Craft Services
Craft Services

Episode 47 · 1 year ago

STEVE JOBS (2015) Discussion


Parth and Trent discuss their thoughts on Danny Boyle's Steve Jobs (2015). They also threaten the audience with a good time. 

Edited by Parth Marathe

They want slots, they don't get a vote. Untilan road childer from the storm. He didn't have people to contribute to the lyrics. Plays don't stop to the playwright. I can ask the audience what seem they'd like to see next. Painters are harder than verge of a tic tonic. Hobbyists prayer and emotem two slots, seenor thread? Send your parth Olah, come Oist us, movie, En, eat. Let's see. See. I'd say that's as far as we can take this. Did you take Spanish in high school? I did not. I took Latin. Oh that must be guys cool. Must really helps on your sat. You know root words. Yeah, what was the thinking there? You're like, I need something that's useless and unapplicable. So what have you've been eating, Trent? Both of I mean, as we just learned off my we were both the napping just like twenty minutes prior. And I'm not a big coffee drinker, but I like to reserve it for moments when I like really need to get jacked up, and so I said, you are right, let me just give me, give me, give me forty five extra just delay the podcast start forty five minutes. Let me make one small cup of coffee, a true professional, and then, and then I'll be ready to pop bro and, as you can tell him, firing on all cylinders. I'm locked and loaded. I'm like a Well oiled machine and I'm ready to discuss. You know this. Two Thousand and thirteen. Feel ready to rumble. Wait, huh wait, no, wait, did I say something? Maybe we should wait. Are you two thousand and thirteen film, or suggesting this film was released in another year? Well, yeah, I mean Steve Jobs was released two thousand and fifteen, but I'm looking at right here. Wait, Trent, are you fucking with me right now or no, I'm looking at it right here. It says jobs released in two thousand and thirteen. Nope, a daring Ashton cutcher. Oh my God, no, Trent, this can't be. Are you fucking did you watch the other one? Part? Yeah, the good one. Yes, wait, the good one, as in two thousand and thirteen jobs. It was released first. It must be better. Okay, okay, there was an arms race on the day of Steve Jobs death and universal studios came together and they said, how quickly can we release two movies about the same person to confuse Trent and part years down the line during their podcast. Yeah, and at this this is not a prerecorded bit, right, like, this isn't no make this mistake. This miscommunication isn't something that we came up with off camera ten minutes ago. No, and then we were like this would be really funny and it's a genuine mix up and it's caused a lot of turbulence and conflict between parth and I and frankly, I don't know where the remainder of the episode is going to go from here because we've studied different source material. I had orange juice q the intro to welcome back to crast services, our show. It's a podcast. Each week we talked about a film and hopefully have a remember of that film to talk with us about their experience working on that picture. Last week we had Alwyn Kushler, cinematographer of our film. Today Steve Jobs. He was pretty cool, was he not know he was? He was very nice. If you listen back to that episode, we'd appreciate it. We worked hard on it. This was our second cinematographer now, yeah, after Doug Emmett. Right, yeah, Dogama was our sorry to bother you. Episode, I think it's like early on in season one. I take it's our first. It's our first episode where we split the interviews and discussions, or maybe the de five bloods. Could I be wrong? Oh, yeah, although that was that was more of US accidental right. Yeah, well, no, it wasn't that way. No, no, we were going to have too because the interview was so, so long. I think we were going to have two episodes on that, but we ended up having one. Yeah, we used to be a twohour podcast, which was good for no one. Wasn't good for us, wasn't good for you guys, and now we're just, you know, out here creating digestible content. You know, the people have spoken. We've answered their sweet call. Like Jesus, we've answered their prayers. Is what I'd say. I'm not comparing US two religious heroes or figures, but if you were to, but gee, all I'm saying is Jesus didn't have a podcast like you. That's true. He had all of these resources. He could walk on water, water into wine, but he couldn't concert a pod. He didn't have Doug Emmett on his podcast. You know what Jesus didn't do what? He didn't have a podcast where each week they would talk about a film and, you know, hopefully have a crew member of that film to talk with them about their experience working on the picture and you could... about technicalities, like technology wasn't invented yet. It was thousands of years away. Jesus had a lot of other stuff going on. He was nailed to crosses. He was dead for three days, but during all this time, like he's God's like Prodigal Son and controversial statement. I don't know much about the Bible, don't know much about Christianity, don't know much about you, don't know much. I don't know much about religion and or much in general, but I do know thing or two about podcasting and the fact that Jesus H Christ for whatever reason, he didn't release a weekly Pod and it's not a coincidence that our show comes out on Sundays. Maybe we're just kind of picking up where he left off. Like church can only get you so far, but are Steve Jobs Dis cushion that'll get you further. Yeah, can you listen to church on your way to work and you listen to it while you wash the dishes? While you're on the treadmill. You could say, yes, Trent, there are televangelists, there are probably there's probably church on the radio. We're not here to discuss facts, we're here to discuss feelings. And, Oh wait, you're going to like the SEGUE. Steve Jobs, the chosen picture of the day is another thing that kind of chooses entertainment over facts. Who Shoo Learn Steve Jobs, Trent all, yeah, out here with the segways. So, Danny Boyle, the director, I just called you out and if you don't come on the pod and defend yourself, then it's just going to seem like I won this battle. But that's the only reason why I want you on the pod. But if you come to an interview and then you can state your case and we'll hear you out, like we're open to it. Danny Boyl, please come on, please come on, like we'd really love to have you as a guest, like we need the numbers, like you'd be our first, like like big director. That'd be like a major stepping stone