JOBS vs STEVE JOBS - How to Adapt an Individual

#stevejobs #screenwriting #videoessay
Following the death of Apple icon Steve Jobs in 2011, two drastically different movies about his life were released. JOBS (2013) recounts Steve’s life in its entirety, whereas STEVE JOBS (2015) focuses on just three days. Somewhat curiously, the more encompassing JOBS bombed both critically and commercially whereas STEVE JOBS went on to become one of the most revered films of the year. Comparing these two films today seems to suggest that they key to making a great biopic is NOT to recount events as faithfully as possible, but rather to draw emotional focus towards the characters at the centre of the story.
Featuring music from Prod. Riddiman:
• need nobody - lofi hip...

[@adamgoldsteintv]

The Ashton Kutcher movie was entertaining, but the Aaron Sorkin one was phenomenal.

[@bullwinkle2664]

Very well done. As a semi tech nerd at the time, I remember being somewhat disappointed that “Steve jobs” didn’t deep dive into the history of Apple but in retrospect your point that the company is an extension of the man is illustrated brilliantly.

[@CraigBickerstaff]

@@thefilmicquest I don't think so, During an interview about his Social Network script sometime after it was announced he was doing Steve Jobs Aaron Sorkin was asked about the Steve Jobs movie and he says then and there basically what the film became 3 acts based on the behind the scenes of 3 product launches played out in real-time. It's on youtube somewhere but it's been a while since I've watched it so it would probably take hours to find it again. I think he even said which products he planned on using.

[@ACasualWeeb]

Phenomenal video! I usually don't dive into biopics due to finding them either too dramatic and unrealistic or simply grounded too much to be entertaining. Steve Jobs sounds like a really good balance of both so I might have to check it out, thanks!

[@cyanrazorCel]

I agree. Historical accuracy is not always what a movie is about. Some of it is always going to boil down to the writer/director's personal opinions.

[@qazmko22]

Woz the main man in the room, has said that 'Jobs' (2013) was held back by Kutcher's cartoony depiction of Steve Jobs as this genius, who is brilliantly making everything.
and has said that 'Steve Jobs' (2015) is amazing because it truly gets into the head and mind of Steve Jobs.
Of the two I highly suggest 'Steve Jobs' (2015) he become much more human and relatable.

[@JuJuDen87]

Steev Jobs is nothing but a Salesman who got Lucky .......
You Sheeps are The Uneducated Lesserminds who make them Genius .......

[@hujinom]

Agreeeee

[@movedmindpoRUSZonyUMYS]

Very well explained! Narratives aren't simply documentaries, that's very important in this discussion. Of course, stuff like historical accuracy is cool and makes for a nice story to tell about during interviews, but the main strength of any film is its artistic value. Just like in case of Jobs vs Steve Jobs. I love the former (plus it has some killer score)!

[@THEGREENHELIUM]

Don’t forget it a biopic can be a tragedy - Amadeus is a fantastic example of such that I happened to rewatch recently. Thank you for the video!

[@thefilmicquest]

Still haven’t seen Amadeus but perhaps this is the time! Thank you

[@juggaloscumdog]

I prefer Steve Jobs. But idk if I would, if I had no knowledge of Steve before. Which for me, originally came from the Pirates of Silicon Valley and then years later Jobs. Also a documentary I watched on Netflix I forget the name of. Without that idk if I would have had the necessary context.

[@catchywatchy7086]

Actually I have been thinking about researching the difference between two film..this video save me a lot of time and effort..thanks..

[@dahnsenwahnsenyes]

this movies have so different angle of view so for me this both films are part of just one movie. Watch Jobs first and than Steve Jobs, think of it, as one big movie

[@malevxlent3934]

jobs is not a good movie do not listen to this guy, just watch steve jobs. choose happiness

[@jqyhlmnp]

There’s a lot of tiny things Danny does in this film that he learned from “127 hours” :3

[@RudyBoy]

What a great essay, love it

[@TimJSwan]

I have to respectfully disagree. Steve Jobs was absolutely fascinating to me and I learned a lot about him through his talks. I was devestated when he died because I was sure I wanted to meet him. His conversation about "a man on a bicycle" is hair raising. His company and his talks really do show what kind of mind he has which you cannot get by just hanging out with him.

[@film_magician]

Bio - Pic

[@isaaccrist8642]

I’ve never heard anyone say biopic like that, I kinda like it

[@kweeneverything]

Great follow

[@Jon-ko1qg]

Joanna in Steve Jobs (2015) wasn't his secretary, Kate Winslet was playing his Director of Marketing

[@thefilmicquest]

Massive oversight on my part

[@STARK0181]

The upcoming Michael Jackson biopic is probably going to fall into the same traps as "Jobs".

[@joewhitehead3]

Not everyone can be Aaron Sorkin

[@thefilmicquest]

In a better world...
I'm actually glad not everyone can. There being only one is precisely what makes him so good.

[@alexpittsley]

not saying biopic right is annoying

[@thefilmicquest]

Can only affect what I say, not how I say it

[@Able406]

I hate both of these films. Pirates of Silicon Valley is the best Jobs biopic

[@CorinneBurrows]

No, it isn't. It's a great film, but Steve Jobs destroys it.

[@calebmcclure3893]

am i the only one who enjoyed Jobs more than Steve jobs?

[@thefilmicquest]

It’s definitely a fun watch but not even near the level of Steve Jobs imo

[@JuJuDen87]

I Liked Jobs 2013 than Steev Jobs.....