Aaron Sorkin and Danny Boyle have created one of the best possible films you could make about the late Apple founder - though therein lies the problem. Emerging from a troubled, Sony hack-shaded production history that, at one point, had such talents as David Fincher and Leonardo DiCaprio attached, the result still feels somewhat together, with a typically thorough and compelling performance from Michael Fassbender and an unconventional story structure that places a worthy emphasis on the character development.
One can't help that the project has survived this long based on the strength of its screenplay. Aaron Sorkin is the only screenwriter I've seen whose name on the poster is as large as that of the director and star, and for the fanboys it's suitably Sorkin-esque. Words are his weapons, his scenes of action and emotion rolled into one multilayered entity, and his verbal showdowns here are as good as we've come to expect. Jobs' final conversation with Steve Wozniak, for instance, is a spine-tingling culmination of their frictional relationship, even if it never actually happened. Some might be disappointed by the fact that there's a relative lack of humour compared to his other works: though, of course, Jobs was made infamous by his ill-temper and ruthlessness in the workplace, one that won Joanna Hoffman (Kate Winslet) an in-joke award from Apple employees surrounding her ability to stand up to him.
If I sound lukewarm in this assessment, it's simply that I just don't find the story of Steve Jobs that interesting. Yes, he brought forward a future that Arthur C. Clarke predicted (as we see in a clip placed at the beginning of the film), and yes, he helped make some damn good phones and computers. But I find the arguments about his abilities as an "artist" rather unconvincing. Did he "lead the orchestra", or was he simply a CEO who helped cultivate his own cult of personality? His political manoeuvrings were clever, yes, and the relationship we see with his daughter and mother is somewhat interesting: but at the end of the day, do we care about him enough to overlook his flaws, to get involved in his story? I don't think so. Maybe that's the point - the ending, where Steve's face is lit up by the epileptic glare of several stage lights, certainly indicates that there were many facets and angles from which to view this undeniably important man. But still. Compared to the grand political drama of The West Wing or the demandingly relevant character conflicts in The Social Network, the stakes here just feel too low.
★★★
★★★
