backtop


Print 64 comment(s) - last by amypaige654.. on Aug 21 at 4:58 PM

After its opening weekend, the movie only generated $6.7 million

The death of former Apple CEO Steve Jobs was a huge event in tech history two years ago, but the recent film to commemorate his career seems to be failing in the box office.

Even the Woz didn't like it. 

"I saw 'Jobs' tonight," said Steve Wozniak, who co-founded Apple with Jobs. "I thought the acting throughout was good. I was attentive and entertained but not greatly enough to recommend the movie.

"One friend who is in the movie said he didn't want to watch fiction so he wasn't interested in seeing it."


The film, simply titled "Jobs," was released in theaters last Friday. After its opening weekend, the movie only generated $6.7 million -- putting it in seventh place among new film popularity in regards to box office sales.

"Jobs" was directed by Joshua Michael Stern and starred Ashton Kutcher as Jobs.

"Lee Daniels’ The Butler" took the No. 1 spot in the North American box office, collecting $25 million. "We're the Millers" came in second place with $17.8 million and "Kick-Ass 2" took third place at $13.56 million. 

Jobs died from complications with pancreatic cancer on October 5, 2011.

Source: The Hollywood Reporter



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Reality?
By Motoman on 8/19/2013 1:13:55 PM , Rating: 5
I haven't seen it, and don't plan to...

...but I'd read reviews saying that the reviewer thought that they'd made a reasonably good job of showing Jobs as he really was...an a$$hole. An egomaniac, megalomaniac, narcissist, and con man.

People don't want to be confronted with who Jobs *really* was. They want to remember him as their messiah, riding off into a double-rainbow sunset on a unicorn with wings.

Jobs was a horrible person, and he made Apple what they are today by perfecting the method of preying on credulous people's gullibility and stomping on those around him.

There was nothing good about that guy, and any movie that ever gets made about him that indicates there was is wrong.




RE: Reality?
By blppt on 8/19/2013 1:19:11 PM , Rating: 1
Or maybe its because Ashton "Kelso" Kutcher cant act his way out of a wet paper bag.


RE: Reality?
By inperfectdarkness on 8/19/2013 1:44:03 PM , Rating: 5
Didn't stop Keanu Reeves from topping the box-office...


RE: Reality?
By JoJoman88 on 8/19/2013 1:46:23 PM , Rating: 2
ROFL, if anybody can play an A**hole it is Ashton "Kelso" Kutcher. Really, Jobs was head of a big Tech company so don't think he was free from the deals, back stabbing,legal stealing,the spinning PR machine, etc. that make up big companies in the USA today.I know Apple fans will say otherwise but it's how buisness get done in todays world.


RE: Reality?
By aliasfox on 8/19/2013 3:17:22 PM , Rating: 2
I'd have to say that Ashton Kutcher was actually one of the high points of the movie (yes, I saw it). He didn't quite capture the charisma or Reality Distortion Field that Jobs was known to possess, but from time to time, you do get the sense that you're looking at Steve Jobs, not Ashton Kutcher.

THAT SAID, the movie was poorly paced, spent too much time on stuff that didn't matter, didn't talk about anything other than Apple (Pixar, Disney, NEXT, etc) and generally felt like it should've been a made-for-TV or straight to DVD release. It didn't focus enough on his failings as a businessman, father, or person, and generally felt half-assed. And if there's someone who hates half-ass-ery, it's Jobs.

Done right, a Jobs movie could be very compelling. The prodigal son, an anti-hero, loved by millions but such a perfectionist that he can barely see beyond himself... etc.


RE: Reality?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/2013 3:31:22 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Done right, a Jobs movie could be very compelling. The prodigal son, an anti-hero, loved by millions but such a perfectionist that he can barely see beyond himself... etc.


Disagree.

The simple reason this movie failed is because Steve Jobs, the man himself, just isn't that interesting. The movie was only made because he died and they were hoping to cash in. Not that there's anything particularly compelling about Jobs or his story.

I just cannot imagine paying money to sit there and watch a movie about Steve Jobs. Who finds that entertaining? Obviously not many people.


