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

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.


"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh














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