for us. Whatever. We're desperate guys. Anyways, shall we this movie? Shall I give its Synopsis, This IMDB Synopsis. Yeah, I'm sure, it's about Steve Jobs, but the devil's in the details. Peter Parker is beset with troubles and is failing personal life as he battles a brilliant scientist named daughter AC auto octavious. Is that right? It's of the funny thing about that is that was the synopsis for Spider Man to a different episode that we did feel for. It was some way. How did I mess that up? Feel for to listen back to it, but part clearly has either losses, damn mind, or he is per. He's sabotaging the pod intentionally. Part, are you rushing or dragging? Steep jobs takes us behind the scenes of the digital revolution to paint a portrait of the man at its epicenter. The story in folds backstage at three iconic product launches, ending in one thousand nine hundred and ninety eight with the unveiling of the IMAC. Was that better? Or was that spider man three? No, that was wait, I remember a suspicious amount of steve jobs in spider man three. Just for fun, can we read the Synopsis For Two Thousand and thirteen jobs? And Yeah, sure, and compare and contrast, because I don't think we can keep the bit going that I accidentally watch that film instead. But the thing we can have a little fun. Sure. Here we go. The story of Steve Jobs is ascension from college drop out into one of the most revered creative entrepreneurs of the twenty century. So have you seen both films? I have you. Yes, yes, me. Also, apparently there's a third steve jobs film that was made before his death. Yeah, no, it was a movie called pirates of the Silicon Valley, and I believe it is about the rivalry between steep jobs and Bill Gates. If you had to pick a side, I well, I've never seen a movie about Bill Gates, but everyone one seems to not like him and thinks that he's chipping us and he won't give he won't give the the the the vaccine recipe to Third World nations. So, Bill Gates, we're calling you out. Come onto the pot, come under the reclaim your name. No one will. Okay, listeners, no one by will really Mike. All right, we're gonna organize a strike. No Microsoft products until Bill Gates comes on Press Services and tells us what he's hid them. So this movie cost thirty million dollars and it made thirty four point four million dollars. So not quite a hit. No, what does the box office need to be to be considered a hit? A hundred mill I mean it depends for a different types of like if you have a horror movie that cost like two million dollars, fifty million dollars is a pretty good return on investment. I think this movie would have had to have made like at least a hundred million dollars to be considered like a mild success. So what is it? Doubling or tripling your budget? If you're have to at least double, because usually they spend advertising. Yeah, so you have to at least do that. And then if it's a CO production, you need to make even more... so that each of the respective parties, I believe this is how it works, but each of the respective parties make enough money for it to have been worth their time and investment. So we're both of the Steve Jobs films actually by universal. We can get into that in the production history. Nice, all right, to take it away as I don't know so many pictures and well, Scott Rowden, by extension Sony Pictures. Scott Rowden as an asshole but Scott run, you can't come on the show is we already know. We already know you're mean and so you're unredeemable. Bill Gates has to defend his name. Scott Rowden had Scott root and has ruined his name. Anyways, so Scott Sony pictures acquired the rights to Walter Isaacson's book Steve Jobs and October Two Thousand and eleven, and then they hired Aaron Sorkin to adapt it. In May two thousand and twelve, sorkin officially confirmed he was writing the script and had come to Steve Wozniak for help with historical accuracy. He said that his screenplay would consist of three thirty minute long scenes covering sixteen years of Steve Jobs his life and that they would be backstage behind the apple key notes. He developed the screenplay with each section taking place with a few key people in Steve's life. One is Steve Wozniak, the other is Joana Hoffman, the third is CEO John Scully, the fourth is Mac team developer Andy Hurtzfeld, and fifth and sixth are jobs, as first child, Lisa Brendan Jobs, as well as your mother, Chrisanne Brennan. David fincher entered negotiations to direct the movie, with him selecting Christian bail as his choice for jobs. But in April two thousand and fourteen he exited the project because he wanted ten million dollars in full creative control, and Sony did not want that. Yeah, PIMP move by fincher. So then, after fincher's exit, Danny Boyle was hired to direct, with Leonardo DiCaprio and discussions for the role. In October he exited it and then Christian Bale was back into negotiations, along with Matt Damon Ben Affleck and Bradley Cooper being considered. So it can revealed that bail was again cast in the role and Seth Rogan was entering negotiations, negotiations to play Steve Bosniac. But in November bail again left the project and Fast Brender, Michael fastbender emerged as a front runner as a replacement. Natalie apartment entered into negotiations for a role in November two thousand and fourteen, presumably join a Hoffman, but she withdrew in December and in December Kate Winslett and tured negotiations to start in the movie. Trent, do you want to give some fun facts? Sure, I'll do fun facts. The costume designer and Laura Lare Nice says the real jobs never wore his trademark turn neck sweater at any of the launches. Quote. The turn neck was the off book decision in those actual three launches. In real life he never wore that. In the nineteen ninety eight portion of the film. In real life he was wearing a dark grayish brownish suit. We made it for him as a backup idea in case we need to adhere to it. As we got closer to the time of filming, I thought we'd set up roles from nineteen eighty four with setuperls from nineteen eighty eight. There's so much of the film that's about design and he was about design. And I heard a quote for fastbender from people giving him shit for the Turle neck thing and his reasoning was since then the third act. See, jobs need to be like fully arrived and this was like the the commonly held vision of him, and I thought that was a good enough a good enough reasoning, because otherwise, he get he would have just been in in a historically accurate yet unnotable grayish brown suit. So I'm down. So any pictures entertainment hack