RE: Reality?
By Flunk on 8/19/2013 4:03:34 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know about that, I found the Movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley" to be quite entertaining (if not entirely accurate). jOBS (even fixing the case of the name didn't help) really seemed like a rushed affair from the start and they really didn't consult enough of Steve Job's old co-workers. The whole thing seems really slapdash.


RE: Reality?
By Dorkyman on 8/19/2013 8:04:34 PM , Rating: 2
Haven't seen the Jobs movie, used to work for Apple back in the time of Lisa and Mac.

Met the guy several times, got into a friendly argument once. What I would find interesting about a study of Jobs is to try to understand how he could have been successful with a new product not just once or twice but multiple times. A track record like that doesn't come along very often.

I would be very disappointed if it turned out that the Hollywood guys didn't do meticulous research and present things as they really were, as opposed to the Hollywood way of just making stuff up and then passing it off as the truth.


RE: Reality?
By Solandri on 8/20/2013 2:15:50 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Met the guy several times, got into a friendly argument once. What I would find interesting about a study of Jobs is to try to understand how he could have been successful with a new product not just once or twice but multiple times. A track record like that doesn't come along very often.

I never met him, but I think it's pretty simple. He was the converse of the tech geek. The tech geek revels in the complexity and obtuseness of the system which keeps it alien to regular people. It's why much of Linux and open source are so difficult to use, and a common reply to users requesting help with a problem are "here's the manual and source code, figure it out yourself". The people behind these projects like having a complex system, and they like that it's inscrutable to regular people. Whether it's an enjoyment of the complexity or a need to feel superior to others doesn't really matter - it creates things which are unusable by the vast majority of people, which is why desktop Linux adoption languishes at 1%.

Jobs was the opposite. He was always advocating making the system easy enough for the person of lower-than-average intelligence to use. Tech geeks decried it as dumbing down the system. Jobs realized it was necessary if you want to expand market share beyond the few percent that is the techno-elite (even if it was Microsoft which eventually captured the market by copycatting the Mac's GUI). The most popular desktop *nix variant right now is OS X (which is built on top of BSD Unix. And the most popular Linux variant right now is Android. Both of these cover up the underlying complexity in an easy-to-use graphical shell, making it accessible to regular people.

Being reasonably competent at programming, I see this all the time. There are thousands of wonderful and brilliant ideas I've seen among tech geeks. Computers would be a dozen times better if all of them were implemented in a way which made them accessible to regular users. But the people who came up with these ideas aren't interested in doing that. They don't like "wasting" time doing "boring" stuff like making it easy to use. They'd rather spend their time fine-tuning it or tinkering with new ideas. Jobs was the type of person who could persuade/force an engineer who thought like this to take that wonderful idea and make it usable by regular people.

That's why he was successful. To run a successful company, you need good engineering and good marketing. Woz was the engineer, Jobs was the marketer. Yeah he did slimy marketing things too, but good engineering + slimy marketing will always beat out great engineering + no marketing.


RE: Reality?
By GotThumbs on 8/20/2013 6:32:05 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
copycatting the Mac's GUI


Would that be AFTER Steve copied IBM's GUI?

Also, did the JOBS movie have the piece about how Jobs suckered Woz out of part of a 5,500 bonus back in 1979 for the Atari Breakout game?

Steve Jobs was a car salesman.....from the start IMO.

I have zero respect for him, but lots for Woz. Steve Jobs was great at selling other peoples ideas....but a failure at coming up with his own IMO.

Best wishes on keeping what you earned.


RE: Reality?
By ATrigo on 8/19/2013 1:33:21 PM , Rating: 3
You are pretty much describing the modern, successful, and despotic business man / entrepreneur :). There are probably out there those that are successful while being really good guys but I guess they don't make juicy news stories.

Anyways, don't get me wrong, I agree with your overall description of Steve Jobs... he was ruthless. But I also think there are people way worse out there.


RE: Reality?
By headbox on 8/19/13, Rating: -1
RE: Reality?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/2013 2:26:33 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
yeah, nothing good at all about the guy- creating millions of Chinese jobs


Fixed :)


RE: Reality?
By jmunjr on 8/19/2013 2:40:40 PM , Rating: 2
Kawasaki ZX-10? Pretty sure computers don't have speed limits, and speed is everything in computing.

