thedarkknight-99999 My issues with this movie are: 1. Some of the lines are good and not phenomenal as the rest. 2. Boyle's direction is very good and not striking and risk-taking as Sorkin's screenplay.Yes, this is how perfect this movie is!This movie is the reason why I believe that Aaron Sorkin is the best screenwriter ever.Steve Jobs is one of the easiest movies to criticize, one of the most exhausting movies to watch, and it's the best movie to listen to!(9/10)

virek213 Genius is often a tough thing to define; and for the person that is frequently defined as a genius, it can lead to a feeling of invincibility, a feeling that you know more than anyone else, inherent insecurity, and indifference. A fair amount of that was very true of Steve Jobs, the co-founder, with Steve Wozniak, in 1976 of Apple, which over the ensuing two decades of turmoil and enormous growth became one of the biggest technological corporations on the planet. His death from a pancreatic tumor in the fall of 2011 at the shockingly early age of 56 led to a stream of films, documentary and feature alike. One of those was the 2015 opus STEVE JOBS.Based on Walter Isaacson's hugely successful biography that included a lot of interviews with the man, STEVE JOBS stars Michael Fassbender as the "resident genius" of the explosive Silicon Valley technological scene of the 1980s always busy dreaming up new technological marvels, and parsing off blame on others when things don't go according to his own version of Hoyle. Indeed, his reactions to his former colleagues, like Wozniak (Seth Rogan) and former Pepsi chairman John Sculley (Jeff Daniels), and even his own marketing executive Joanna Hoffman (Kate Winslet), are ones of almost intolerable cruelty, including Daniels having axed Fassbender from Apple, and Rogan pointing out in graphic detail how much he, and not Fassbender, created the computers and operating systems that made Apple a technological giant in the first place. And then flesh-and-blood reality in the form of a former girlfriend of his (Katherine Waterston) and her daughter, intrude; and he Fassbender is eventually forced to confront the failures in his rise to the top that were caused by his cold obsession with "changing the world".Fassbender does not have an easy job in his portrayal of Jobs, largely because he has to get into the skin of the techno-genius, and that skin is clearly crawling with ego. Truth be told, Fassbender's portrayal really comes across as one of the bigger egomaniacal bastards seen on screen in recent times. This probably has a lot with the real Jobs having been so candid about himself with Isaacson in the book prior to his passing, though such a character, in what passes for today's Hollywood, can be seen as rather repellent. But that would seem to be what Steve Jobs himself was often like, especially during those times that the film focuses on, the roll-outs of new products of Jobs' own skewed creative mind that happened in 1984, 1988, and 1998. It also doesn't hurt that the direction of Danny Boyle (SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE; 28 DAYS LATER; 127 HOURS), and the screenplay adaptation of Isaacson's book by Aaron Sorkin (A FEW GOOD MEN; THE SOCIAL NETWORK) have both a marvelous technological sheen and a scathingly sardonic edge (peppered with a fair amount of profane bits of dialogue) to it.Nevertheless, despite (or maybe because of) the realistic, if frequently unsympathetic, portrayal of Jobs by Fassbender, along with Winslet's, Daniels', and Rogan's performances, the film is a very direct look at how being a "genius" with an outsized ego to match can do funny things to those who have both. STEVE JOBS, as such, is worthy of a '9' rating from me.

merelyaninnuendo Steve JobsHow many biographies are made nowadays? And how many of them gets it right? This is not one of those, this is a movie that limelight's the part of this genre which was untouched over the years. The movie is depicted with such a grace that it is inhuman to not break down in the end of it which is quite surprising considering its genre. Steve Jobs is not just a good movie that came across this year, it was written, acted and executed out so perfectly to find a lose thread in there that is editable. Danny Boyle sets the bar of the biographies to a new place where it seems almost impossible to even touch it let along surpass it for the premise is way too interesting to not invest in it and above all; his execution, each and every detail hits the perfect note. Aaron's writing behind the screen is completely visible and it stands alone in its own tone and environment and is still palpable to not only survive but triumph over it. Michael Fassbender as the protagonist is the most human any actor can ever be and along with a great support cast like Kate, Seth, Katherine and Jeff, Danny creates more from it than it was aspired or even dared too. Steve Jobs is filled with compelling arguments, rigorous emotions, eerie perspective, stellar performances, fast paced sequences and perfectly edited feature that even though being a talkative natured script for 2 complete hours won't let you wander your eyes away from the screen.

iseeeliteinthesky Steve Jobs is one of my idols and i do not have many. Why? Because he knew what would come and what was needed, and that was sufficient for Apple company to rise to the stars. His mind was brilliant, a genius.This movie was another side than the movie "Jobs" 2013. I liked this perspective as well but it was not a better filmatization than the older movie, which had great scenery and more of a movie feeling to it. Hence i do not at all understand why this got 7.4 at IMDb and Jobs from 2013 only 5. Its the opposite way around in my mind. This movie is about 5 stars and that from 2013 is about 7 stars.There are some weaknesses also in this movie compared to the older movie. Aston Kutcher is brilliant as Steve Jobs, Michael Fassbender does a really great job in acting as the psychopathic Steve but appearance is really not in line, so one gets confused when seeing this movie, and i did not relate to Steve Jobs at all seeing Fassbender in this role.The acting from Kate Winslet is also exaggerated at times (acting 3,5/10) and makes the situation untrustworthy for a movie.I would not advice people to see this in a cinema.