wing” does this film absolutely no favours. I liked “The West Wing”, but here I found it incredibly irritating. In fact, it bothered me a whole lot more than the fact that Sorkin pretty much depicts Jobs as an older Mark Zuckerberg. There might be a little too much similarity with the superior “The Social Network” for some people. Me, I was more distracted by all of the walking and talking to the point where I found myself confused as to whether people were coming or going, and wondering where they were coming from and going to. Boyle and Sorkin’s other tactic of having two conversations from two different time periods taking place at once on camera is also irritating.

Basically, this is a film in which the director and screenwriter refuse to move the fuck out of the way. And that’s a shame, because although Michael Fassbender doesn’t look a goddamn thing like Jobs (slightly more like him in flashbacks to when he was young I guess), he does still deliver a solid performance in the role, which may be more important. Fassbender nails the temper and single focus of Jobs as much as any of us who never met him think of him. He was said by some to be kind of an arsehole, and one of the more interesting things about the film is that it does indeed paint him that way. I know it’s easier when the subject is dead, but I was still taken aback a little. Having said that, even if the film depicts Jobs as an arsehole and mostly neglectful/in denial parent, there’s enough here to suggest the girl’s mother might be a tad toxic herself. Also, as important as guys like Steve Wozniak are to the company, being the boss and overseeing everything comes with its own demands, risks, and pressures. So you can see Jobs’ POV, even if you don’t actually agree with his treatment of Woz and others in the film. He’s a singularly focussed jerk, but if things fail, it’s on him. Yes, it does feel like Sorkin going over territory similar to “The Social Network” at times, but it rings true to me nonetheless. So even if he isn’t quite right, Fassbender and the filmmakers get it right there. Meanwhile, Seth Rogen doesn’t look or sound much like the real Steve Wozniak. However, playing him as a cuddlier Seth Rogen actually works to be honest. Everyone likes Woz. Even I do. I fucking hate the Apple II with every fibre of my being. It’s the only Apple product I’ve ever used regularly and I don’t intend on partaking in their products in the future (I’m a PC guy turned non-Apple laptop user), but I genuinely like Woz. Rogen isn’t as likeable as the real Woz, but he’s good enough at faking it here for a couple of hours. Cuddly, mild-mannered Rogen might just be the best Seth Rogen, and he proves a better dramatic actor here than Jonah Hill ever has, if you ask me. If what transpires here between Woz and Jobs is anywhere near close to the truth, Steve Wozniak is far too good of a human being and Steve Jobs, dead as he is…no, I won’t even finish that profanity-laced sentiment. I’ll leave it up to your imagination (By the way, Woz apparently prefers this film to the Ashton Kutcher one. I guess he’d be a pretty good judge, though to be fair he was also a consultant on this one).

I actually think the most impressive work in the film comes from someone whose talent seems to amaze me more with every role: Kate Winslet (Having not been a fan of her in “Titanic” beyond that one scene we’ve all re-watched over and over). It may take a minute to recognise her here as she looks very different, but Winslet shows what a helluva actress she is here. She’s immediately excellent. Roles with accents have potential to turn into Meryl Streep ‘focus on the accent at the expense of everything else’ phoniness (Though Meryl sure does get it right some of the time, too. “A Cry in the Dark” for instance). Winslet gives us a full-blooded performance and character who just happens to have a slight Eastern European accent. Her character is an Eastern European who has lived in America for a while, so it’s not as easy an accent as you’d think to pull off, but she nails it to my ears.

I know the material is somewhat dry, but the stylistic and narrative approach taken by Boyle and Sorkin here is infuriatingly distracting. The film is miscast in some respects but well-acted and a lot of the material, while dry is pretty interesting. However, the style and familiarity of the themes and characters make this one watchable at best.

Rating: C+