in December two thousand and fourteen revealed casting cause the film's production to be delayed. Was this the the interview now Sony Pictures Hack, or is that as Sony just getting hacked every day, every day? Left in right now? It was the same one and like a bunch of emails were leaked and Sorkin was not a fan of Michael fastbender being cast. Tom Cruise, Matthew mcconaughey and Charlie theren were at one point being considered for potential roles in the film. There's a lot of what ifs in this in this movie, and a lot of alist actors in the in the sliding doors of Hollywood. The first as we discussed with cinematographer Alan Coockler. Please listen that episode. The First Act was shot in sixteen millimaid. It's like an act with shot and thirty five million millimeter and the Third Act is shot digital. The three act film was shot in sequence. The actors spent four weeks on each act. Rehearsing for two weeks, then filming for two weeks. Kate winslet said that by act three, Michael fastbender didn't even have a script at the rehearsals as he had memorized all one hundred eighty pages. Aaron Sorkin has said that he's never actually met Steve Jobs in person, but that he's spoken to him on the phone three times. Macintosh super bowl commercial, the one thousand nine hundred and eighty four one, was directed by Ridley Scott. The final of the fun fact several memorable scenes in the movie never happened in real if. Some of these are the scene where jobs this little daughter uses the computer to draw a picture on I paint, the reconciliation between John scully and jobs, most of the arguments with Steefwasniak, and the final scene between jobs and his now grown up daughter. On the other hand, infamacy and where it's implied that's it's more than implied. We're sieve jobs puts...

...his feet in the toilet bowl to calm himself. Did actually happen, and it says this was one of jobs is infamous quarks and the Michael fastbender asked or demanded that it be in the film. Since it wasn't in Sorkin script, and I'm kind of surprised that these are the only notable events that they claim didn't happen, because if you told me that one hundred percent of this was fictionalized outside of the characters themselves existing, I would believe you. Yes, shall I give a Onestar review, Trent, please. Oh, warning to you will listeners at home. We got four for once, are reviews today. Part I. Part usually like breaks my spirit and edits, edits it down, but he, the review spoke for themselves a day and he couldn't resist the temptation. Yeah, yeah, yeah, so this first one is from J galt and he wrote it on March two, two thousand and sixteen, and heading is four dollars ninety nine cents wasted. I was expecting a movie and got a play. If you're not biased against Ashton cutcher, jobs was fantastic in all caps. You can understand my sympathy with this review because I've been on the wrong side Sude of this argument before. This one's by Robert D Rulo and it says I wouldn't waste your time. Terrible movie. There was so much miss to cram his life in under two hours. There should have been focus on one specific event and not his entire life. I was thinking today about how this is kind of a condensed before sunrise trilogy. Imagine if before sunrise was one movie, or I mean it is one movie. I excuse me, if the trilogy was one movie. Yeah, that would be fun. Well, I guess I would be what this is. But I don't think that there could be a steve jobs trilogy of these three different launches. I mean you could, it just wouldn't be as interesting. So the third one is by CNH and it says disappointing. On April twenty three, two thousand and twenty one, so this is pretty recent. I think Steve Jobs as a man, as a father, as a human being was disappointing. The film was fine, but as a character was hard to watch. Yeah, if I ever watch a movie and any of the characters are making questionable decisions, I'm like, I expect this is difficult for me. How do you expect me to watch this? Personally, I don't believe in anti heroes. I need a clear distinction between good and evil. Otherwise all this moral ambiguity I don't care for. And the fourth review is by Paul at Johnson and it says I really cannot recommend this movie. Says it was a movie with a lot of walking down hallways, people interrupting conversations by knocking on the door way, too many flashbacks, etcetera. Up It may have been how his life was, but it was hard to follow. I really cannot recommend this movie. They can't recommend it. It seems like they're on the fence about it, but they can't. They just can't. But what comes next? I mean, we've got all the four play out of the way. I guess it's just our thoughts. Is that I think people want to hear or like? Yeah, no, I mean we are to college age film students with a lot of CINNAMA knowledge under our belts and we need to we need to shower the peasants with some thought, with some facts and logic. That's what we do here, facts and logic. So what's work in part? Well, for me, kind of all of it. I'm a huge, huge fan of this movie. I think I saw this ironically on my iphone in two thousand and sixteen or something, and there I'm a huge, huge Aaron Sorkin Fan and at the time I was a super fan and I've always really liked this movie. It kind of feels like a nice companion piece to the social network, obviously kind of just being because it's, you know, about about too, very big and written by the same person exactly. And what I really admire about this is that it is a biopic that's not really a biopic. It kind of there's a lot of reviews where people kind of admonish it for being a play kind of, but that's kind of one of my favorite aspects about it is that I understand that it's not an accurate retelling of the literal events that happened, and Steve Jobs is life and if you want that you can kind of go see jobs, which is also not a hundred percent accurate, but the existence of jobs two thousand and thirteen and job Steve Jobs two thousand and fifteen kind of shows two opposite approaches to the same material, where one kind of goes from a cradle to grave narrative and the other decides to do a slightly more experimental approach and key moments, so to say exactly, and and to sort of compress a lot of events that happen into obviously these six people did not meet each other, you know, at the same time, and all have these arguments, but obviously that's very dramatically compelling and I really like that aspect of it that, even though it's not literally true, the people, people in Steve Jobs as life have said that this is an accurate depiction of who he was as...

