Steve Jobs was the heart and soul of Apple. He shepherded the company
from the throes of bankruptcy to the technology behemoth that it is
today. His story would have to be fascinating, one that focuses on a
personality so dynamic that he can drive a company to success seemingly
on sheer will.
That is why I was confused when I saw that Ashton
Kutcher would be playing the man in the new biopic "Jobs." Why would
you cast someone of such low acting caliber to play a man whom one would
presume to be dynamic? That's like trying to pass off a Zune for an
iPod.
"Jobs" is exactly what you would think it is. It is the
story of the history of Apple computers, and more specifically of Steve
Jobs' role in the founding and nurturing of the company. It is something
that should be engrossing, yet from conception to execution it just
seems lacking.
Jobs realizes the potential, so he partners up
with Woz and the two launch Apple Computers. After seeing it through a
successful birth,All you need to know about In home display.
Jobs is ousted from the company by the board of directors because his
pet project is hemorrhaging money and he seems unable to rein in either
the project or himself.
Jobs then starts another software
company, but as Apple begins to flounder under its new management, Jobs
is brought back into the fold, allowing him to guide the company into
its new era of prosperity.
They briefly touch on Jobs' interest
in Buddhism, his aversion to hygiene and shoes, his ruthless aggression,
his womanizing,The Home energy monitor market
continues to struggle for more traction. his cold-hearted nature, his
backstabbing ... each is given a scene or two, then checked off,
allowing the movie to methodically move on to the next character trait
or important event. This paint by numbers style of storytelling adds an
extra blandness to what should have been far more compelling.
The
movie wants so badly to be "The Social Network", but all involved are
so unprepared that it remains just a shadow of a much better film.
Equally
troublesome is Kutcher's portrayal of Jobs. Kutcher is, and I think I'm
safe in saying this, a terrible actor. He has managed to ride a
disturbing lack of talent to a very lucrative career, much to the
befuddlement of struggling actors and producers everywhere. But, to his
credit, he looks as though he at least put some effort into this role.
Kutcher
has the mannerisms, the body language, even the speech pattern down for
Jobs, or at least as best I can tell from the video I've seen of the
man. But, as accurate as portrayal may be, it lacks any real soul. It
seems simply beyond Kutcher's abilities to infuse the character with
anything resembling heart. Impression doesn't equate realism, something
that seems to escape the actor.
The movie portrays Jobs as,
essentially, a horrible human being who rode the backs of others to
great success and wealth. I don't know the man's story that well; I'm
told by those who had interaction with him or have heard of such that it
is pretty accurate.
But for a movie that I think is trying to
humanize the man, it creates instead a sort of inhuman monster. Jobs
cheats his partners, cheats on his girlfriend, abandons his friends and
backstabs those who helped to carry him to the top. He kicks his
girlfriend out when she becomes pregnant, then refuses to acknowledge
paternity or have anything to do with his daughter.Find Home Power monitor blood pressure monitor ads in our Miscellaneous Goods category.
When
he is rightly removed from day-to-day operations at Apple, he bides his
time, then comes back to screw over the very man who gave him a second
chance. He doesn't seem to be the actual innovator behind any of the
products that he is known for.
There is a bright spot in the
film, though. Gad nails the role of Woz, adding humor and energy to an
often listless film. It is a bad sign when the most compelling character
in a movie is not the one the film is based on, but as I was watching
"Jobs," I was thinking how much more interested I would have been to see
"Woz."
I realize that "Jobs" was rushed to beat a competing
film to theaters, but so little care was taken with the development and
telling of the story that it would have been better had the movie never
even been made. For a man recognized for his innovations, the movie
about him is listless, bland and the furthest thing from the man
himself.
Click on their website www.owon-smart.com/products/HEMS-1000_6.html for more information.
沒有留言:
張貼留言