PS - if I could drive 190mph safely everywhere I go I would do it, especially on small to medium road trips.


RE: Reality?
By Flunk on 8/19/2013 4:04:50 PM , Rating: 2
What are you driving that can hit $190?

And where can I get one?


RE: Reality?
By bupkus on 8/19/2013 4:15:36 PM , Rating: 2
I think you took a wrong turn there.


RE: Reality?
By Motoman on 8/19/2013 6:10:32 PM , Rating: 3
A ZX-10, for one thing. Or a Suzuki Hayabusa...or, frankly, lots of modern sport bikes.

Pick a brand and walk in the door. In all likelihood, if your life's goal was to go 200MPH you could buy a new sport bike for ~$15,000 and change the gearing a bit and you'd be there.

Off the showroom floor, a Hayabusa will do in the neighborhood of 194MPH. Although since 2001, the major manufacturers all got together and agreed to self-imposed a limit of 300KPH (about 186MPH) on all production machines. That bit is electronically-controlled, and easily defeated.


RE: Reality?
By flyingpants1 on 8/19/2013 3:40:51 PM , Rating: 3
Except not, because Samsung or Asus laptops still cost a good $100-300 less than equivalently-specced Macbook anythings.


RE: Reality?
By Argon18 on 8/19/13, Rating: 0
RE: Reality?
By AMDftw on 8/19/13, Rating: 0
RE: Reality?
By ATrigo on 8/19/2013 8:10:22 PM , Rating: 2
Dude relax, I'm talking about personality traits / behavior of a business man. Jobs was a rutheless business man and there is no way to deny that.
Nor that makes any of his achievements any lesser or failures any worse.


RE: Reality?
By ie5x on 8/20/2013 5:48:15 AM , Rating: 1
Sir, you need to take your head out of the box.


RE: Reality?
By conq on 8/20/2013 9:13:28 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
creating millions of jobs, creating competition in the computer industry, shifting focus from pure cpu power to actual usability

Nah, I'd stop the list there. Except cpu power is important for the progress of humanity as a whole but not all the ma's and pa's of the world trying to check their email...

quote:
I think my favorite lesson he taught us just before his death, is that the second a "PeeCee" maker tries to build a device with fit & finish of a Mac, they have to charge Mac prices

Really? That's your favorite lesson? The lame justification of why he charged so much more than his competitors? So he doesn't feel guilty about reaping extreme profits on his way out? I do find it funny how that "lesson" inspires an apple fan for justifying high product costs for something he bought. I would have instead expected to inspire entrepreneurs of finding reasons to charge more. There's a reason why Apple's profit margins are cushier than almost all of its competitors, it's because they convinced their customer base it's worth a higher premium. Case in point!

Anyway, imho, the most remarkable lesson is not one he originally taught, but one that he learned from his foster father. You paint both sides of the fence, even if you can't see the backside - because *you* will know you skimped out on quality and won't be able to sleep at night. That's commitment to perfection. That's a real "lesson", the lesson you cited is just ammunition for cannon fodder for cat fights in forums


RE: Reality?
By Solandri on 8/20/2013 2:27:43 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
quote:
I think my favorite lesson he taught us just before his death, is that the second a "PeeCee" maker tries to build a device with fit & finish of a Mac, they have to charge Mac prices

Really? That's your favorite lesson? The lame justification of why he charged so much more than his competitors? So he doesn't feel guilty about reaping extreme profits on his way out? I do find it funny how that "lesson" inspires an apple fan for justifying high product costs for something he bought.

His conclusion is a total non-sequitor. If building a device with the fit & finish of a Mac required Mac prices, then Apple's profit margin would be the same as everyone else's.

Apple's much higher profit margin means they're charging a lot more for their products than it costs them to produce the increased fit & finish.


RE: Reality?
By JackBurton on 8/19/13, Rating: 0
RE: Reality?
By ritualm on 8/19/2013 3:53:33 PM , Rating: 2
Oh please.
quote:
wall of text

Being a PITA to his own family = "one of the most influential businessmen of our time"? Hell no.

This guy exhibits more family issues than MY own, messy family breakup and all.