...a character and I really appreciate how strong of a character study it is. I think through the specificity of the storytelling, just as the viewer, you have to acknowledge that it would be impossible for these conversations to be like exabatim, and so I mean I appreciate that it doesn't. I mean it's clearly quote, based on a true story, but not opening with the title car as saying these events really happen. It helps me shrug it off kind of like you mentioned, when you're doing a biopic, your choices are kind of either to do their entire life and how they their rise and fall a to greatness, or to pick like an individual moment that defined their life for their career, and I kind of like that this is both, as in its spanning over a long period of time, so you get to see a real arc but it's not. It's not just a single it's not too much and it's not too little. It's a it's a it's a very unique stylistic choice that I think work. I think Sorkin said that when he was sort of being criticized a lot for it, for it being fictionalized. I think his response to that is that when you go see a play about Henry the fifth, there's something you're not expecting it to be accurate exactly to what happened to Henry the fifth. And in a similar token, it's kind of different when these are characters that like just existed, but I think the same kind of dramatic rules apply. I was just going to say it's kind of like recency bias and that the closer the event was, the more people who will think that they have an insight as to what really happened. Compared to a World War II movie that comes out now, not too many people are going to attack it for historical and accuracy. Yes, it just because we're, you know, we're less in tune for what was and what wasn't at that time. But if you know, if it's a movie that takes place in two thousand and sixteen. It's you know, if you're it'll be much easier to point out the technicalities. So what? The first thing I wrote down, or what's working, is Michael Fastbender, because I think he kills the role he is. Now what people picture when they think of Steve Jobs is him in the third act wearing the turble neck. I don't know if I'd go that far, only because not that many people saw this movie. True, I would mention they might think of, you know, actual pictures of Steve Jobs wearing or maybe Ashen Coulcher, we never know. But talking about some of the other people who were considered, that Christian Bale, Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, Bradley Cooper. WHO's your plan being? Because I think fastbender, at least in terms of physical resemblance, is the is the closest and like like Tom Cruise, I see well he they came under fire because he, Michael Fastpender, looks kind of nothing like Steve Jobs. He looks most like him in the Third Act. But yes, if you actually look at Steve Jobs, he doesn't really look anything like him. But I think that kind of ties into what this whole movie is, which is they're not recreating events. They're sort of painting with broad strokes of kind of essentially what happened. I think the jobs versus Steve Jobs thing is very interesting because again to opposite approaches to the same material. And you look at jobs, where Ashton could your looks away hell of a lot more like Steve jobs did in real life. You compare those performances and which one is more convincing? Which one is more engaging? It's a hundred percent in my eyes. Michael fastbender. Yes, are just by asking couture, taking the the method acting approach. If him being like yeah, I was a valiant fruit. Yeah, is that CE job? Is that what he actually did, or was he just a be I believe so. I believe so. That doesn't sound like a sustainable diet choice. No, it is not. It is not. But answer my question about about Actors Plan B well, here's the thing. This is going to come across as me being a super fan, which I am. Let See, but I think Tom Cruise would have been an interesting choice. I don't think he would have been right for the movie. I think Michael Fastbenders is a better choice because the problem with Tom Cruise a lot of the times, as I think he's a very good actor, but he's never not Tom Cruise. It's just by virtue of him being so popular and famous you can't not see him, and I think one of the better aspects of fastbender's performance is that he really sinks into it where he's not real like life steve jobs in the waist cutcher is Steve Jobs, but he's also not Michael fastbender. He's he is the character of the movie, Steve Jobs. I think Tom Cruise could do like the intense facial expressions required, like but I think what he'd be missing is some of I mean it's not his fault, but Tom Cruise is kind of a shorter guy and I think Steve Jobs is like famously a little tall and just like with the physicality of the role, I think fastbender like, I don't know, I just like Tom Cruise Look Taller. True, yes, apple boxes exist, but I can't imagine it any other way. But part if you had to choose between DiCaprio, Bail...

