Alex Gibney’s Steve Jobs documentary is available now in some theaters, on Amazon Instant Video and, ironically, on iTunes. It’s a film that purports to figure out what made Steve Jobs tick. And it does a lot, just not that.
I’m not a dispassionate reviewer here. More than a year before Jobs died I tried to hire Alex Gibney to make a Steve Jobs film with me. At that point he suggested I be the director, that he’d coach me (“It’s not that hard,” the Oscar-winner claimed.) We talked and met but didn’t come to a deal. Later Gibney decided to do a Jobs film on his own — this film — and he came to me for help. We talked and met but again didn’t come to a deal. Nothing is unusual about any of this, but it made me eager to see what kind of movie he would make and how it would compare to the one I originally had in mind.
Now some of you may recall that I did a Steve Jobs film — The Lost Interview — also released by Magnolia Pictures, the company showing Gibney’s movie. But my Jobs film was an accident, a stroke of good fortune, a documentary shot in 69 minutes and brought to the screen for under $25,000 including digital restoration and publicity. Gibney’s movie cost $2 million to make.
And the money shows on the screen. Gibney is a very skilled documentary director surrounded by a staff of the best professionals in the business. The film is beautifully shot and the audio is spectacular, too. Even where the audio is bad it is deliberately bad — for effect. You can hear Gibney asking questions from off camera. You can hear me asking questions, too, because about two minutes of the film were taken from my film, for which my partners and I were paid.
There aren’t very many interviews in the film but the ones he has are good, especially Chrisann Brennan (Lisa’s mother), a very sweet Dan Kottke, and hardware engineer Bob Belleville. All the interviews are excellent but those three stood out for me.
In a documentary film the thing you want most to get and hardly ever do is a moment of true emotion and Bob Belleville’s crying while talking about the passing of this man who he also says ruined his life, well that’s one of those moments. I wish the film had ended right there, around 45 minutes in.
But it didn’t end there.
The last 40 minutes or so are a succession of negative items that are all true — backdated stock options, Foxconn employee suicides, corporate tax avoidance, Apple bullying the press, and the ingenuous way Apple treated the news of Steve’s health — the health of the CEO of a major public company. All these events involved Steve and represented aspects of his personality, but they felt to me while watching the movie like two influences were in effect: 1) the need to get in as much material as possible (this would be, after all, Gibney’s only-ever film on the topic), and; 2) it was a CNN Films co-production and therefore had to have some element of journalism, not just be a tone poem to narcissism.
So the film is 20 minutes too long. And by the time you get to the end and swing back to the central idea that Gibney is personally trying to figure out Steve Jobs (Gibney is the film’s narrator, not just the guy asking questions from off camera) he doesn’t really come to anything like a conclusion.
This is funny given our earlier discussions back in New York about the Walter Isaacson authorized biography of Jobs that we had both thought was kind of a snow job. At the end of that book Isaacson had pretty much thrown up his hands saying that Steve was “complicated” and therefore beyond understanding.
Steve certainly was complicated, but I expected more of a conclusion from Gibney, a sense of really coming to terms with Steve.
Ultimately Steve Jobs wasn’t the man in the machine, he was the machine. And the mourning for Steve that so confused Gibney, because he saw Jobs as a very unlovable character, was mourning for a passing age as much as a man. After that the iPhone became a phone, Apple became a company, and technology pretty much lost any pretense of character.
And Captain Hook was dead.
The link to the documentary on iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/movie/steve-jobs-man-in-machine/id1027677408?at=10lHrn . By the way, it’s available in the USA but not in Spain (and I guess many other countries)
Thanks for reminding me Steve Jobs hates my choice of operating system. They tried to get me to download a copy on itunes for Microsoft windows. They still have no client for Linux, or even BSD which OSX is based on. The legacy of Steve Jobs lives on.
“the mourning for Steve … was mourning for a passing age as much as a man.”
This. Yes. The book “Fire in the Valley” and the PBS show “Triumph of the Nerds” catch the “heroic” era of PC’s, before we became corporate, very well.
