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 ...
Posts
My recent reading includes BECOMING STEVE JOBS by Brent Schlender and Rich Tetzeli. I am struck by the following passage, from a discussion of Jobs' time with Pixar. A power struggle had forced him out at Apple, and Pixar was his corporate Elba. Or one of them. The first-person pronoun "I" in this book generally refers to Brent Schlender, due to the long personal relationship with Jobs.. That said, I'll let the following speak for itself. When people list the many industries that Steve is said to have revolutionized, they often include the movies, since Pixar brought a whole new art form to the big screen. I'm not of that mind. John Lasseter and Ed Carmull are the men who brought 3-D computer graphics to the movies, and revived the art of animated storytelling. That said, Steve did play a critical role in Pixar's success. His influence was constrained, because Carmull and Lasseter were the ones shaping Pixar, not he. But that constraint, ironically,...