Damon Affleck Brad the Cooper, where where you going? I guess Christian Bale. Yep, because I feel like having an a heavy, an a plus lister like almost doesn't make sense. Like I think it would be distract that's the thing is that actually sorkin was pissed off about that, is, he'd really did not want Michael Fast I don't know how he feels about it now, but there's in the Sony Hack you could there were a bunch of emails where he was upset because he wanted Christian Bale or Tom Cruise for the role and when Michael Fastminder was cast, he was like nobody's going to see this movie, he's not an a list actor, which is true, but the problem is that Christian Bale, at the very least, he is kind of transformative in the way that he looks. He I could potentially see him, you know, sinking into that role because he's one of the few like a lister, Chameleon actors. Yes, but I think Michael Fastmender, short of playing Magneto, is kind of just like a weird actor. He kind of does a lot of weird projects and I think him not being a household name really benefits the project. It hurt its box office a lot. But yeah, here's a question I'm most interested in is, would you rather have this movie or the version of this movie that was directed by David Fincher, and I know that's a difficult question to answer because we don't know what that looks like and also because we're biased, because David fincher's perhaps this podcast, is favorite director, one of the very least. I'm happier. I mean there is a you know, I was going to say I'd rather have the social network, but there is a universe where he directed the social network and then as offer it that it doesn't have to be one or the other, but I mean that's what did happen. It was off the basis of the social network being a success. That, yeah, I to him. I kind of think that they would be two similar movies in a row and I like, obviously I think it would work because finches so technically proficient. Would you, would you have? Would you prefer the fincher version, the theoretical fincher version? No, I thought about this a lot before we started recording and I think there's an interview where Danny Boyle says that he was such a huge fan at the social network that he was like kind of scared to take on this movie because he knew it would be it would be in her shadow of it exactly. But what he said is that fincher kind of directed the sitting down technology movie, which is true. It's a lot of people talking in board rooms, be little discussing code and whatever, the standing up the wall. This is the getting up and walking around movie. And he was like, you know, Steve Jobs is this just incredible force of energy, constantly moving, and I think Danny Boyle's sort of kinetic energy and sort of off the cuff style really helps the movie have a sense of pace. I know it's hard to envision, but if the characters were sitting down in this film, we wouldn't be talking about it right now. Yeah, I mean I think it would still be well made because it's fincher. I'm sure he would have done something interesting with it and I kind of want to see what his take on the material is. But I kind of agree that you would have it would feel like more of the social network in a certain sense, even if it wasn't that, it would be like weirdly compared to that, whereas I think this is like different enough in style and tone. Like I think this is a little bit more of a funny movie then social network. Is it kind of functions in a similar way in terms of editing as the social network, because I think the cross cutting between like college and and the lawsuits kind of work in this as like with the flashbacks, and there's a lot of intercutting the the main question I was thinking about watching this movie is everyone makes the comparison to a play, but I don't think it's. Besides the fact that, Oh, it's very dialog heavy and it takes place primarily in one in one space. I think with all the walking around, it would be nearly impossible to do as a play. I think you could do it as a play, and I mean like the middle portion would have to be modified significantly, because I think like my favorite scene in the movie is the John scully argument in the middle in the in the boardroom. Well, that that part of like the whole sequence. It's like a ten minute sequence where they're arguing and it's cross cutting between them, between him getting fire about the super with the super bowl commercial, with the super bowl commercial. That's like my favorite scene, I would say, in the movie, just because I think that's so dramatic. You're issuing contradictory instructions, you're in subordinate, you make people miniserable, or top engineers are fleeing to Sondell HBAT. Wall Street doesn't know WHO's driving the bus. We've lost hundreds of millions in value and I'm the CEO of Apple, Steve, that's my resume. But before that you sold carbonated sugar water. Right, I sat in a fucking garage with Wasniak and invented the future, because artist lead and acts. As for Joe Ham's, all right, well, this guy's out of control. I'm perfectly willing to hand in my resignation tonight, but if you want me to stay,... can't have Steve Subtle amount. You can keep a sure of stock so we gets our newsletter. They'll have to sever his connection to apple. I'm dead serious. I want the secretary to call through a bowl. I fucking dare you. That scene would obviously have to be re done because you can't cross cut into play. Yes, I kind of see what they mean in that. It's it's all primarily in a single location and it's all just characters talking about things rather than them like happening on screen. So I kind of see what they mean. But I like how, despite the Diet, the dialog and screenplay being written sort of as a play. Again, it's that Danny Boyle's sense of urgency. And we talked with Alan Kushler, which is cool, because he was talking about how they basically really needed all these steadicams and really good steadicam operators because they were like eighty percent of the movie is shot on Steadycam. I think he said right. Yeah, I was looking out and there was really only a few handheld shots at the whole thing. HMM. So if we're while we're talking about what works, I think the first act and the third act are significantly stronger than the second act. How do we really I if we're talking about rewatchability, I could turn this movie on any point because I love the first forty minutes and then I'm kind of twittering my thumbs for the next forty minutes waiting to get to the final forty minutes. That's so interesting because I think this, the Middle Act, is my favorite part of the movie. With what for? For what reason? I think what's interesting about that is that the first part is kind of the most fun part to watch, I think because it's so immediately engaging, immediately like, come on, we got to could do this your toss into the deep end. I think the Middle Act, to me is the most interesting because with the first act you've still got Steve Jobs. You know, he's on top of his game, he's at everybody loves him, he's he's insecure, but he's like he's kind of sure of sure of himself, and with the Third Act you've got him more sure of himself. He's toned down a little bit, and I think the movie does a really good