Hello Again
By Chris Sabga
 |
Release Date:
October 23, 2015 – U.S.
Rating: R
Genre: Biography, Drama
Running Time:
122 minutes
Director: Danny
Boyle
Writers:
Aaron Sorkin (screenplay),
Walter Isaacson (book)
Cast: Michael
Fassbender, Kate Winslet,
Seth Rogen, Jeff Daniels, Michael
Stuhlbarg,
Katherine Waterston, Perla Haney-Jardine,
Ripley Sobo,
Makenzie Moss, Sarah Snook,
John Ortiz
|
"Steve
Jobs" is the second movie in two years about the founder of
Apple. Add a 600+ page book to the equation (by Walter Isaacson,
which this is based on), and it's hard to blame anyone for being sick
of Jobs by now. But this is far from a retread of the previous
material.
The
first film – 2013's "Jobs"
– raced through its subject's "insanely great" history.
"Steve Jobs" is narrower in focus: it takes place almost
entirely during three product launches – the Macintosh in 1984, the
NeXT Computer ("the cube") in 1988, and the iMac in 1998 –
with a few other short flashbacks as needed.
The
big surprise here: While Jobs (Michael Fassbender) may be an asshole,
he's portrayed here as a benevolent one capable of recognizing his
own flaws and compromising on (some) points. Steve Wozniak (Seth
Rogen), meanwhile, comes across as somewhat of a bitter, petulant,
slightly unhinged man-child. It's a dramatic shift from the nice and
loveable but kooky guy he's usually portrayed as. Yet, the real Woz
has nothing but praise
for this movie, which seems strange to me given his
less-than-flattering characterization in this version of the story.
But, hey, who am I to argue with the creator of the Apple II?
Before
each product launch, Jobs interacts with several important figures
from his life: former Pepsi CEO John Sculley (Jeff Daniels, superb as
always), infamous for "firing" Jobs from his own company;
Andy Hertzfeld (Michael Stuhlbarg, "Hugo"), the designer in
charge of making the Mac say "hello"; and Chrisann Brennan
(Katherine Waterston), with whom Steve had a daughter. Chrisann is
underwritten though. As justified as her emotions are, the writing or
acting (or both) dismisses her as a nagging shrew. But her presence
is a simply a means to an end to establish the relationship between
Jobs and Lisa (portrayed by three different actresses – Makenzie
Moss, Ripley Sobo, and Perla Haney-Jardine – from ages 5 to 19).
The struggles between father and daughter – and the irony of a man
"abandoned" by his birth parents later doing the same to
his own child – end up being one of the major themes of the film.
In
the foreground during all of this is Joanna Hoffman (Kate Winslet).
Winslet dominates every scene she's in as Steve's tough-talking,
no-nonsense, take-no-shit assistant. It's one of the film's biggest
treats to behold. If Fassbender is in contention for an Oscar
nomination, Winslet better be right by his side. The best supporting
roles make you want to see a movie about them. Just as Tommy
Lee Jones accomplished that as Thaddeus Stevens in "Lincoln,"
so does Winslet as Joanna Hoffman in "Steve Jobs."
It
is a glaring fact that Michael Fassbinder doesn't much look like the
man he's playing. But after five minutes on-screen, that doesn't
really matter. Hair, clothing, and a dash of makeup are more than
enough to maintain some semblance of an illusion for the audience.
All of that, however, would be for naught without the great writing
by Aaron Sorkin and the fantastic acting by Fassbender and his
co-stars as they bring those words to life.
For
a film that essentially consists of nonstop dialogue and people
walking into different rooms, it is subtly stylish. The three time
periods are each filmed differently: 1984 is grainy with a dark and
drab color scheme, 1988 feels more open with a richer palette but
retains a traditional film look, and 2008 is shot digitally and looks
clear and bright. There are also other visual flourishes, such as a
nighttime board meeting with rain pouring behind a glass window – a
dazzling backdrop.
One
of the best aspects of Sorkin's script: Something from 1984 may
affect what happens in 1998. There are instances of that all over
"Steve Jobs." One example: Lisa's Sony Walkman (a music
tape player, for those of you too young to remember them) portends
the coming of the iPod.
Of
course, not everything really happened as depicted in "Steve
Jobs." For one thing, people generally don't speak like great
screenwriters and argue using only catchy soundbites and quips. Also,
I don't think anyone is really expected to believe that all
of the central figures in Steve Jobs's life would show up and
confront him mere minutes before an important press conference –
three times! If that actually happened, it would be a sign of
collective mental illness. After all, don't these people have
anything better to do? Obviously, it's a purposeful plot device
designed to tell the story a specific way – and it works on that
level. In Sorkin's own
words, "this a painting and not a photograph."
It
is tempting to analyze and contrast "Steve Jobs" with the
earlier "Jobs," but it really is like comparing – forgive
me – apples and oranges. Ashton Kutcher did an incredible
job in 2013, but Michael Fassbender puts his own unique stamp on this
version. Ditto for Josh Gad and Seth Rogen, respectively, as Woz.
"Jobs" tells a more complete story, but the writing in
"Steve Jobs" is superior. Both films have a reason to
exist, and that's something I wasn't expecting.
