Steve Jobs

The film, "Steve Jobs" begins with noted author and scientist, Arthur C. Clarke, speaking in a 1960's documentary about something called a "computer," which, at that time, took up entire rooms. Echoing the optimism that he exhibited in his other works, particularly in "2001: A Space Odyssey," Clarke discussed how one day every family would have a computer in their home and how it would change life as they knew it. In the first few moments of the film, we are led to believe that Steve Jobs will represent the ultimate fulfillment of that promise. After all, he pioneered personal computers as the penultimate extension of self, a tool for total expression of the soul. In one crucial scene, when those around him were questioning his philosophy, he let his daughter play around with a new model of the Mac. When asked what a child will do with the Mac, he turned the monitor around to show an abstract drawing that his daughter had created in a painting program. Pointing to her creation, Jobs asserted "She will make this."

The problem with "Steve Jobs" is that it doesn't even come close to explaining how and if Jobs fulfilled that promise. In a film billed as a "character study," there was little if any insight into the man or the business that he helped to create. For some inexplicable reason, the screenwriter, Aaron Sorkin, chose to separate the movie into three acts that mirror the launch of three different Jobs projects: the Macintosh, the NEXT Cube, and the iMac. The film hovers around the hour or so before Jobs goes on stage to present his newest creation. Apparently, Sorkin thinks that these are the crucial moments that explain Jobs' life: the moments in which Jobs repeatedly obsesses about his products while ignoring his daughter and mistreating colleagues. To Sorkin, Jobs' life is that reductive.  

The only time the film even flirts with being a character study is when it harshly judges Jobs for his bizarre denial of his daughter, despite the existence of DNA proof. The film uncomfortably forces the question of whether one's career accomplishments, particularly those as big as Jobs' endeavors, can outweigh failures in one's personal life. Even if that question were a legitimate one, the film does nothing to answer it except to point out the fact that he denied paternity of his daughter. So much for an interesting exposition. Additionally, it would have been interesting to know about Job's magnetic qualities and how he was able to motivate others and bend people to his vision.  

The larger and more interesting issue that the movie almost totally avoids is why Jobs is considered such a genius. Many engineers, programmers and electronics experts had a significant role in our modern computing age. Jobs' business partner, Steve Wozniak, hits the nail on the head: "You can't write code... you're not an engineer... you're not a designer... you can't put a hammer to a nail. I built the circuit board. The graphical interface was stolen from Xerox Parc. Jeff Raskin was the leader of the Mac team before you threw him off his own project! Someone else designed the box! So how come ten times in a day, I read Steve Jobs is a genius? What do you do?" Again, the movie does not come close to answering this question. We do not get to see the magic behind the man. While Jobs had a gift for envisioning user friendly interfaces and welcoming computer designs, I think he also had a gift for designing and marketing himself as a genius and someone who has the ability to "Think Different[ly]," as the slogan goes. Instead of any interesting discussion of this point, the best we get from Sorkin are cool sounding but ultimately sterile phrases like "the orchestra plays their instruments and I play the orchestra."

"Steve Jobs" is a sizable flop for both Aaron Sorkin and director, Danny Boyle, both of whom have produced great films in the past. In fact, Sorkin had great success in writing about cyberspace innovators in "The Social Network," a truly great film about Mark Zuckerberg and the creation of Facebook. Sorkin was able to trace the history of Facebook while also examining the social and cultural implications that derived from lives relived on the internet. From Sorkin's latest film, what did we really learn about Steve Jobs and the development of the personal computer? Not that much, except that Steve Jobs is both a genius and jerk for reasons that go unexamined. To be sure, "Steve Jobs" is a sizable, missed opportunity. Do yourself a favor and watch the documentary, "Steve Jobs: The Man in the Machine." You can even learn more by watching Ashton Kutcher's performance in "Jobs," which was once the worst Steve Jobs movie. Not any more.