job of showing through the repetitious nature of its structure, you kind of see how he reacts differently to the same situations. Yes, and the third act shows him mellowing down, being a little bit nicer, being bit of a better boss. The Middle Act is him hurting essentially and him essentially in the middle of a breakup with his own company, and I think that that is very intriguing. I think fast bender's performance in that is very dark in a way that I don't think that the first or third is, and he's filled with a lot more angry energy and I kind of gravitate towards that. And again I think that that showdown between him and scully is you know, that's been a major inspiration for me, like in writing things. What do you think about the the opening intro clip and the the interludes, because I love the interlude between act one and two with the with the little girl walking around, and then the second interlude of just news footage I care about much less. And and the Intro, I think is I like the intro but it kind of doesn't have that much to do with what happened. But I'm not really sure why they chose to put that at the beginning. I don't have a problem with it because it still fits the movie in that it's like about this technology, it's about like it's kind of prophetic. It kind of makes sense, but I'm not a hundred percent sure why it's there. It's not necessary. Maybe they needed a title sequence and that was the way to get it. I really like the the interludes. I really like the second one actually, purely because I think it's very visually stimulating, again like that the that first interlude. You don't get a visual like that with David Fincher, I don't think. I think that's a very danny boyle sort of having that text and are walking through the text like that. I don't think like with fincher's visual language. Yeah, like, I don't think that would work. So this is this is nothing new and we're not the first people to say this and this isn't the first time we said on this podcast, but Aaron Sorkin has, I mean has written so much and for so long he's developed things called like Sorkin Isms, and I maybe we can leave the link in the show notes, but I for the first time watched on Youtube. There's like a super cut of Sorkini ISMS. You know what I'm speaking of. I know exactly what you're speaking of. It was very funny to see all the repeating exact quotes that he's used over his career. And so when he worked with fincher on the social network, if you watch the behind the scene stuff, it's them going like a line by line and like there's a scene where he's like you don't need to have them say this three times. Yeah, stop. Essentially that being attached to a director like fincher like kept him in his cage and kept things from getting too cute. And I think in this film there are several time blast there are several times where Sorkin is uncaged and it... it's a little bit too cheeky and I'm like, I I don't know. Some things are like over pronounced, over pronunciated. I'm like yeah, sometimes it's not. Like that's not how re people talk. I don't have too much of a problem with the fact that real people don't talk like that, because people don't talk like any of his dialog generally. But I do agree. If we wanted to get into what doesn't work, this isn't really a specifically. I I don't think anything doesn't work in this movie. I think there's special. There's maybe like a few things that you could take issue with, but it's a little too much sometimes with its irony and witty comebacks and person repeating what they just said or what the other person said. I think that can happen a few too many times and I think boiled didn't have as much creative control over this or he had a lot of faith in the script. So with Sorkin, famously, there will be several like trains of thought going on and sure you'll explore one and then and then you'll skip on to another, and then you'll and then several sentences later, after topic one has been long forgotten, you'll reference back to it and it's used again here. There's sometimes when it's two characters talking and I'm like, like Sorkin dialog makes perfect sense for the social that work, because it's like everyone is Silicon Valley people, it's Harvard people, they're all operating on a very certain high functioning wavelength, and not I mean these are once again people in the tech industry. But like the moment that cemented it for me is it's in act to when Michael fastbenders talking to his daughter and there and she's she's listening to her cassette deck and he's like what are the two different versions of the song? And then, you know, she says, Oh, the first one's girlish, and then they go downstairs and then, right before she's about to leave, he's like Oh, what's the second version? And she like pauses for a second and then she's like regretful, and then Michael fastbender thinks that she's referring to herself and he's like what do you regretful about? She's like, AH, no, I'm talking about the song. Yes, that's what we're talking about, and I'm like, Steve, jobs that you're operating on like you're way too smart of a man to be confused about this. Yes, sorkin loves to do the caught off guard by like mistakenly assume something means something but it actually meant a different thing, and that reveals their character. I agreed that moment. That moment I don't like. Well, I like the moment, but I think it could have been written better because it's like it's kind of college freshman year writing and I think that should have been ironed out a little bit more. But I think as far as it not making sense that people talk like that like this versus the social network where people are in the tech industry and maybe talk like that, that's kind of a sorkin thing. He had a show that was about the behind the scenes stage work of essentially an SNL type skit show that lasted one season. And everybody talks like that. You you're either on board with it or you're not on board with it. He kind of he kind of gets away with it because time after time, whether it's the West wing or or any of these movies are I mean I was watching money ball last night and all of it great movie, Great Movie, and all of them deal and like a great level of I mean they're professionals, and then it's like a great level of like specificity. So it's a lot of just like industry vocabulary. Yeah, he's never written, or I mean he not never, but very not in my knowledge, has he written a movie about people with sat scores less than a thousand. You know, but yet is there? Is there anything that you don't like other than that about the movie, because I remember we were hanging out actually the first time when we recorded our Judas intro. Sure, you said that you'd re watch Steve Jobs and you were disappointed by it, but you've since re watched it and I seem to feel like it's gone back up and it's ranking for you. Sure, this is long time been one of my most rewatchable movies, partly for the reason I mentioned and that I love the first forty minute so much. I mean, it's not one of my best qualities, but I like films that are really dialog heavy because then I can play them in the background while I mess around on other tabs, and so films less of a visual focus I watched time and time