Really? Mourning for someone you never knew, or just knew in a work context. Jeezus people — get a f***ing life.
–
Steve What’s-His-Name didn’t cure cancer or even pimples. He didn’t even invent anything in the computer space. He was a rapaciously greedy, mean bastard, who happened to be very good at marketing. And even though he got rich doing it, he worked like a slave until his final ending. That last sentence makes it hard for me to even respect the man as intelligent. Any normal person would have quit while he was still young and enjoyed the money on some beach.
Re: “Any normal person would have quit while he was still young and enjoyed the money on some beach.” I think that’s the point. He was not normal.
“Any normal person would have quit while he was still young and enjoyed the money on some beach.”
As to RonC’s counter….exactly! There was obviously other things driving Jobs….silly comment. Regardless if you like or respect him, it wasn’t all driven strictly by the $$$. That’s part of what makes the story so interesting.
Fully agreed. Like all narcissists, Jobs was driven by the need for attention (which he didn’t get as a child) and a need to feel superior to everyone he met (he did this by seizing control of every situation). People like Jobs have no interest in beaches or mountains or even money – they only care about being worshipped and adored by people.
Keep in mind that Jobs spent his whole life working for us, which is what brought attention to himself. I’ve done plenty of things which happened to bring attention to myself, but that was never the goal. In Jobs’ case it was a side effect of setting and achieving great goals.
You have it backwards: he needed the attention and worked to get it; the insanely great products were the side effect.
I suppose that’s one way of looking at the universe.
“Insanely great products” and “working for us”. Yes, you people have no life and no perspective on life.
–
Jobs didn’t cure cancer. He didn’t even cure hang nails. He built some FAIRLY DECENT computech/toys, and marketed the hell out of it. No — I’m being too generous. He built status symbols and marketed to weak people who need that kind of conformity.
… and yet, a new age IS upon us, an age with no heroes, no villains, just a bunch of dancing werewolves with their thumbs up each other’s asses.
I feel like your article, especially the end, is more profound than Gibney’s film.
If a film shows in a theater (or iTunes or Amazon) and nobody goes to see it, does it really exist?
I just read Creativity, Inc. by Ed Catmull. This is a management book handled through the framework of a Pixar history.
One of the intriguing things is the presentation of Steve Jobs from someone who worked and fought with him for decades. Catmull was never a sychophant and never a hater. He shows how and why he came to respect Steve Jobs and where people vying for attention miss the important things.
Steve isn’t the focus of the book, but when he enters the story, it is intriguing to read. Check it out.
Pixar provided the bulk of Jobs’s fortune and was the only place where he allowed his managers to manage. Yes, there was definitely a push and pull there, but Catmull and Lasseter were more than a match for Jobs, who had opinions and demanded some level of respect but knew he wasn’t the expert. Only Alvy Ray Smith in that bunch is especially bitter today and that has mainly to do with his holdings being diluted to nothing by Jobs continually investing in the company.
Hey Bob. I was a co-founder with Alvy in Altamira Software, the company that moved him away from Pixar (and Steve) in 1992.
Alvy was maybe bitter back then (and sad that he wasn’t continuing with his friend Ed to do Toy Story, which was a deal-in-hand when we started Altamira), but fortunately he did well when we sold Altamira to Microsoft in 1994. (So did Steve and Pixar, BTW — that’s a little untold story…) He might still be a little bitter because of the way Steve basically wrote him out of the whole Pixar story later on, and he’d have a right to be.
Steve and Alvy certainly didn’t have good chemistry, but in the end Steve did right by us and we all profited from it. I actually think Steve showed a rare moment of compassion in our business dealings, and I’m particularly indebted to him for it.
I’m inclined to agree with Bob – my feeling is that as time passes Steve Jobs will be better recognized for his talents as a designer – I see him as being much closer to Walter Gropius (Bauhaus) than anything else. Steve’s vision has changed the world that we live in – and, in general, for the better. I’m no fan of Apple as a company and I own no Apple products but I respect Steve’s passion and his vision – certainly he was no saint, but then who is these days?
