So to hell with truth, then.
Jeff Jarvis
113

I finally saw the movie today and it’s a far cry from the one you described in your attack piece against Sorkin and his script.

For one, while it was clear that the film treated Jobs as an exceptionally complex and distinctly flawed character, he was far from portrayed as irredeemable. My goodness, how you must despise Sorkin that you would see his Jobs as an assassination attempt when it’s not even remotely anything of the sort.

And while you describe the film as a docudrama, it would have to be incredibly clear and obvious to even the most slack jawed of movie goers (without an axe to grind, at least) that the conversations taking place prior to the three major product launches depicted in the film are painstakingly fabricated dramatizations, designed to give us a heightened sense of drama while we catch a mere glimpse into character of Steve Jobs. Sorkin even gives Jobs a line in the third act ridiculing the whole notion that these conversations could actually be taking place as they are prior to each of his product launches.

And the very fact that the film ends with so much of Jobs’ life and career still ahead of him assures that no one watching should walk away thinking this was in any way a complete picture of who he was.

Regardless, the picture we do get is impressively multi-faceted and -dimensional. Jobs makes a lot of mistakes on his quest for perfection, but Sorkin gives him opportunities along the way to recognize some of those mistakes, and we get to see the impact those moments of realization have on him. So long as we’re not too busy conjuring vitriol as the movie whizzes by us, of course.

Again, it’s a movie. And a darn good one at that. It’s unfortunate that whatever personal vendetta you have against Sorkin has blinded you to that fact.

Like what you read? Give Darcy Fitzpatrick a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.