again. There's a lot of talking and Zodiac and the social that were and and no bomback movies, which is why I keep going back to them. HMM, I don't have too many notes on the what doesn't work category. I mean child actors are often hit or miss, and I kind of think the actor who plays the girl at every are the daughter at every step of the way, like just something isn't clicking for me, or the line readings are the tiniest that off. I mean I'm I was a child and I didn't successfully act, so I'm in no especially sork and dialog. Yes, it's very it's a it's a mouthful and they are like six. So yeah, if you're I... I like the adult one though, in the third act, so the line reading from from the adult one that made okay. So it's when they're in the hallway and Michael fastbender is like it's some college freshman introductory class, like that's what's turned you against me. And then she says I read time and then I did some looking into my family history. Something happened to a school. First semester core class at all freshman are required to take some read time. What I have Internet access at school. I read an old copy of time and I asked my mom some questions about my family history. That was time, rone a mangled piece of journey we're never supposed to read. I had two different harbor scanisations. Writer, reverse engineer the equation that you came up with to prove the twenty eight percent of American men could be my father, and I'm liked you would just say I read time and what the fuck you said? You're not my dad. I don't know. HMM, that's more of a problem with the script that though. Yeah, and what do you think of it's kind of weird how in the first act he's like, Hey, you're definitely not my daughter, and I don't know what happens in the interim, but they're like just chilling and act to and then by act three they're like, I don't know you, like he believes that they're related. And you know what, do you think? Here's the thing that's I mean, this could be a steve jobs himself character flaw of being a bad father. It is, it is, but that is true. But I kind of see this as even in the first act, you know that he knows that she's his daughter, but he's just lying to himself. And in the second act, you kind of see him being like a reluctant father. Yeah, and that he's there but he's not really like he's giving all these orders to Chriss and, but he's also not really paying attention to his dart. He doesn't really care about her. Or like he cares about her, but in a very I don't want you to die way, not an a I will spend time with you a way, or in thinking that by making her go to school, that that's like the full. Yeah, that's the best he can do of being a father. Yeah, and a lot of his a lot of his quote unquote, parenting, it's just like shitting on Chrissanne, yes, and yes, and just saying that she's a bad mother. I under his I understand her frustration, I mean the Chriss and character. It's kind of it's kind of volatile, but I understand her friend kind of like how they deal with her, and that it's like it's clear that jobs is like insufferable and that, yes, he's like a bad dad, but she's also like fucking crazy to yes, but yeah, but what I was saying is that I like that the third act shows him being that he should be or like kind of trying to be, but you've seen too much of what he was as a dad that it doesn't for the daughter a hundred percent compute. What do you think of the I made this connection for the first time today and that the I paint drawing? That is like he hands her the piece of paper at the very end and it's supposed to be significant. It's kind of like the Rosebud of the film where you know sure some significant moment from his from childhood or from earlier years that you know. It's thus like the thesis or whatever. I mean. I like it, but I mean it's the final shot of the film. But he walks on stage and then he starts walking back at his daughter, as if he's not about to give a keynote presentation. You know what the deal with that is? I'm not sure what the deal I don't think he's walking back to her. I think it's more so that she's seeing him. It makes her de in that it makes for a good shot. Yeah, it kind of doesn't make sense that he just came out to do a Kino and then is going to go back to his daughter. But ending the movie on a note of the daughter being the one to it's kind of like switching the perspective a little bit, where we've seen been seeing things through jobs eyes and now we're seeing this. In a way, the movie is sort of jobs is daughter trying to understand her own father because he wasn't there for her. Him coming out and all of that glory and like all these whatever. It's like, okay, this is the best version of this man, I guess, and so I guess that's sort of like he's that version is coming for her. That, in combination with the the painting thing, it's like, in my own way, I never not cared, you know what I mean. But that's that's what I like about this movie is that it's complicated. Are we ready to move on to rating scauntlet? I was going to say nippicks and then rating scauntlet. Oh sure, yeah, I don't really have many, but part I'll say this. How many slots should there be? Should like? Should we make this for for the hobbyists, for the hackers, or do we want end to end control? What are you talking about? Why would you only want two slots? Printer and AMMONUM WITH PAINT SLOTS? This is a huge deal that we were able to add e slots. I appreciate the engineering, but it's not what we're really here's the thing. Both are right, but Steve Jobs is ultimately more right. I like the theme permeating...

...through this film. I mean it's kind of says something about humans and convenience and having everything handed to them, but I think Steve Jobs is approach in that what people want is like ease of use and to be handed a product and then not need to do anything and for it to be all there, and that's exactly what apple has perfected and I like seeing the origins of it here, especially where people think that it's not going to work, because now it's it's like American religion in a way. You can read this as a reading on Sorkin's own work, because there's so many complaints that you can lodge at Sorkin about his work and that it's very indulgent, it's very sarcastic, it's very that's not how people talk, you know, like all these things in the same way that people kind of throw shit at Steve Jobs, where it's like why do you have all these weird things? Why is it ninety degrees and not ninety point one degrees. Why is it? And and to control? Why can you not send an email from a next compute? You know all these things and in a way, I think for all intents and purposes it seems like Aaron Sorkin is a good father. So I don't think it's really a reading on that level. Yeah, Aaron Sorkin has a thing, I mean, speaking money ball again, he is a I mean, and applies to this film, he has a thing for father daughter relationships. Yes, he has a daughter, which makes sense, but I think you it's kind of like Sorkin requires end to end control and he requires like complete quality assurance. None of the movies that he's been made have been just bought. He's been very closely involved with them, with the directors and everything. So I think on that level