What should have been 2015’s Best Picture, “Steve Jobs” is a masterpiece. It’s one of the best films of the decade, and it’s hardly recognized. It was bashed by the public, praised by critics, and snubbed at the Oscars. But if you actually watch it, you’ll find out how beautiful it really is.
Everything about this film is masterful. I don’t know where to start.
Danny Boyle utilizes his shots so well in this film. The long shots, two shots, Dutch tilts, hell, every shot in this film is perfect.
In this shot, Boyle uses the bright colors to grab our attention while keeping the focus on our two main characters using a long two shot. The cinematography in “Steve Jobs” is so gripping and interesting that even if the film were slow-which it’s not-it would still keep your attention. But guess what? It didn’t even get nominated for Best Cinematography.
The film’s editing is so unique. In the shot above, while Steve is comparing several events to his work, the events play out on the wall. Then instead of playing out the scenes chronologically, flashbacks are told during scenes of dialogue in which the flashbacks are relevant. It works so well. The score is also edited in a way where it gets louder as the character speaking talks louder. Sometimes the score gets louder or more grim as a character becomes more angry. This is great editing, and should be done in most films. But guess what? No Best Editing nomination.
Michael Fassbender delivers what I personally think is his best performance yet. He embodies Jobs’s personality. Looking like the Jobs is important, yes, but acting as him is more important. Michael Fassbender doesn’t look anything like Jobs, but he plays Jobs so well. He’s captivating in every line he delivers. He’s narcissistic and completely unlikeable, but also very likeable at sometimes.
This is also because of Danny Boyle’s fantastic direction. He knew the person he was making this film about and directs Fassbender so well as this character. With 2013’s “Jobs”, the director and writer had no idea what they were doing or who they were making their film about. The studio hired on a cheap director and a writer with literally no writing credentials to make a movie about the guy who founded Apple. Steve Jobs was so much more than just the guy who founded Apple, and Danny Boyle and Aaron Sorkin knew that. You can see the passion that’s put into this film. If you didn’t already know, “Steve Jobs” takes place backstage before three Apple launch events: The Macintosh (1984), the NeXT computer (1988), and the iMac (1998). To represent technological advancements, during the first sequence Boyle uses 16mm film. In the second he uses 35mm, and in the third he uses digital. As I said before, no one can deny the filmmakers were passionate about making a great film.
Taking a step back to acting, the rest of the cast is also magnificent. When it was first announced that Seth Rogen was going to play Steve Wozniak, I was skeptical. Seth Rogen hasn’t done much outside of comedy, but I’ve never been so wrong. He’s great, and I prefer him in dramatic roles now. Jeff Daniels deserved an Oscar nomination, in my opinion. Kate Winslet also delivers one of the best performances of her career, which her and Fassbender earned Oscar nominations for if you didn’t know. Neither won though.
Now for the biggest snub of them all. Aaron Sorkin for Best Adapted Screenplay. Part of me thinks this is another one of those things where the voters at the Academy were so sure he’d be nominated and win that they all voted for someone else. The dialogue in this film is outstanding.
But why was “Steve Jobs” so snubbed? I don’t have an answer, but I wish it was more recognized. It truly deserves it. I think “Steve Jobs” is a masterpiece, and one of the best films of the decade so far. I’ll stand by that. I recommend that if you’re reading this and haven’t seen it…go watch it.