When Steve Jobs saw that cancer would soon take his life, he chose to befriend a man known for writing hefty biographies, not a Hollywood screenwriter. Now that I’ve read the 650-page biography and watched the biopic film, I can begin to suspect why. Even Jobs, ever the biggest supporter of simplicity, knew enough to leave in the messy details when it came to his biography. Unfortunately, Joshua Michael Stern’s “Jobs” didn’t seem to get that memo.
The film has one goal for its two hour run time: stress the idea that Jobs was a Machiavellian visionary genius. The film is willing to reach this goal at the expense of anything that would make for an interesting narrative or character arc. It throws away nuances in turn for clichés, distills supporting characters into stereotypes and slathers on the swelling music and tears at narrative turns.
The problem is not so much that the film stresses this point about his character, because this is what has always made Jobs genuinely fascinating. Most people are driven into a burgeoning industry by financial incentives or out of a true love for what they do. On the other hand, Jobs tried to control and shape the computer industry in his vision, not because he was a “computer nerd,” or to fill his pockets, but for the feeling of control itself.
The problem with the film is that the audience already knew this about Jobs and had reached the point where they wanted a film that would show them the details they didn’t know. This is an especially hard task given that Jobs’ persona was central to public image of Apple Computers, and the media was oversaturated with stories about him following his death. The failure of this movie might be attributable to bad timing.
So, really, there are two questions in deciding whether “Jobs” is a good film. One, was it written well for its modern audience? Well, no, of course not. Two, will it entertain future audiences who know less about Jobs than we do? Perhaps. Future audiences might view the film as an introduction to his odd persona and thoroughly enjoy the watered down biopic.
But, for now, if you have any interest left in Apple’s former front man, it is best to go pick up the book with all those wonderfully messy details. In this case, less is most definitely not more.
