MovieChat Forums > Steve Jobs (2015) Discussion > Ashton Kutcher must hate how good this f...

Ashton Kutcher must hate how good this film is.

posted 9 years ago by NewbridgeNJ
42 replies | jump to latest

Ashton Kutcher must hate how good this film is.

I saw "Jobs" and the only thing I could think of was the word, "Meh". Ashton worked very hard for the role. He tried his best. He was hospitalized for preparing for the role (look it up). Also, he LOVES new technology. The film is a straight up dud and is basically ignored. Seriously, the parody film "iSteve" was better.

THEN.. The film "Steve Jobs" comes along and blows everyone away.

[–] missingeyesocketman 9 years ago

isteve was funny but aston kutcher version was ok. the budget was much smaller than this film.

[–] thory-1 9 years ago

Really a matter of opinion. This movie wasn't good at all imho. The fact that people are mentioning it for Best Picture is laughable.

[–] Jonnythec 9 years ago

If I was kutcher and seen this I would instantly retire or keep hosting shows. This film will be recognized, cause it's a good film. what are you thinking is gonna be nominated or win?

[–] thory-1 9 years ago

You're silly.

[–] TheTripleA 8 years ago

But you gave The Interview a 10 so nothing you say is relevant.

[–] fackinshat 9 years ago

I will lose faith in humanity if this movie wins

[–] shoutatthesky 9 years ago

Such comments just prove that you can either make a mediocre film that entertains those of average intelligence or you can make a great film that entertains those rarer creatures possessing a superior intelligence.

[–] fackinshat 9 years ago

What about a mediocre film that entertains no one? I highly doubt that you have superior intelligence.

[–] ghull88 8 years ago

I always laugh at those that think their taste in a film confirms that they have a superior intellect. So, thanks for the chuckle. Having said that, I thought this film was terrific. I was compelled from start to finish. Fassbender was a revelation. Winslet has rarely been better. And my appreciation for Sorkin's writing continues to grow. Finally, I alwAys enjoy watching the great Jeff Daniels.

[–] redd4576 9 years ago

I thought Ashton did a good job. But the movie didn't get the attention nor marketing

[–] Schmo_mo 9 years ago

Both films weren't great imo. But I did like the story of Jobs over Steve Jobs. I feel they missed some of his best moments, although if they included them as well they would probably be accused of mimicking "Jobs".

[–] terokivinen 9 years ago

The Ashton Kutcher version was a typical biopic that told the story behind Apple and Steve Jobs. It was interesting and actually gave some new information to those who didn't know the company's history well. It was nothing that special but Ashton definitely was suited for the part since he looks more like Steve than any other "top" actor and did an okay job acting as well.

This new version on the other hand is quite bad. Fassbender is way too charismatic, athletic and good looking to pass as Jobs. It was very hard to try to remember who he was trying to portray. The plot doesn't tell you anything about Apple or Steve, it just shows random conversations throughout his life. If you didn't know the history of Apple or the life story of Steve Jobs, you won't know them even after watching this. This is like a character piece with bad characters and no back story. I can't really understand why some people consider it to be a good movie. Read the book instead.

[–] christoffersen366 9 years ago

Did you mix up the two titles?? Because this movie assumes you know every product after the iMac, which most people do. And it tells you about it's previous products even the very first one made in a garage. It tells plenty about Macintosh's/Aplle's and NEXT's history and also how Jobs was since it's about him. It's an okay movie, it's refreshingly different than other movies depicting a real life person, but the movie is subtle with it's story, you to remember it throughout and connect the dots yourself or you obviously didn't.

[–] sjaool 9 years ago

You should all go and watch Pirates of Silicon Valley. ;-)

Steve Jobs was a great movie which centered around him and his daughter. The rest of the movie was entertaining enough but not that important. Steve Wozniak although wouldn't speak like he did in the movie he is way to kind to do that.

[–] ilutrov 9 years ago

> Fassbender is way too charismatic, athletic and good looking to pass as Jobs.

That's funny. Especially to those of us who disagree with you.

http://imdb.com/user/ur2019270/ratings

[–] CQTiger 9 years ago

Kutcher looked more like jobs

[–] MisterKinish 9 years ago

The problem with Ashton Kutcher is, he can't escape being Ashton Kutcher. Those of you familiar with his work prior to playing Steve Jobs know that he never plays anything much different than his character Kelso from "That 70's Show". Michael Fassbender on the other hand, went so far as to get Steve's voice down. A way of speaking that he has never used in any other film. That takes talent. Talent that Ashton does not have.

[–] jajceboy 9 years ago

Who on earth thinks Ashton Kutcher was better? Kutcher is good-looking which is what made his success. That's his talent, not playing dramatic roles. Every time he plays someone, even dramatic roles, it always ends up like Michael Kelso from that 70's show
That film was also a quick cash-grab made to profit from his recent death, and was incredibly shallow. We didn't get to know anything about Jobs, or his thoughts.

This one had better actors, script and directing. Plus it was better overall. Very absorbing and fascinating to watch, and one of the best movies of 2015.
Sorkin isn't really interested in the company or the the technology. Like with everything Sorkin does he's more interested in the characters and the relationships between them rather than a traditional plot. His dialogue is what makes the plot. That makes all of his work so compelling to work.

[–] benighted2005 9 years ago

What is incredibly shallow? Why is a cash grab? As someone who has read the book, I felt Kutcher's version was infinitesimally better. I was totally expecting to hate it. I gave that one an 8.

Better actors? Fassbender has only done Shame, otherwise he's no good. What is so laudable about Kate Winslet? Were you even watching the film? And the whole LISA angle was deplorable. What was absorbing about it? not one of the best moves for 2015.

You see, you seemed to like it a lot, which I am ok with but I am not ok with you throwing egg shells and labelling the work of another film.

I am interested in the company and technology dynamics so for me, it was good. I like Sorkin otherwise but this film was just not that good in my opinion. I am not going to label it anything unlike you.

Come in she said I'll give you shelter from the storm.

[–] movie_nazi 9 years ago

Better actors? Fassbender has only done Shame, otherwise he's no good

I haven't seen either film and was interested which crowd was in the "right" camp as to which film is better. You sir, have lost all credibility with that statement right there. Fassbender no good? HA!
I do believe the new film will be better if clueless people like you are supporting the older one.

My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

[–] rollora 8 years ago

Well he didn't get the voice. But if you rewatch the movie there is a weird way of Steve Jobs/Kutcher moving strangely. That is because Kutcher absolutely nailed the way Jobs moved, while Fassbender did neither of it: not the movement, not the mimic... yeah he impersonated Jobs voice... but that was the only thing really resembling of Jobs