I agree with everyone, your closing comments are quite profound. I find all of your work when you describe any of your encounters with Steve to be more real, yet never take away, necessarily, from the image i have of Steve in my mind. I don’t know who would pay you to do it, but i would certainly buy your book about Steve or your full blown documentary!
Thanks!
Russ
we are all “black boxes”, you can see what goes in and what comes out. what came out of Steve Jobs changed the world, for the better, but not for everyone.
Steve was a lot like Walt Disney; connoisseurs of the work in their fields, unbending intent and focus, opportunistic, opinionated, strong leaders. Men that extreme in their talents tend to be extreme in many other aspects of their lives, it goes with the territory.
Bob,
You wrote that whole piece because you had that great pun line?
If only I could see both movies for $3: http://oad.syr.edu/event/pan-and-steve-jobs-double-feature-movie-premieres/
Pan and Steve Jobs Double Feature Movie Premieres. See two movies for the price of one! First is Pan, the origin story of Peter Pan and Captain Hook, followed by Steve Jobs, a biographical drama about the Apple, Inc. co-founder, written by Aaron Sorkin. This event features both movies back to back in the same theater. Buses will depart at 10:00 p.m. from the front of Schine Student Center and Goldstein Student Center. $3.00 covers event costs and transportation. Tickets will be on sale starting September 25 at the Schine Box Office. All students must bring their ticket and valid SU student ID.
nice piece, Bob.
I always thought Jobs was adored because he was identified as gifting us with the machines in which we invested our own identities: the Mac, the iPod, the iPhone. Like babies looking into their mother’s eyes, we look into these devices to discover who we are. I AM the person with this kind of playlist, and these kinds of selfies.
“Corporate tax avoidance” is not a negative, it’s just part of his responsibility to the company, which he delegated to the appropriate tax experts. It’s illegal “tax evasion” that would have been a negative, but that didn’t happen.
Ofcourse…. pff!
I liked the Isaacson book a lot. Just curious why you thought it was a snow job, he may have muted some of his less attractive attributes but he certainly didn’t present Jobs him as being that likable.
//
In terms of his legacy, I don’t think Jobs could have picked a better time to exit. With or without him Apple was going to have a hell of time finding another market they could disrupt the way they did with phones and tablets.
//
You probably already know this, but apparently it was 18 years ago today that Jobs returned to Apple: https://www.crossingwallstreet.com/archives/2015/09/18-years-ago-today-steve-jobs-returns.html
I just saw the 2 part American Experience about Walt Disney and I am very much struck by the parallels between Disney and Jobs. Both were very involved with low level details on very big projects.
Both visionaries, both experienced tremendous successes as well as defeats during their careers.
Think Snow White/Macintosh, Fantasia/Lisa, Disneyland/iPod, Disneyworld/iPhone… the list goes on.
Both left dynastic companies when they passed. Many people felt a great sense of loss when Disney died they same way they did for Jobs.
I highly recommend viewing the video: http://video.pbs.org/video/2365556336/
This is an excellent comparison
And it shows the labour abuse Disney had, the same is done today with H1B
But I like today people reacted and went on strike
But you also had the MacArthy era
So a very good lesson indeed
“Apple became a company, and technology pretty much lost any pretense of character.”
For companies as inextricably tied to their founders, like Apple, or HP, the biggest challenge is not to lose touch. While change it inevitable, some handle it better than others.
We got another reminder of that yesterday when HP announced their big layoff, as a result of the fracturing of the company to placate Wall Street and its shareholders. HP lost its Way years ago. And hey, don’t forget to vote for Carly!
George Lucas is a better parallel for Jobs than Disney. Disney was a *terrible* businessman. His brother Roy actually had to run the company for him.
Jobs had incredible instincts about what technology could and should do, and how it needed to look and work in order to excite people. And he was an absolute master at using charm to get what he wanted when he thought it was worth the effort. But he was also a tyrant. I’ve heard that his second stint at Apple was less tyrannical–possibly because he’d simply mellowed slightly with age, or possibly because his time in the wilderness with Pixar and NeXT taught him a lot about managing people.
