Movies Old and New: Steve Jobs

One Sentence Synopsis: Set during the moments prior to three historical product launches, Steve Jobs tells the story of the titular Apple co-founder (played by Michael Fassbender), his complicated relationships, and how his brilliant yet infamous personality would lead to Apple becoming one of the most successful companies of the 21st century.

---

About month ago, as I sat down to read The New York Times, I couldn’t help but notice a strange foldout that came within this week’s paper. As I took it out and opened it up, I was shocked to find a four page, double-sided advertising spread for the upcoming Steve Jobs film. One side featured the four prominent character posters, and the other featured an extensive quoting of the film’s TIME review, along with another recognizable poster. Needless to say, I was absolutely floored by the sheer lengths Universal had taken to advertise the film in this one newspaper, let alone its efforts outside of them. Forgive me for getting the impression that this film was important, and that I should be excited for it.

To be fair, I didn’t need a newspaper to get me excited for this film, for the talent behind it was enough: a critically acclaimed director, Danny Boyle, a talented screenwriter, Aaron Sorkin, and a leading man who’s proven his mastery of character and conviction, Michael Fassbender, not to mention a supporting cast that can also hold their own, Kate Winslet, Seth Rogen, and Jeff Daniels. This kind of a cast and crew is something any film fan dreams of seeing come to life.

Thankfully, for the most part, Steve Jobs is an excellently made film, without a doubt; everything it attempts to do is, at the very least, a success, and we definitely have one of the best films of the year. However, the way I see it, I find myself stuck in the situation where I found myself wondering how the film could’ve been better in my eyes, thus keeping me from immediately calling Steve Jobs one of my favorites of the year.

My main concerns naturally come from the film’s most unconventional quality: it’s structure. Sorkin goes for an interesting three-act structure, with each act being the events preceding a different presentation given throughout Jobs’ career, each one having a huge effect on his career. I commend Sorkin for taking a vastly different approach and making it work, for this film’s patterns and visual choices practically beg to be dissected and discussed on a thematic level. 

However, for a structure that seems so out there, when translated to film, it feels quite tame in its execution; there’s no incredibly dynamic quality to the film’s movement on a cinematographic level, for it essentially plays out like any act would, only confined into a single space. This begs the question why this structure was chosen if it plays out so similarly to any film, yet keeps it locked within a space, with exceptions few and far between. Perhaps a more real-time, long-take approach would’ve given this structure more of an impact and more of a dynamic feeling, but as it stands, the structure is something that gives the film an edge, but not quite enough to be considered the preferable approach.

Besides for that personal gripe, Steve Jobs is definitely a well-crafted character study from top to bottom, and this is mostly thanks to its on-screen talent. Fassbender once again proves that he can fully immerse himself in any identity he chooses, as he absolutely nails the quick-witted, perfectionist nature of his subject down to a tee. Kate Winslet, his assistant and confidante, is fully transformed both verbally and physically, emerging as a brand new character I’ve yet to see, yet beg to see more of. 

Seth Rogen doesn’t really escape his off-screen persona, instead using his likable, “nice-guy” personality he personally has to aid the character as well. It also helps that when necessary, he can pull off dramatic weight, and rather impressively at that. Jeff Daniels is truly excellent, sporting a sharp delivery with a human emotion; his scenes with Fassbender are easily the best scenes in the film, making me believe that he is one of, if not the only supporting actor I’ve seen so far this year that strongly warrants a nomination in this year’s race.

But when it comes down to it, it’s Sorkin’s script that makes this film shine; as many will tell you, it’s a special style of dialogue that is often imitated, yet barely ever duplicated; few people write sharp, hard-hitting dialogue like Sorkin, and thankfully he has the cast that can pull of the exact pace and delivery that this banter deserves. What’s even better about the dialogue here is that it’s incredibly smart while still keeping a very organic dynamic to it. These conversations feel real, driven by what the characters themselves need to say. This balanced combination of inherency mixed with poignancy is very rare, and deserves to be appreciated, especially in a year where several film lack this quality.

Everything else, simply put, is as well done as you’d imagine: solid cinematography, an intriguing score, flashy but nevertheless colorful transitions, and a heartfelt center that never feels too mushy for its own good. 

It’s hard for me to describe it in any other way guys, Steve Jobs is a well made film through and through. Part of me wants to be slightly depressed that I can’t be more ecstatic about this film, because it’s absolutely worth a watch, and arguably one of the best films of the year. I just can’t find myself falling it love with it as much as I did with The Martian or Inside Out. It’s more of a respect rather than a love, and sadly, movies that I respect don’t usually make it on the favorites list. But the fact that I respect it is something I immediately appreciate in and of itself.

8/10 - Great

---

Rule Thirds Review

Facebook   -   Twitter   -   Website