Watch Michael Fassbender as Steve Jobs in new official trailer

Steve Jobs will be in theaters on October 9th.


Michael Fassbeneder as Steve Jobs
Michael Fassbeneder as Steve Jobs
Steve Jobs is directed by Academy Award winner Danny Boyle and written by Academy Award winner Aaron Sorkin. The producers are Mark Gordon, Guymon Casady of Film 360, Scott Rudin and Academy Award winner Christian Colson.


The film’s website is:

MacDailyNews Take: Fingers crossed!

John Sculley: Forcing Steve Jobs out of Apple was a mistake – April 18, 2014
John Sculley: I wish I told Steve Jobs ‘This is your company, let’s figure out how you can come back and be CEO’ – Septemeber 13, 2011
John Sculley: Apple’s big mistake was hiring me as CEO – October 14, 2010
Sculley: Uh, maybe I shouldn’t have fired Steve Jobs – June 7, 2010


    1. Besides, they again repeat this nonsense about Jobs not being able to do anything (which is false since Jobs has programmed since 1960s and was engineer long before meeting Wozniak, and was professional engineers before the supposed scene has happened).

      1. Paul King, worked at NeXT for 2 years

        Bill Gates’ reputation is that he was an excellent coder in his day, and technically astute and incisive throughout his time leading Microsoft. In college (at Harvard), Bill Gates and Paul Allen wrote a full BASIC language interpreter in assembly language for a computer they didn’t even have access to and which had only 4000 bytes of memory. They wrote it on a PDP-10 at Harvard that was running an Intel 8080 emulator. Bill Gates once said that he remembered every technical detail and variable name of those early programs, although surely that would not be true today.

        Steve Jobs was never a programmer. He was a product visionary, astute businessman, and excellent if eccentric salesman. It was Steve Wozniak who built the Apple I (one) while Steve promoted it. That said (from my experience working at his company NeXT), Steve had an amazing knack for understanding technical concepts and how they could be relevant. While he had never programmed, his technical people convinced him of the revolutionary power of object-oriented programming. As a result, he made object-oriented design the central theme of the NeXT machine and he developed a great sales pitch for its ability to reduce code bulk: “The line of code you don’t write is the line of code you never have to debug.”

        Written 15 Jun, 2013. 152,053 views.

    2. I don’t believe you’re correct about this. According to just about everyone including Steve himself, he never wrote code. He certainly didn’t write code during the 60s. Jobs was a bit older than I am. I was a baby and a toddler during the 60s. I started coding daily in 1976.

      “Steve didn’t ever code,” writes Wozniak. “He wasn’t an engineer and he didn’t do any original design, but he was technical enough to alter and change and add to other designs.”

      Steve did have an uncanny ability to look at a product and tell what it needed to be for us to want and need it. He was a true visionary in many ways. I’d swap skillsets in a second.

      Read more:

      1. Do not confuse what Wozniak (a loose canon on many issues) tells with actual Steven’s history. He has started as programmer in 1960s since later 1960s (for huge HP machines), being schooler yet.

        However, as the title of your link correctly states, he did not write code for Apple; and I did not state otherwise.

    3. Horrible choice of actor… Nothing says Steve about him.. Not the looks , not the demeanor , not the voice and tone… Nada.

      What a shame becouse otherwise it seens to be a nice production.

      1. Blame Danny Boyle.

        Fassbender is a credible actor. But I’m confused on why Danny Boyle would not have had the make-up team change his hair and appearance to make Fassbender approximate Jobs. Further, Fassbender used his own voice, and did not appear to have any voice coaching to use the vocal characteristics of Jobs, again, a very curious decision by Boyle.

        You can’t slap a pair of glasses and a black mock turtleneck on an actor and call it a day. I find Boyle’s decisions on this to be very curious. If the audience wants to understand Steve Jobs, first, the actor has to present a reasonable facsimile of the subject’s character.

        It’s easy to point the blame on Michael Fassbender. But it’s up to director Danny Boyle to instruct the cast on how to create the personas of the historical figures they were hired to portray.

        Compare Michael Fassbender’s Steve Jobs to Ben Kingsley’s Ghandi, or Helen Mirren’s Queen Elizabeth, as two examples. In both cases, and many others, the director, actor and make-up crew took pains to make the character feel like the original. Why Boyle chose not to do this is very peculiar.

        I have an uneasy feeling of how this movie will turn out.

  1. When are they going to get him right?

    Im beginning to think that the only accurate movie on Steve Jobs is a documentary.

    Maybe Steve is one person that a film should never be made about…

  2. More revisionist history from another ‘CIA approved’ script from the bowels of Hollyweird. Why does it seem that the sooner a movie gets made about a real life event / person, the more propaganda and revisionism is involved?

  3. It seems to me that everyone here was expecting a docudrama. What we got was exactly what was promised: a a Hollywood film that is a work of fiction, written by one of the top screenwriters of today (Sorkin) and inspired (re-read that word) by a real life.

    The screenplay is NOT a transcript from some actual events. It is a result of creative effort of a well-known screenwriter.

    There are very few Hollywood movies that were inspired by real events, and in which the dramatic story closely follows the events from real life. This is because rarely do events form real life line up perfectly for a 110-minute motion picture story line. One such film is Apollo 13, where film dialogue relied extensively on transcripts from communications during that fateful voyage. And even there, many scenes were completely made up in order to propel the story forward.

    Based on the cast, director and writer, I have a feeling that this will be a good Hollywood film. However, I’m virtually 100% certain that vast majority of MDN followers won’t like it and would consider the 1999 TV movie “Pirates of Silicon Valley” (the one with third-rate TV actors and no-name director and writers) much better… mainly because its story is more true to the actual events than the Sorkin screenplay.

    Hollywood doesn’t make accurate biopics. This is usually done better by TV people (with documentaries, or ‘docu-dramas’). Hollywood does what Hollywood does best: fictional entertainment (you know, Terminator, Jurassic Park, Frozen…).

    1. I thought Aaron Sorkin did renowned work in television. Not Hollywood.

      No movie is ever true, and not because of Hollywood or writer slant or artistic license or story compression but because a person is a multiplicity, perceived and interpreted by others through different prismatic shards. The closer to the present day, the more the multiplicity.

      The Fallen Hero myth is nicely framed by T. L. Sherred in his short story E For Effort. No public figure matches everyone’s perception of him or her.

Reader Feedback