But I have to admit that I’m curious to see–now that he’s seen Gibney’s film and found it unsatisfying–whether Bob would still like to make his own documentary about Jobs.
No one could understand him.
That was the conclusion after all the Reagan biographies as well.
He also had a big vision.
“We win, they lose”
“We will relegate Communism to the ash heap of history”
Gibney’s a pretty good documentarian (I particularly loved his piece on Hunter S. Thompson), but Bob, I have to say I feel you would’ve done a much better job than Gibney on any documentary about Steve Jobs, and I can only wonder what the end result would have been like if you and Gibney had come to agreement and worked together on the film.
More than any other industry, any story about the history of the development of the PC (and all related) industry from 1975-2010, before it go SO commoditized, can IMO only be really told by someone who was an insider and an integral part of that industry, right from the beginning.
Someone like…..Robert X. Cringely! I’m sorry, but as someone who’s also been in this biz since very close to the beginning, I have yet to see any movie/documentary done by anyone (especially movie directors who cover a wide range of subjects) from OUTSIDE the industry that really gives me the feel of capturing not only the story but the true spirit and feeling (dare I use the word “zeitgeist?”) of that time. The only place I get that is from Cringely’s work (“Triumph of the Nerds” being an excellent example)….someone who was there AND had the unique ability to tell the story in a way that brings one back to what it as really like.
Maybe next time Bob, eh? Your fans are waiting!
I wasn’t planning on watching it because of the various reviews I saw but anything computer history I am a sucker for so I caved. Nothing here you do not already know. I rented it online but if I was in a theater I might have walked out. It’s essential theme is that Steve Jobs was imperfect/flawed so why are we crying over him. And then attempt in some ethereal way to then ask what does that say about us. It came off as very contrived though. I for one am tired of trying to rip successful people down and corporation bashing. The world is imperfect and the people in it are inherently flawed. But those that do this are nothing more than vandals. And like the Vandals of ancient Rome who promulgated the destruction of works of art thinking that made them as powerful or enlightened as the artist is nothing but fallacy. Those people and “journalists” are just full of envy. But judge it for yourself.
“I for one am tired of trying to rip successful people down and corporation bashing.”
.
Aren’t you equally as tired of hired PR flacks and such who work to hype “successful” people and corporations? Under the circumstances, trying to achieve a little balance here would seem to be a wise choice.
.
“Those people and “journalists” are just full of envy.”
.
Envy rarely has anything to do with it. Often it’s more about inside knowledge that they just can’t make fully public yet – perhaps knowledge based on whispers and well-founded rumors and “I’m not really supposed to talk about this” and such.
.
“…what does that say about us…” It says that “we” (humans) have a powerful bias towards taking megalomaniacs at their own estimation of themselves. That bias is a problem, often a very serious problem indeed. Historical examples are far too numerous and obvious to require citation; pick your favorite.
In my view, we (autonomous individuals) have a high ethical obligation to correct this bias in ourselves.
Re:”like the Vandals of ancient Rome who promulgated the destruction of works of art thinking that made them as powerful or enlightened as the artist”. Great analogy. I may choose to avoid Apple products for one reason or another, as a matter of personal preference, but I would never criticize great, hard working, dedicated, men like Jobs.
The Lost Interview doesn’t appear to be available anywhere except the Australian iTunes store. I’m pretty sure I saw it back when you released it, but wanted to watch it again. Seems like it was played only once on PBS or something like that. Where can I find it? The link on the Magnolia web site points to Amazon and there’s no product available.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B008NA3HZY/ref=dp_olp_all_mbc?ie=UTF8&condition=all
Just saw the movie. I came away with a strange feeling that something was missing. Before and during the “birth” of the Macintosh, Me, my buddies and all of Europe were doing pretty hot stuff with MIDI music sequencing, audio mixing – on… not the Macintosh, but on the Atari computers (the ST, and later the MegaST, for which I had installed card #0035, a brand new digital audio card from the just birthed Digidesign and used and product-tested its first Pro Tools. I nearly sunk my economy when I found a 40 MB RLL drive which cost me $450, and connected it to a connector-and-bus native on the Atari… and our screens were 2-3 times the little Mac Screen. We feel left out when the Macintosh was birthing and Windows was emerging from the primordial slime, re-inventing everything that we had and did on our Ataris (and Amigas). Lousy drivers and Atari’s death-plunge stopped everything. But I’ll never forget my young nephew visiting one summer, seeing my kit, he took me to sites, he shot video and HE processed the audio on my setup – and this all before the Mac II showed up.He didn’t sleep worked all night, and in the morning my girlfriend and I were thrilled to see his first oeuvre: Mika Ajamian – Bad Boy!!! To this day, I miss that Atari, but am glad that I was in that turbulent stew of ideas and technologies.
