There’s nothing in the director Danny Boyle’s visual conception or dramatic organization of the film that distinguishes itself from Sorkin’s text-as, for instance, there is, profoundly, in David Fincher’s filming of Sorkin’s script for “The Social Network.” Boyle is so deferential to the script that he might as well have torn the pages from the script and pasted them on the screen. I’m inclined to consider Sorkin the movie’s guiding artistic spirit. The primary shortcoming of “Steve Jobs” is the simplistic reduction of Jobs, by the movie’s screenwriter, Aaron Sorkin, to a small set of facile diagnoses. The choices become a question of not violating the spirit of the character while not deforming a sense of the world. There’s no bio-pic rule that dictates in advance which departures from the record are appropriate, which omissions are legitimate. But that sense of wonder isn’t the same as insight. The details are what can make a life-its surprising reality-seem even more wondrous than a drama. Yet the very notion of the bio-pic is at odds with dramatic form, because lives are untidy and unstrung, while dramas are orderly and organized. To rival fiction, lives need to be transformed into fiction. But the elements, qualities, achievements, or actions that make this person’s life exemplary and dramatic may not be immediately detectable from any particular moment that this person actually lived. Every bio-pic affirms, first, that it’s worth your while to know about this person’s life and, second, that there’s something about this person’s life that makes it extraordinary and exemplary, that transforms this person into a character equal to those of fiction. The prime cause of every bio-pic isn’t informational it’s moral and reflexive.
STEVE JOBS 2015 ONLINE FREE MOVIE
( Laura Bradley and Rick Tetzeli do the heavy lifting at Slate and Fast Company, respectively.) It’s the fact that the fictionalized elements of the movie don’t produce increased insight into Jobs, and don’t lead to a grasp of Jobs’s spirit in exchange for the reportorial letter of his life story. The problem with “Steve Jobs” isn’t its departures from facts about Jobs’s life that can be rapidly gleaned from a glance at Walter Isaacson’s biography of him. It’s as easy to lie with facts as it is with fictions-a tendentious selection of verifiable events can turn an ostensible report into a grotesque distortion. In any case, the distinction between fiction and nonfiction isn’t the distinction between falsehood and truth. Michael Fassbender as the title character in “Steve Jobs.” PHOTOGRAPH BY FRANCOIS DUHAMEL / UNIVERSAL PICTURES / EVERETT
0 kommentar(er)
