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.

[–] thething42011 9 years ago

Ashton is rich and happy as any celebrity can be, blah blah blah.

In retrospect, he probably wishes he'd been in this, working with Danny Boyle and other stars to much more success. How could he not, his movie came out only a couple years ago and didn't do him any unique favors.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] evikeaz 9 years ago

I just watched both versions almost back to back. I had seen the Ashton version when it first came out but decided to rent it again after seeing the newest one. I think Ashton did a great job of portraying Steve Jobs not only personally but also from a business sense in giving a good background into Apple and also some of his personal relationships but still providing some entertainment value Ashton's expressions, mannerisms and look for Steve Jobs was right on. The newest one I didn't get that feeling whatsoever JMO.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] skat1140 9 years ago

I completely agree. This film makes Kutcher's film irrelevant and puerile.

I love just how terrible Fassbender let "his" Jobs get. With Kutcher, I always got the feeling he's still wants us to like him (Jobs).

[–] Expresso79 9 years ago

I think that this movie (2015) benefits from an excellent director. Danny Boyle's version is more virtuosic and also flashy (just like Jobs).

Other than that, i think that Kutcher acted well and even looked like Steve Jobs. Fassbender also played the role well but his looks were a bit too teutonic for the role.

The 2013 movie was more thorough about Job's life, but the directing was amateurish in comparison. Especially the intro where the director tried to present all of Jobs's early hippy years, in a few minutes...

Boyle's movie overemphasized in only 2-3 aspects of Jobs's life, his relationship with Lisa, Woz and with Scully but was succesful nevertheless without trying to be biographic or like a documentrary.

[–] thepacman 8 years ago

They are both good films with different styles and different view points. I think that Ashton Kutcher did the best he could with the style his was assigned.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mcgill_j 8 years ago

Jobs wasn't awful. it just felt low rent. maybe a slightly bigger budgeted HALF as interesting "Pirates of Silicon Valley" which in part worked because you had two sides of a coin. In fact "Jobs" really didn't show anything that "Pirates" didn't that I recall (mostly).

At least "Steve Jobs" is showing something NEW. Like his Jobs' years at NeXt. It skips over the Apple II (which has been covered). But there's also zero narrative thrust or even real story to the film. It's most just a series of vignettes about one central character (Jobs himself). Although Fassbender is a great actor? I think he was miscast here. Someone said Christian Bale, and I can see that more.

the dialogue and everything is sharp.. crackling.. but its all almost operatic level drama. LOUD bombastic music. A quick walk and talk, as his style is known, Sorkin script. Don't get me wrong.. there's some great acting involved all around. But "Steve Jobs" really isn't a "movie" per se.

[–] Anthol-Arard 8 years ago

This movie was better but Ashton was easily better than Michael Fassbender's awful performance