it seems like he can kind of connect with jobs part final, final nip pick. There's something of an Steve Jobs is an orphan subplot and I think the thing with his dad like owning a the restaurant that he goes to, is kind of like, I'm I'm down with it, but it's it's not away explored. You know, I agree that that is the one thing that I think is kind of in the script but not fully explored, where it ties into everything else. I think everything else kind of locks in perfectly. And then this is kind of like, I guess it's that feeling of abandonment. It's to set that up where he's talking about, you know, how he felt abandoned as a child in the first act, because it's not like the baby is born, the parents look and say no, we're not interested in this one. And the other hand, someone did choose you the time. It's having no control. Find out you're out of the loop when the most crucial events in your life were set in motion. As long as you have control, I don't understand people give it up. And then that's supposed to be like when he's at next yeah, like he was abandoned by Apple. Yeah, I think that you can maybe a flesh it out more, but I guess I see what they were trying to do there. That that's kind of like me with my netpicks with the whole movie is that there's some lines of dialog that are like kind of weird or something, but nothing where it's like, I don't care that much. That, like the fact that it's not changed is a problem. For me, it's kind of amazing that his his next plant worked out so well, because to get fire and then to come back and get bought for half a billion dollars and then get end to end control and every product, it's a it's a pretty big jump and I know they were ninety days from insolvency. Do you want to enter the rating scoutlet sure, a let's do we trent. You go first. rewatchability? Yes, emphasis on acts one and three. Would I recommended to a friend? Absolutely. It's probably on. If I was tasked with making a short list of fifty movies to watch the rest of my life, strangely enough this might be on the list and out of ten it's like an eight. It's most of the way there, but it's not. It's not perfect, but I social network. Yes, if there ever comes the time where we're lucky enough to do a social network interview, I think I may. I may have to hand out my first ten. But is that? Would that be your first time we've ever given it up to ten? Wow, and know that I'm saving myself, but in a it does pretty much everything right, but it's it's got some cute will imperfections. But perfect, but fastbender killed it. You killed it. Yeah, I would say pretty much the same thing. This is, for me, one of my most rewatched movies ever. If I'm ever trying to get into the mood for writing, I watch this movie because it just charges you up. It's like an adrenaline shot. I meet so many worth per minute. I have recommended this movie to countless friends, so that's a yes. And wait. So let's go back to that. You have countless friends to recommend films to. I have a lot of friends Trent time, well liked by...

...most, if not all. Yeah, you seem really well connected, both just on a personal level. I like end in the film world. You're probably going to I mean sixty, what can I say? Way And reading out of ten. I mean to get this at nine, point five. WHOA, because I can't. The point five is because there are a few like weird things. There's some lines where I'm like, why do you do it like that? You know, or like that? That could have been that could have gone for another draft maybe. Yeah, but there's just so much working and I appreciate what this movie stands for in a certain sense of like not doing the traditional biopic because it would have been so easy to like have it, you know, starting out in the garage like like having that sort of movie would be a very different type of movie and way less engaging, and this is just a much more entertaining character study. Well, I think that just about wraps up twenty the two thousand and thirteen film jobs. I think, Ashton Cutcher, I think we covered it from end to end. Control and end, control and parth and I, from this point on will only be eating fruit until it proves that it doesn't provide than traditional requirements for life and we dropped dead and therefore can't pod anymore. Yeah, with all that being said, what comes next? What's next week? Will Tread, thanks for asking. Next week we're going to be talking with Martha Pinson, script supervisor for the depoted. Wait, that about it? The depot it? Yeah, weight was. Yeah, she's going to say what she was. She a really Nice Lady. She was very nice and she's worked with, I, you know, Sidney Lumette, Brian De Palma, Oliver Stone, some, you know, just some, some names. Wait and Martin Scuisse. See Mata, that's got it said. D Yes, am I wrong, or has Martha Pinson worked on like ten plus Martin Scorsese films. I don't know if it's ten plus, but it is a lot. It's almost like she has like a long term established relationship with like perhaps arguably, one of the best living directors. Yes, and so we are only one degree of separation away from Martin Scorsese pretty much in next week's episode. So I'm not trying to say that Martin Scorsese's gonna be on our show, but it's like the possibility is open. Yeah, what is Scorsese's next movie? By the way, it is a western. I think it's killer, flowers of the moon, something something like that. Didn't. Didn't dicaprio choose to be in that instead of the next Tarantino? No, he instead of, I think, the next gear of Mo del Toro movie. He dropped out of that because Tarantino doesn't know what movie he's doing yet, or at least he hasn't said. Well, part I'd say not. I'd be a good time to get back on topic and to to end the episode. But before we end it, is there anything we want our viewers, or sorry listeners, to do for us? Or it's an excellent question. We have a list of demands, and part is he has a handgun and he's not afraid to use it. I'm his trusted cohost and he just shot me in square in the jet. He's dead now, and so you can only imagine the unmerciful things that he's like, willing and able to do to you. Number one, you're going to go onto apple podcasts. Number two, you're going to scroll down to the review section. Number three, you're going to hit the five star button and then it's going to ask you to write a review, and you were going to write a very flattering, nice review. Let me reference back to the five star part, because if it's four stars, get the shit out of here. Yeah, we don't want that. And even if you think that we don't deserve all five stars, it's not really up to you, is it? It's tough. I have a gun and you probably don't, and so we're blackmailing you and at the risk of violence, we if you've come this far, we recommend for your own safety and protection for legal purposes. This is all a joke. Yeah, no, guys like we would really appreciate it if you wrote to serve you, but there won't be we're not going to kill you, or there won't be fast there won't be physical repercussions. You're not going to die, only Trent will die. And if mom and Dad, if you're listening to this, this is all parts the idea. I would never commit. Wait, what.

In-Stream Audio Search


Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (120)