There were lots of machines, the zx spectrum, after it the ql which could multi task, and which multitasker made it into the Linux kernel, after that the z88 size of an iPad with a 20 hour battery life and solid state storage, in many ways better specs than an iPad, then there was Amiga setting game standards, and the cheaper Atari st
The PC took over but was the lousiest machine, but it promised compatibility
The apple 2gs was a very good cheap machine, they could have had the hole market, but jobs killed it for the mac which was in many ways a much worse machine
There were dozens and dozens of machines, the Jupiter ace, the oric, the BBC micro
And there was real progress, in battery life, portability, accelerated graphics, operating systems, standards which the Amiga set
Today you just get a beige PC that’s faster with a slower crappier unstable operating system that does nothing for the user, or an iPad that is so closed that you can’t install third party software or open source
Linux is kept off PC’s and tablets so as not to hurt microsofts operating system junk or apples closed monopoly
Gone are the days when you could buy a computer and programme it
Microsoft is junk, Apple is closed, and Linux which was created on the PC is kept away from PC’s and tablets
Computers were cheaper too
You could buy computers from 100 to 200 range even 400
And all were programmable, so a new computer industry started up
Today good luck programming windows with its anti competitive practices or apple with the same practices, neither of which will run open software
Today’s computers are expensive closed and crippled
And the once thriving and exciting software business is moribund, flooded with H1B Hindu workers taking jobs tags have been dumbed down beyond all recognition
There is this great article on The Cringely here: http://archive.wired.com/wired/archive/6.12/cringely_pr.html
Of course, he will die poor.
Unlike the enormous fabrications/creations of Bill Gates and the PhD study in people, of that strange psychopathic Steve Jobs, who have been Spin-doctored right up there with Christianity’s Whats-is-name.
It is only the Internet that has prevented an enormous conflict for the world as we all know, the rules are clear: “only one Saviour at a time is allowed.”
Then there is the codicil: “And he must be dead”.
But, it is the story of that pathetic in all other ways, lying huckster Jobs and his proof that you can sell that 7% of total suckers, anything, just so long as you pick your mark carefully and never, ever admit your blunders.
That can give hope to the rest of us THAT ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.
(Just never admit to the truth – and preach only to the already converted)
That article was written 17 years ago when Cringely was 45, now he’s 62
ihave a funny feeling that iknow something ishouldn’t. noomi. Ever have Apple flavored moonshine?
Can you share?
” After that the iPhone became a phone, Apple became a company, and technology pretty much lost any pretense of character.”
Well written line! Maybe that just shows you that Jobs had basically formed this massive illusion around Apple and now it is revealed itself to be what it actually is. After all, lets not forget that as the face of Apple, he is also responsible for taking advantage of people’s emotions to influence them in such a manner that they lineup outside Apple stores way in advance of a product launch. It would be interesting if someone came out with how much was he involved in the actual design of Apple’s products and how much in marketing Apple.
The reality distortion field was exposed in 1981: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_distortion_field . The iPhone marked the beginning of a much bigger company, but I doubt if there was a change of “character”. That is, unless we equate the size of a company to it’s “character”, so I suspect we first need to agree on the definition of “character”.
From that article: “biographer Walter Isaacson states that around 1972, while Jobs was attending Reed College, Robert Friedland taught Steve the reality distortion field.”
