Skip to main content

Steve Jobs (the movie)

NeXT logo.svg


I recently saw the latest biopic about Apple co-founder and re-fashioner of industries Steve Jobs.

It was a fine movie. The Rolling Stone reviewer calls it brilliant. But it hasn't been a commercial success. 

Why not? I don't know, but I'll make the simple observation that it is the antithesis of an action film. It isn't even a very visual film, it could almost have been done on the radio. Everything depended on the dialog. Still, that dialogue was very well-written and acted by a world-class cast.

It is written as a three act play, and each act is a product launch. Various backstage dramas each time precede the moment when Jobs walks on stage to unveil a new product to the world. We also get some quick flash back scenes to events the characters are talking about, and some very brief news anchor narration in inter-act transitions.

The essentials of the familiar story are conveyed through this structure. Job and Woz co-founded Apple. As it outgrew them, Woz became associated with the Apple II and Job with other products, more innovative but less remunerative. Also, as the company grew, the founders had to bring in a professional CEO as 'adult supervision.' That was John Scully, a veteran of Pepsico. Scully and the board eventually rebelled against Jobs' high-handedness and fired him. Later, in deeper troubles, the board fired Scully and brought back Jobs. All that, as I say, will be familiar to most of the audience interested enough to go to this movie.

What was surprising to me was that the movie made NO MENTION OF PIXAR AT ALL. The "Elba" period in Jobs' life is represented in this movie, and within the 3-act structure, by the launch of the Cube, the key product of NeXT, a company Jobs later sold to Apple as part of his own triumphant return to its executive suite. If you followed the above link to the Rolling Stone rave you may have noticed that the critic there mentioned Pixar near the top, as one of the reasons Jobs was worth making a movie around.

But ... more dramatically relevant, Pixar was at least as important a part of Jobs' work during the Elba period as was NeXT. And Toy Story was a success whereas the NeXT Cube was largely a flop. I've also mentioned the Jobs/Pixar connection in this blog before, and I have to admit that I understand the problem. Jobs' work with Pixar wouldn't have fit within the three-act structure. A movie's grand opening doesn't look at all like a computer's product launch. Still, to consign it to the memory hole seems a bit much.


Comments

  1. Do you drink Pepsi or Coca-Cola?
    ANSWER THE POLL and you could get a prepaid VISA gift card!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

England as a Raft?

In a lecture delivered in 1880, William James asked rhetorically, "Would England ... be the drifting raft she is now in European affairs if a Frederic the Great had inherited her throne instead of a Victoria, and if Messrs Bentham, Mill, Cobden, and Bright had all been born in Prussia?"

Beneath that, in a collection of such lectures later published under James' direction, was placed the footnote, "The reader will remember when this was written."

The suggestion of the bit about Bentham, Mill, etc. is that the utilitarians as a school helped render England ineffective as a European power, a drifting raft.

The footnote was added in 1897. So either James is suggesting that the baleful influence of Bentham, Mill etc wore off in the meantime or that he had over-estimated it.

Let's unpack this a bit.  What was happening in the period before 1880 that made England seem a drifting raft in European affairs, to a friendly though foreign observer (to the older brother…

Cancer Breakthrough

Hopeful news in recent days about an old and dear desideratum: a cure for cancer. Or at least for a cancer, and a nasty one at that.

The news comes about because investors in GlaxoSmithKline are greedy for profits, and has already inspired a bit of deregulation to boot. 

The FDA has paved the road for a speedy review of a new BCMA drug for multiple myeloma, essentially cancer of the bone marrow. This means that the US govt has removed some of the hurdles that would otherwise (by decision of the same govt) face a company trying to proceed with these trials expeditiously. 

This has been done because the Phase I clinical trial results have been very promising. The report I've seen indicates that details of these results will be shared with the world on Dec. 11 at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. 

The European Medicines Agency has also given priority treatment to the drug in question. 

GSK's website identifies the drug at issue as "GSK2857916," althou…

Francesco Orsi

I thought briefly that I had found a contemporary philosopher whose views on ethics and meta-ethics checked all four key boxes. An ally all down the line.

The four, as regular readers of this blog may remember, are: cognitivism, intuitionism, consequentialism, pluralism. These represent the views that, respectively: some ethical judgments constitute knowledge; one important source for this knowledge consists of quasi-sensory non-inferential primary recognitions ("intuitions"); the right is logically dependent upon the good; and there exists an irreducible plurality of good.

Francesco Orsi seemed to believe all of these propositions. Here's his website and a link to one relevant paper:

https://sites.google.com/site/francescoorsi1/

https://jhaponline.org/jhap/article/view/3

What was better: Orsi is a young man. Born in 1980. A damned child! Has no memories of the age of disco!

So I emailed him asking if I was right that he believed all of those things. His answer: three out of …