Steve Jobs

What the fuck this was great, why'd it bomb?

i think people got fed up after "jobs"

If you want to bait people into watching your boring biopic, you have to make the actor look like the person for the poster.

Apple put out that the movie was dishonest filmmaking (This actually happened). So the Applefags didn't watch it and they needed them.

It also turns out the genpop doesn't really give a fuck about him. People don't like going to watch movies about absolute cunts.

You needa 10/10 actor and director to pull it off like Leo and Scorsese did with Wolf of Wall Street.

I had this argument with my boss.

Why did it bomb? Well I'll tell you why, who was this movie for? Who was this movie made for, who was the target audience?

>We'll create a Steve Jobs movie, we'll cast Fassbender, our target demographic is... ... ?

No one, that's who.

>Youth
No one under 21 knows or cares who Steve Jobs is.

21+
>Want to see the new Steve Jobs movie?
>No, that sounds really fucking boring


>Elderly
Steve Who? Apples?

Micheal Fassbender is a 10/10 actor, and by implying Leo is 10/10 you are outed yourself as a ginormous fucking pleb.

>Steve Who? Apples?
Kek.

I agree with your point though. I liked it but only saw it much later. Anytime they only wait a few years after someone's death the suck their dick.

GET OUT

It's a great point and the alienation goes beyond that.

>minorities
Why would a black/hispanic/(asian maaaybe?) man or woman 16-80 watch this movie?

It would only appeal to hardcore Apple fanboys and as someone said i'm pretty sure Apple shit all over it

This may well be the first blockbuster movie aimed at literally no one

>>
>Micheal Fassbender is a 10/10 actor,

lol. Yeah, "Magnet man" is a 10/10 actor.

No good actor does fucking capeshit.

underrated indeed, but as long as everyone has their personal GPS device in their pocket no one cares about the origin.

itt people who didnt watch the movie say its a story about steve jobs producing computers

>say its a story about steve jobs producing computers

where?

Came out too late. Everyone had already seen 3 terrible Steve Jobs Biopics by the time this came out.

bc the only people that give a shit about steve job are drooling apple drones

I know this sounds kind of stupid, but I think the totally lack of resemblance to Jobs really hurt the movie. Especially early on, you never felt like you weren't watching Fassbender. His haircut and color are all wrong, and he just looks like 2015 ripped Fassbender. I mean, like he doesn't even have fucking black hair.

Also, people were kind of over Jobs by that point, and they probably heard the movie was basically nothing but people talking in like three different rooms for 2+ hours and were like...no thanks.

Don't disagree with my strawman.

The Newsroom is total shite, but you have to hand it to Sorkin for this film. It was really remarkable and he was a big reason why.

Do you think Stewart and McAvoy are bad as well?

I liked it more than The Social Network.

This. Fass is great, but he looks nothing like Steve Jobs, which is kind of distracting considering how well known Steve Jobs is. I know it's nitpicking and it doesn't make or break the film.

I didn't even know this existed. Sure, his books were spammed everywhere. Every bookstore had them in front, but a movie? Literally what?

Boyle also did a good job.

how does it feel having such shit taste?

I find Jobs' story and characterization more interesting than Zuckenberg's, and also I absolutely can't stand the jew faggot actor.

I ALREADY FIRED YOU

Never watched any of these Jobs movies or The Social Network, are they worth watching?

I can appreciate Steve Jobs in the sense that he was a big force in making the computing user experience more aesthetic and less autist-tier visually. Don't know much about Zuckerberg aside from an article I read a few years ago where he was committed to personally killing all of the meat that he ate, which is pretty cool.

FIRE ME AGAIN!

Can't you say this about any biopic though? This could be applied to Alan Turing or Howard Hughes, but their films were successful. Someone has an interesting life story and they decide to make a film based on it.

Not enough people actually cared about Steve Jobs.

It just seemed like many people did because of the tech press echo chamber.

How many steve jobs movies are there?

Many. He was a big man.

naomie was fucking thicc in this

should have been a sex scene

>thinks zuckerberg is a cool guy
laughing my ass off

Yeah, that's exactly why I didn't give Sorkin all the credit. Boyle was fantastic as well. Just a really good film here

Purely a victim of being too late to the party. If Amy Pascal had forked out the extra $5 million Fincher was demanding for the budget it would have been made years ago, and not years after the death of Jobs and two or three other Jobs films, with Leo starring as Jobs, who also looking nothing like Jobs and not being as talented as Fassbender is still great in his own right and a far bigger name, as well as a proven box office draw card.

Nobody will see a movie of John Harington, because nobody cares about him, knows about him, what he did, how he did it.

We got, you made it. But that doesn't mean people still care.

My personal opinion, is that people don't care because the stuff invented by anyone, or anyone on the past or future, makes life easier/more comfortable, but it is still not necessary for living. You don't actually NEED most things invented.
Other biopics works because they give people's life meaning, and purpose.

>how well known Steve Jobs is

You say this, but a lot of people I knew constantly said, "who?" when he died.

>No one under 21 knows or cares who Steve Jobs is.
Maybe with the retarded gang of people you call friends and associates. For everyone else this is definitely not true

You have to understand that the general public doesn't give a shit about who a biopic is about, they just care about the face they see.
Some people don't even know the names of actor/actresses, even the most well-known ones in the industry.

You're probably right but reading those emails it comes off like Fincher was just fucking with Sony. He wanted upwards of a $15m paycheck for making it, additional budget and complete creative control over marketing, which would have been hilarious.

I doubt he really wanted to tread on his own feet by making a new Silicon Valley biopic

it was pretty bland and the previous jobs movie basically stole the audience. few people would care to see another biopic on a man that wasn't too interesting to start with.

...

I loved it until the third act where it falls apart by playing the ending too sappy and miscasting teen lisa. having steve jobs have the painting in his pocket wasn't in the original script and was stupid as hell.

i watch the movie once in a while but i always stop at the third act. i've literally only seen it once.

He was pissed at Sony for botching the marketing/release of Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

>he wanted $15 million for making it

Are you sure? Final budget requested through Rudin in those emails was $50 million. I can't see him asking for almost 1/3rd of the budget for himself. Are you sure that wasn't what he was needing to secure Leo?

He may have been fucking with them, his experience working with Sony on GWTDT was reputedly unpleasant but I can't see him not wanting to make that script into a film.

I think it's more likely he was confident that $50 million was the floor to do it the way he saw it (guy is a noted perfectionist) and after his previous experience with Sony couldn't be assed fighting with them further over a measly $5 million and walked.

The movie was too close to reality. Everyone wants to pretend the showman side of Steve Jobs was the reality of what made Apple great. This movie shows the *real* behind the scenes reality of what made Jobs great so no one wants to see that. Most of the people in Silicon Valley still hero-worship Jobs and mold their business model around the cult of egalitarianism that he created

When was the last time this man made anything that didn't have the word "fandom" attached to it?