No, just no. All narcissists have RDF as part of their personality – they certainly did not learn it!
I’ve heard that when Steve Jobs (or Bill Gates, for that matter) entered a room, he would know he was the smartest one there. However, if it’s true, then it’s not narcissism, it’s just a fact. I doubt if either one of them would make that assumption if Einstein were also present.
Narcissists think they are superior to everyone, whether that’s actually true or not (usually not). Einstein was far too modest to make such a disgusting assumption. Like many narcissists, Jobs would think he was the smartest in the room until he came across someone that was smarter, but he still considered himself to be superior in other ways to that person (emotionally, spiritually etc.)
P.S. If Jobs and Einstein were in the same room, Jobs would try to exploit him and then say to himself ‘I’m better than you Albert because I’m taller and have more money’ – that’s the kind of child-like logic that Jobs had.
I would very much like to see a psychologist interviewed as part of any future documentary on Jobs, as Narcissistic Personality Disorder (a serious form of mental illness) is so poorly understood by the general public. Paradoxically, interviewing the very people that knew jobs is counter-productive: they were just seeing his fake persona (but they didn’t know it was all false). For example, if you had interviewed me about my best friend 5 years ago, I would have said he was a generous, warm, happy person. If you interviewed me today about him (2 years after the 27-year friendship ended and 1.5 years after I stumbled upon articles and videos concerning Narcissistic Personality Disorder) I would tell you that he was a selfish, unhappy, people-using parasite. He was only being nice to me to use me, and always managed to convince me that he was blameless when the $$$ I invested in his failed projects were lost!
Jobs is easy to understand once you truly understand narcissism. Here are some resources to get you started:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no5-rKy_rqc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1AyRkHd8Yg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1lClgIfA9U
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2015/04/16/3-reasons-you-cant-win-with-a-narcissist/
https://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Do_Narcissists_Have_Friends.html
It is reasonably clear that Jobs was somewhere on the high functioning side of the autism spectrum. He probably had very little in the way of empathy and the behaviors people didn’t like in Jobs were probably not voluntary choices for him.
I suspect since most people that are not like that themselves cannot put themselves in Jobs shoes, they are left judging him based on what expected behavior would be like for themselves.
A dog might steal dinner from the dining room table while you’re not looking, but you can look at him and know the dog is guilty because dogs understand morality and they feel shame. But a cat doesn’t even understand the question. There was food there so they took some. I’ve always thought that people like Jobs are cats in a world of dogs. We need to think about them differently.
One more thought. Many people try to dismiss Jobs as somebody that was simply a marketer.
Well.
Firstly, if that was so easy why isn’t everybody doing it?
And.
What made Jobs so successful was not the marketing. It was the vision.
Silicon Valley is full of people that know how to do things. But they need someone to show them what specific things they should be working on. Woz is an example of a guy that can/could really do stuff. But he hasn’t been especially relevant since he parted ways with Steve.
Steve is one of the great tech visionaries of all time. Don’t underestimate the value there.
I agree in the sense that he had the power to motivate others (in a manipulative manner) but I wouldn’t say that he was a visionary. Anyone with an IQ of 100 or more could have appreciated the visionary tech as demonstrated by Xerox PARC and taken steps to bring that stuff to market, just as he did with the Lisa. You want to know the reason why not everybody could do it? Narcissists are highly-sensitive creatures and cannot stand personal criticism. Nobody dared to tell him that the Lisa (and later, the Macintosh) was too expensive for the market to bear at the time – he just lived in his own little world and refused to listen to anyone. Same goes for the iPod and iPhone – products he forced onto the market because (in his mind) they were flawless and amazing like himself.
Re: “market to bear” I think it depends on the market one is after. Lots of people have proven they are willing to pay a lot more for a slightly more refined, curated, and even more limited-capability product.
Jobs was driven by the need for attention (which he didn’t get as a child) and a need to feel superior to everyone he met (he did this by seizing control of every situation). People like Jobs have no interest in beaches or mountains or even money – they only care about being worshipped and adored by people.