RE: Reality?
By JackBurton on 8/19/13, Rating: -1
RE: Reality?
By retrospooty on 8/19/2013 5:15:14 PM , Rating: 4
I assume that means you don't read your own posts.

http://i.imgur.com/aPvpf0c.png


RE: Reality?
By retrospooty on 8/19/2013 4:31:14 PM , Rating: 1
"quit trying to down play the monstrous accomplishments Jobs made. He did it with HIS vision, determination "

OMG. You are really in need of a life Jack. And get some perspective while you are at it. It's a company and he was a business man, and a slimy one at that. Get over him.


RE: Reality?
By JackBurton on 8/19/2013 4:47:55 PM , Rating: 1
[quote]It's a company and he was a business man[/quote]

Yes, and Standard Oil was "just" a company and John D. Rockefeller was "just" a businessman (one of the most ruthless businessmen in history at that). History won't get over him, and it would be a great disservice to everyone if it did. Same with Jobs.

Like it or not, Steve Jobs will go down in history as one of the biggest influential tech leaders of this era, right along with Bill Gates.


RE: Reality?
By retrospooty on 8/19/2013 5:03:55 PM , Rating: 2
"Like it or not, Steve Jobs will go down in history as one of the biggest influential tech leaders of this era, right along with Bill Gates."

That is correct. Now stop feverishly salivating over him you nutjob, and put that thing away FFS. You like the product? Great, buy it.

No-one needs to hear your psycho angry rant anytime anyone says anything about Apple that isnt 100% complimentary. I repeat, Apple is a company and Jobs was a business man.


RE: Reality?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/19/2013 5:16:39 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Like it or not, Steve Jobs will go down in history as one of the biggest influential tech leaders of this era, right along with Bill Gates.


You're joking right? Bill Gates?

Jobs greatest talent was making existing technologies profitable. Without Gates, we wouldn't even HAVE most of those technologies.

If Apple disappeared from existence most of us wouldn't even be effected, at all. Sorry but that's a fact. Without Microsoft, more specifically Windows, we're plunged into the technology equivalent of the stone age.


RE: Reality?
By Motoman on 8/19/2013 6:12:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Like it or not, Steve Jobs will go down in history as one of the biggest influential tech leaders of this era, right along with Bill Gates.


Only because we're surrounded by mouth-breathing morons like you who can't differentiate between a con artist and an innovator.

Steve Jobs is more like the 2nd coming of PT Barnum than someone to compare to Gates.


RE: Reality?
By ProtonBadger on 8/19/13, Rating: -1
RE: Reality?
By Cheesew1z69 on 8/19/2013 3:38:05 PM , Rating: 4
Really? Adolescent type haters? Or just Rabid Fanbois? I would say the latter...

http://macdailynews.com/2013/08/11/why-steve-jobs-...


RE: Reality?
By timothyd97402 on 8/19/2013 4:51:10 PM , Rating: 1
I am sick of extremely opinionated types running down people, products and companies they could not begin to hold a candle to.

Apple is not perfect and neither are their products. Your suggestion that those who buy them are credulous and gullible is very offensive. I build and sell Windows PCs, tablets and other tech products. I own Apple, Android & Windows tablets. I know a thing or two about the business. Apple makes very finely crafted phones and tablets. Second to none in build quality, actually. Some of us appreciate that sort of thing.

Try to remember that your opinions aren't facts and perhaps rein in the rather vicious commentary a bit.

Oh, go Google "Samsung Corruption" if you really want to see the kind of evil that goes on.


RE: Reality?
By Motoman on 8/19/13, Rating: 0
RE: Reality?
By Dorkyman on 8/19/2013 8:10:09 PM , Rating: 2
Classy.

You kiss your mom with that mouth?


RE: Reality?
By Motoman on 8/19/13, Rating: 0
RE: Reality?
By marvdmartian on 8/20/2013 8:40:10 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe the problem is, that the director couldn't figure out how to make a reality distortion field show up on film??


"A politician stumbles over himself... Then they pick it out. They edit it. He runs the clip, and then he makes a funny face, and the whole audience has a Pavlovian response." -- Joe Scarborough on John Stewart over Jim Cramer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki