Steve Jobs vs. Jobs

[@studioOuTproductions]

I agree that Fassbender is a far superior actor (in that particular role and basically anything else) but to be fair with Kutcher, Fassbender had Aaron Sorkin’s amazing screenplay and Danny Boyle’s genius directing behind him to support him.

[@ViewerEm]

his movie was also more positive to steve jobs, whereas kutchers was intended to make steve jobs sometimes look pathetic. hence the wide shot when he screams rather than a closeup. we're supposed to focus on how uncomfortable he's making people, not sympathize with him

[@strikerbowls791]

Kutcher is better

[@KnotPhound]

Honestly, I think that Kutcher definitely deserved better for this role. I mean, he looks extremely similar to the real Steve Jobs and he's a pretty good actor (although I'd say that Fassbender is definitely superior). Kutcher just needed a better screenplay and director to work with.

[@stevewalker6240]

Kutcher was more accurate to the real Steve Jobs tho. Fassbender had a more interesting performance in a much better film, but he didn't look or act like Steve Jobs at all.

[@joshcollins9125]

The score (or lack there of) makes a difference too

[@cyanrazorCel]

Ashton Kutcher isn't exactly the best actor ever but he sure as hell looked exactly like young Steve Jobs.

[@irishguy200007]

Picking an actor that looks like a young Steve Jobs is a lame approach.

[@BortaMaga]

While acting definitely is much more important than looks, I do agree Fassbender looks and sounds absolutely nothing like Jobs other than the fact that they're both white.

[@pemudabergairah]

@@irishguy200007 but he’s an actor, not a random dude

[@InitialAA]

@@BortaMaga he can act.

[@antiracistbaby1085]

@@irishguy200007 Arent the Irish basically British?

[@zzzzzzzzzzz6]

Fassbender doesn't look as much like Jobs, but you really believe he is running a multi-billion dollar company. With Kutcher I feel like I'm watching a sketch and keep waiting for the punchline.

[@vb8428]

And funnily enough, Kutcher is the rich tech investor.

[@Fl0k5ser]

And he doesn't have too because there's only one Steve Jobs in this world so you really can't expect a doopleganger of him. What matters is the fact that Fassbender was given a great script and director to work with that supported his performance, Kutcher is a good actor but he was given very poor material to work with that unfortunately affected his performance

[@redsquirrel5308]

Exactly

[@SuperSaiyen64]

You know multi billion dollar company ceos? How do you know that's how they act?

[@1998Cebola]

@@vb8428 being an investor and running a company are completly different things. One requires capitla, the other requires skill.

[@jqyhlmnp]

The reason Fassbender can portray Jobs so well is because he can flip the switch from serious to funny and back instantly. In the 2013 version, Kutcher can’t in the same shot.

[@8iego815]

Apparently everyone is a fa King expert here. Stop hating on Ashton Kutcher. They both did great. It just hurts your soul for some reason, that Kutcher has the acting and the looks.

[@lenny8511]

@@8iego815 bro i dont think it was that deep

[@OverPoweredCatSwag]

@@8iego815 honestly he doesn’t come off as serious in the scenes where he screams

[@ripitvapars]

Kutcher reminds of Steve Jobs. Fassbender doesn't remind of Steve Jobs but of some lawyer.

[@soujee2744]

@@ripitvapars True😂

[@planetnron4989]

Michael Fassbender will go down as one of the greatest actor of this generation... the depth of character he brings in these portrayals are awe inspiring

[@starwarsjunkie7776]

I hated his interpretation.

[@ttime441]

Fassbender fucking nailed it

[@samuel-mx3oq]

@@starwarsjunkie7776 ok

[@tedgrowney8981]

Except when he plays Steve Jobs. Yikes

[@NeverAsk]

Fassbender was absolutely a wrong choice or at least the makeup artist was poor. I didn't feel a thing from him irrespective of how good he was as an actor. But Ashton made me feel it was Steve. P.S: I worked for Jobs for 3 months and telling you this from personal experience

[@keanuxu5435]

Kutcher sounds like that friend who's being fake angry but will break into a laugh because you're all making jokes at each other.

[@Mr_Bob_A_Feet]

Besides acting, the script and direction were key to making Steve Jobs phenomenal. Sorkin is phenomenal at writing an intriguing and engaging story while Danny Boyle is great at bringing a script to life visually.

[@micajohansson1138]

Jobs looks like an SNL sketch. Steve Jobs has the drama, the tension and it's like play. Three acts well crafted under the brilliant script from Aaron Sorkin and Danny Boyle's direction.

[@ॐIo]

Jobs felt real tbh, Steve Jobs is a overzealous drama. Steve Jobs is the better film but I think Jobs has its own essence of nonchalant realness that the other lacks

[@CraigBickerstaff]

@@ॐIo It didn't feel real at all, it felt like a sloppy poorly written love letter at best. Kutcher is practically whispering his lines. They portrayed Woz as this hopeless oaf who needed Steve Jobs to drag him to accomplish anything.

[@LarryHazard]

@@CraigBickerstaff Fassbender acted like an actor not like a real person

[@fardimnazir666]

@@LarryHazard And Kutcher did? Lol

[@LarryHazard]

@@fardimnazir666 Ashton Kutcher is the greatest actor in the history of cinema

[@blairmielnik8228]

Ashton's version didn't get any of those sweeping musical scores to elevate the emotion, several years of time to reflect also provided more room for the development

[@BananaPhoPhilly]

Also Ashton's acting sucks really really hard. It feels like a comedy movie

[@TheOnlyJohnAbraham]

I actually found the music really distracting in that movie. Fassbender doesn't need an orchestra to bolster his performance.

[@TheOnlyJohnAbraham]

@@jonathanwilliams1451 I definitely agree. Jobs is more fun to watch, even if the acting isn't groundbreaking.

[@taylor11111]

He’s also a corny actor. at least here.

[@gbowers]

Ashton Kutcher just sucks, and that’s the best he could do, and it still amounted to being horrible. "Oh, but he looks just like him." Nah, not really… not really. Fuck Ashton Kutcher. Michael Fassbender gave a commendable and respectable acting performance. If you’ve watched enough of the real Steve Jobs on camera, this will be clear.

[@erickalejandrocv]

Fassbender is acting, Kutchert impersonating

[@8iego815]

Okay...

[@Di11zCODM]

You say “okay...”, you obviously don’t get what he’s saying. Hes exactly right

[@8iego815]

@@Di11zCODM It actually means you're all sheep. Your mutter knows what I mean jelly bean ;)

[@smallshaq8062]

@@8iego815 Kutcher was not great. Looking like Steve Jobs doesn't automatically make your performance great. Kutcher is a not a strong actor while Fassbender is an elite actor and how distinctive their performances were is an example of that

[@smallshaq8062]

@@8iego815 You're so stupid that it's actually painful to read your comment. Congrats on being good looking but ppl are still going to run away from you after they hear you speak

[@micajohansson1138]

Steve Jobs had Aaron Sorkin behind the script. Jobs I don't know who wrote it but it's not Sorkin.

[@DrVVVinK]

It was honestly a fanboy, who happened to have money and family connections in Hollywood, but no talent. "Jobs" it's nothing but a big budget Fanboy movie.

[@Fl0k5ser]

@@DrVVVinK Jobs felt like a movie that was made for TV with an SNL sketch element to it but with better acting than that. Steve Jobs felt real in just about everyway. It felt like people was in real environment

[@stueygriffith4671]

MAGNETO v KELSO is there really any competion?

[@Venom-yh7vb]

Can’t blame Kutcher considering he had a terrible script to work with. Meanwhile Fassbender who’s already a god in acting has an Aaron Sorkin screenplay in front of him which eases the load on his back and can focus more on his acting than trying to salvage some terrible dialogue.

[@psibarpsi]

So true!

[@nikhil1234raje]

And one of the best director in the world

[@Fl0k5ser]

@@nikhil1234raje an Oscar winning director for sure which makes his performance a lot better

[@weirdtoknow1226]

and the audio is a lot better in the 2015 version like the background music making the scene more compelling

[@stepha5926]

You absolutely can blame Kutcher.

[@romilrh]

This is a classic example of casting someone who can LOOK the part vs someone that can ACT the part. Kutcher has an eerie resemblance to young Jobs, but Fassbender actually evoked the _presence_ of Jobs much better.

[@rometherevenant8749]

I love that Ashton looks more like Steve Jobs, but Fassbender perfectly captured Steves real life duality as someone who cared very much about his vision but wasnt a people person to the ones who were close to him. Or at least thats what I got from the biopic.

[@johngalactus4014]

Kutcher = Easy mode Fassbender = Hard mode Tbh, both did an amazing job, with both films having a different tone and realism. For me it's Fassbender that nails the role even though he doesn't look like Steve Jobs.

[@reaganation6000]

Kutcher's movie capture the facts and accuracy, while Fassbender's capture the essence.

[@Grivian]

Ashton: "Some weird watered down version of cola" Fassbender: "Classic coke"

[@c87kim]

Ashton Kutcher started believing he was Steve Jobs after he made that movie lol

[@clausesanta5042]

Fassbender won Oscar nominations for his role as Steve Jobs. Kutcher may looks similar to Steve Jobs, but he failed to show more than that.

[@Matt90541]

Kutchner was exemplary, a perfect 10 performance. A performance that will be remembered for the next 500 years. Unfortunately the European Fassbender, looks completely out of place. He is no Steve Jobs. He ain't even Ashton. The production of Steve Jobs was off. It was filmed in dark and cold tones, not the sunny and warm found in California. The script of "Steve Jobs" tried to be witty but often fell flat.

[@rohanpierotti7927]

@@Matt90541 you- what- how. I have fallen flat from this comment

[@santosh-vh6xx]

Fassbender is nowhere close to Ashton. Don’t know how they casted Fassbender for this role.

[@clausesanta5042]

@@santosh-vh6xx You're talking about appearance, not character.

[@santosh-vh6xx]

@@clausesanta5042 Yeah, but that brings life to character. Also Fassbender was not very extraordinary if you compare both.

[@fart895]

Neither performance really feels like a real 'person' they're both interpretations of a larger than life figure but, Fassbender channels both the arrogance, intelligence, and humor of Steve Jobs even if he only vaguely looks like him. Ashton Kutcher almost always seems like he's pissed off as Jobs and he tends to talk really slow like he's attempting to control his anger. At least I think that's what he's doing. It comes off very phony compared to Fassbender's Steve who's anger feels more real.

[@ripitvapars]

Fassbender doesn't remind of Steve Jobs at all.

[@sekaibreaker9243]

@@ripitvapars That's your opinion

[@nectarinedreams7208]

I see no real need for the actor to look close to the real person.

[@doom-and-gloom]

@@sekaibreaker9243 unless you're blind or never seen picture of Steve Jobs before it's very clear to see

[@fandhinurhidayat626]

@@sekaibreaker9243 Well his opinion same like mine, fassbender doesn't feel like he is steve jobs at all

[@OneUponADime]

Ashton really came across as 'weeeee Im acting!'

[@shreyasarojkar5267]

Coz he is lookalike of Steve and is also a entrepreneur

[@OneUponADime]

@@shreyasarojkar5267 no Id say its because he's unnaturally copying his body language and hamming up his acting

[@starwarsjunkie7776]

Ashton fucking nailed it.

[@ttime441]

Ikr, I’m pretty sure they only hired him because he looks like a young Steve, but Fassbender’s performance is just so good that there is no way he could’ve matched

[@tedgrowney8981]

@@OneUponADime It's called acting

[@nguyenho9591]

Fassbender potrayed an emotional man with logical, rational and thoughtful words, part asshole, part intelligent. Kutcher is straight up 100% emotions with nothing worth listening to. But again, according to Jony Ive, none of them sounded like Jobs, not one bit

[@tc2241]

Kutcher is waaay more realistic, but Fassbenders far more interesting and ‘Oscar worthy’

[@Unqualifiedmedicalperson]

“Realistic”? Um...if you say so 😂

[@Fl0k5ser]

Realistic? Sure, the script for the entire movie was very bland and the direction was awful too. Fassbender and the movie surrounding him was technically well made and better. And there's nothing wrong with being "Oscar worthy" anyways, had Kutcher given a better script and director to work with he could've been nominated for an Oscar

[@sabapavlik5510]

Ashton Kutcher's look to Steve Jobs is better, but Fassbender playing level is insane!

[@TheFireflyGuy]

I felt like I had seen an actual piece of Steve in Fassbender’s performance. Kutcher wasn’t evoking Jobs at all - he was reading the script dramatically as HE would say it. Fassbender had the cadence, tone and rhythm of the voice down to a T. His physical presence at every stage of the movie is perfect. Kutcher just looks like a young Steve if you put a beard on him - that’s as far as that goes.

[@YourFavouriteColor]

Fassbender is a BILLION times the actor my god.

[@masterblockwarrior]

Exactly! Like holding a candle to the sun.

[@thabreez456]

I think even just the way these two films are lit are an indication of their quality.

[@CreativeIsolation]

That’s a stylistic choice, generally. Drama vs realism. Feeling like you’re watching a movie vs feeling like you’re there. No music either is a choice.

[@iordanstefan1]

Sometimes we take good acting for granted, and with montages like this you realise what it really means. Nice

[@kjeet007]

Micheal just nailed it....I can imagine Steve in his acting ❤

[@maritime7776]

This should have been a Jobs vs Jobs vs Jobs. “Steve Jobs”, “Jobs” and “Pirates of Silicon Valley”. Noah Wyle’s portrayal of Steve Jobs was amazing!

[@dodeka]

Noah was so good, Steve had him prank a crowd at an Apple event after filming Pirates of Silicon Valley, dressed as younger him

[@stolenwise]

Look I know that Fassbender is an incredible actor. And Sorkin gives him great dialogue. I still believe Kutcher's performance a lot more accurate - particularly here in this scene. He is intimidating - he's portraying the young Steve who wasn't as sophisticated in his interactions but definitely took charge. He delivers dialogue that sounds a lot more like Steve, imo - based on the biographies and videos I've seen of Steve. Kutcher's performance seems much much more authentic to me.

[@strikerbowls791]

Great dialogue? 🤣

[@chadparsons50]

I was thinking the same. Ashton is more true to Steve Jobs, Fassbender is playing a great character just not much like Steve Jobs in mannerisms/looks.

[@stolenwise]

@@chadparsons50 Right. It's like Fassbender is playing a great character named Steve Jobs - but it's not the Steve Jobs I've seen or read about. Fassbender is not trying to assimilate into how Steve behaved.

[@kdscool1536]

​@@stolenwise respectfully disagree, Fassbender is exactly like Jobs described in Isaac Walterson's book Aaron Sorkin's script is based on. Kutcher is laughable, he looks like SNL parody.

[@stolenwise]

@@kdscool1536 We can respectfully disagree. Is it bad that I see a lot more of the Reality Distortion Field in Kutcher's performance?

[@Nhamp2000]

I keep waiting for Kutcher to say Burn!

[@foreverjune8]

Scene with Fassbender is too dramatic, it just isnt the case in real life. That's why I prefer Kutcher's movie. It's simpler and more grounded. The scene with Kutcher wasn't about intimidation. It's simply an outburst due to a particular thing the character is sensitive about. He thinks sharing a vision of the project is imperative therefore he concludes the ones who dont comply are useless thus when he finds one - he gets rid of the problem.

[@irishguy200007]

The movie Steve Jobs is an introspective look into how the mind and character of Steve Jobs may work and it's quite intense in his constant movement of the goal posts on everyone, While the movie Jobs is like a biopic of his life.

[@Lucifronz]

They both sort of fail. Fassbender's version is too dramatic and Kutcher's isn't dramatic enough. The latter does feel more grounded, but it also fails to do its job as a film and sell the moment. It almost feels unreal because of how real it is. Verisimilitude is more important than realism. Otherwise we'd just strap a camera to some dude's face and have him stand in the room with the moment and say "screw it" to camera choreography.

[@uncleben7306]

but kutcher doesn't even seem mad, you can tell he's faking

[@aarongarcia5037]

@@Lucifronz “TOO” dramatic?? god damn what more do you people want the social network is a good example of an intense thrilling movie around what should be a completely boring premise. it’s not like we had Steve Jobs in a high speed car chase in act 3, it’s literally just stirring music and good performances, or you know, THE BASICS OF A GOOD MOVIE. fuck outta here.

[@YourFavouriteColor]

dude the kutcher film is shot and directed like a lifetime TV movie. The score sounds like a hallmark channel score. It's the most milquetoast, on the nose, lazy writing. My god the scene when he goes back to apple to talk to the design department and that british guy just sucks his D. SO indulgent. Not how people talk. It's total amateur hour. The Fassbender film is just on another planet in terms of overall quality.

[@johnbarrientosiii6586]

I can’t help but see Kelso

[@thereliablesource7938]

The movie "Jobs" was badly written and the storyline didn't show the later parts of Steve's life, Kutcher was a good impersonater regardless

[@ChispyReddit]

"It's Stevin' Time!" Beautiful.

[@elijahfordsidioticvarietys8770]

It’s the music. The music makes it way better. 😊

[@stevewalker6240]

Kutcher was more accurate to the real Steve Jobs tho. Fassbender had a more interesting performance in a much better film, but he didn't look or act like Steve Jobs at all.

[@CreativeIsolation]

I totally agree. I really felt like Kutcher put everything into becoming Steve Jobs. I was actually rather impressed with his performance in the end. Fassbender is a wonderful actor, but I never really believed that he was Steve. His movie was more engaging and probably better constructed, and definitely more dramatic. But it was a lot of Hollywood showmanship, whereas Kutchers movie felt more like a biopic to me.

[@Fl0k5ser]

But again, this is a film. Even judging from a film standpoint, Fassbender's movie was written and directed better than Jobs. Jobs looked like it was made for Television, it's way too bright to look at whereas Danny Boyle's Steve Jobs felt a lot more real. Accurate or not, Fassbender had a better material to work with. Even people who were close to Jobs praised the movie a lot more than Kutcher's

[@stevewalker6240]

@@Fl0k5ser Yes. Kutcher looks closer to the real Steve Jobs and his movie tone also feels closer to life documentary especially the 80s setting. In the other hand, Fassbender feels more like Magneto than Steve Jobs especially with that pale color palette and dark tone make it looks like a sci-fi movie set in 2050s. But again, his movie is technically better and much more emotional than Kutcher's mediocre movie. Thanks to Sorkin's screenplay that was incredible as always.

[@Fl0k5ser]

@@stevewalker6240 except this is a feature film not a documentary so Fassbender's movie felt more real surrounding it and doesn't feel too flashy either from a filmmaking standpoint. Kutcher's movie looks like if it was made to television if you watched the whole thing, Fassbender and Kutcher's emotions playing Jobs is no difference. If Fassbender didn't play Magneto, would your answer of "Fassbender more like Magneto than Steve Jobs" is the same? And yet the dark tone is probably to set the mood for the movie too because this person isn't necessarily a light-hearted guy either, he's a bit of an asshole too, Kutcher's movie also felt like it was an SNL skit except with a better acting of course mostly because of the cinematography, too bright. People who worked close to Jobs actually praised Fassbender's movie a lot more than Kutcher's, so that's saying something. Kutcher looks like Jobs but everything surrounding him wasn't as good as his performance. Kutcher has the looks but because this is acting, I'm judging it from a performance standpoint so Fassbender wins. Kutcher could've been better if the script and director he was given was better. The thing is we already passed to many hundred good biopic movies and many actors look nothing like the real person but they still did a great job in their roles

[@stevewalker6240]

@@Fl0k5ser Yes. Kutcher looks closer to the real Steve Jobs and his movie tone also feels closer to the 80s setting which is the setting of the events. In the other hand, Fassbender feels more like Magneto than Steve Jobs especially with that pale color palette and dark tone make it looks like a sci-fi movie set in 2050s. But again, his movie is technically better and much more emotional than Kutcher's mediocre movie. Thanks to Sorkin's screenplay that was incredible as always.

[@06rtm]

More important to capture a characters essence than to simply look like him

[@EliasWolf77]

Kalso Jobs: was a d*ck because he was just a d*ck Magneto Jobs: cold but calculating and brilliant, self obsessed but secretly had a heart

[@nicosauseador]

I love the fassbender acting

[@rafaelestrada1846]

Lmao fassbender vs kutcher is like Mike Tyson vs a child

[@asecretone]

Fassbender was Jobs. Kutcher was an actor playing Jobs.

[@jackbauer555]

honestly, i watched both movies and i liked them both

[@demoscratos4577]

Even with Kelso looking more like Jobs, Fassbender sill out performs the former.

[@FEARisCOLD]

I love “Steve Jobs” it’s so good, though not what happened in real life. “Jobs” could have been great with a better director to direct Kutcher.

[@sillkthashocker]

I'll always think of David when I see Fassbender

[@Sunfun818]

I kept thinking about Michael Kelso saying “Burned” every time I see Ashton Kutcher in any scene. I need to reprogram my brain 🧠 to not see it but it’s tough.

[@th3blackghost214]

I watch the both movies and I think both of them did surprisingly well

[@TheProphegy]

Ashton Kutcher literally seems like he’s acting as Ashton Kutcher. lol. The Fassbender film is too Hollywood. Should’ve felt more like an indie film imo.

[@perezident14]

Pirates of Silicon Valley is still my favorite portrayal.

[@stregadisalem732]

Noah Wyle was the best.

[@montyi8]

That's right, all the other characters were superb too, like Balmer.

[@MaximizedAction]

Shoutout to the best Silicon Valley film before Silicon Valley was so mainstream

[@mikeg2491]

It really needs a bluray release

[@stepha5926]

Fassbender was still better.

[@kenthefele113]

If you took Kutcher’s resemblance to Steve Jobs and added Fassbender’s performance you’d have the perfect actor to portray Steve Jobs.

[@phantasmagora6542]

The biggest difference between Jobs (2013) and Steve Jobs (2015) is that the latter rationalizes Jobs' behavior without excusing it. Fassbender, unlike Kutcher, has the charisma to nail Jobs' larger-than-life persona, yet this image is constantly undermined by his pettiness towards employees and co-workers over seemingly-tiny details, and the way he treats his daughter. It shows his singleminded devotion to Apple's vision doesn't translate to other aspects of his life, and makes no attempt to apologize for his flaws. The "apology" to Lisa at the end of the movie for years of abandonment - "I'm poorly made", then promising to put more music in her pocket with the iPod? It's a bit lame, but it seems within the bounds of Fassbender's character. The film kind of leaves it there, and I kind of enjoyed that. Jobs (2013) seems to worship Steve a lot more. Honestly, when I was a kid I enjoyed the movie, but looking back it seemed like the movie was trying to make you feel sorry for Jobs, particularly with how teared-up Kutcher would get at almost every junction, regardless of his terrible behavior. Even then, I found Kutcher's portrayal to be annoying with how he seemed to take control of every single project he got his hands on. Whether that's true or not in real life, the movie seemed to justify it by showing that he was simply smarter, and had more "vision" than everyone else. That, to me, seemed a little manipulative, because I do remember coming out of the movie admiring Kutcher's character, when Fassbender's portrayal is a lot more complex. Regarding the portrayal of Jobs' relationship with Lisa? The movie skips ahead a few years and shows Lisa crashing on his couch and shows him being a typical dad to her. Chrisann never even makes a comeback to remind Jobs that "you're a dick".

[@Zyklon-Bro64]

I like Kutcher just a tad more. Honestly could be the lack of music in his tense scenes. Fassbenders Jobs just felt to larger than life Hollywood

[@TheSlayerV1]

Imagine being fired by Kelso after he left Point Place.

[@planet60Co.]

Ashton is invested into the role of being Steve Jobs and Fassbender is portraying the greek tragedy.

[@nms7872]

ashton kutcher as steve jobs literally sounds like a punchline from 30 Rock

[@shiva_productions]

Ashton is the spitting image of a young Jobs - it was my first thought on seeing photos of Jobs early in his career. I think it's really Important to cast someone who looks like him. It's hard to buy into Fassbender being Jobs therefore.

[@bencummings5304]

Neither of them are even his race

[@fl1490]

When will people understand the ability to act is far more important than just looking like the character

[@mrgiggles5555]

@@fl1490 Never, some people are just stupid. They believe looks matter more than how the actor embodies the character. I believe in Fassbender's performance way more than Kutcher's. To be fair to Kutcher though, Fassbender has a WAY better script and direction. Kutcher's film felt very generic/run of the mill.

[@anen9332]

@@bencummings5304 Jobs' biological father is Syrian. His biological mother is German. Both mother and father are Caucasian, just as Jobs himself was. Just as Ashton and Michael are. You don't appear to understand basic anthropology or genetics. Europeans, North Africans, Indians (people from India), Iranians, etc. are all in the same racial family of Caucasian. Obviously, Semitic peoples of the Middle East are a part of the Caucasian race. This is simple science. Shalom.

[@bencummings5304]

@@anen9332 Simple science, yes, for simple minds. Anthropology deals with different cultures, different sociological backgrounds, different viewpoints of different peoples within society and someone’s race concerns all of that not just the ingredients they get from a gene pool, had you understood anthropology before writing you wouldn’t have been so uppity with your reply. If you studied genealogy you would know that Middle-Eastern would show up on a DNA test, so would any of the ethnicities from India, any European ethnicity like Irish, Scottish, Catalan, Fleming, Ashkenazi Jew, Sephardi Jew, Nordic, English, Welsh, ALL THESE ETHNICITIES WOULD SHOW UP ON A DNA TEST Why? My friend AnEn here, a perfectly normal name, seems to think that should be impossible, that there is only 3 real ethnic groups in the world, spare the indigenous of the Far East and West, and that is African, Caucasian and the many ethnicities of East Asia, so why is it all these ethnicities show up on DNA tests? Well it’s because Caucasian is the shared origin of many races but to say that that removes every race in Europe and Western Asia of their individual experience and to use a blanket term to define race like you did means you might as well call us all African as that is where Homo Sapiens originated. Bollocks to the last 300,000 years or any separate cultures or entirely separate races and experiences. I loved Michael Fassbender as Steve Jobs, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with his performance and the film is great but let’s not pretend that choosing an actor of Middle Eastern origin, for better or for worse, would add authenticity to the interpretation of Steve Jobs’ life, especially considering they touch conversationally on his life before adoption in which Steve Jobs was in contact with his Arabic father. I hope my reply was as annoying to read as yours was. Perhaps next time I write comments I can talk to someone who doesn’t se KZbin comments se novels waiting to be written, I don’t like writing like this but sometimes the best way to fight fire is with a flame Fuck you

[@rsolsjo]

Am I the only one who kind of preferred the Kutcher movie? I know deep down it's probably the inferior film, but I still just.. liked it a lot. 😂

[@jainilsheth9879]

Yeah, even I like Kutcher's one a lot. Idk why everyone is bashing it in the comments

[@radscorpion8]

All I know is Jobs was a scary man and I'm glad I didn't work for him

[@stevenogle2226]

When I Ashton gets upset and started yelling I swear I’m watching a Kindergartener throw a temper tantrum

[@zeuscannizzomusic8148]

Bro Michael is an acting beast

[@Xayuap]

does he have 2 movs? what about Wosniak?

[@humansnotbots-y8l]

The one with Fassbender is actually a masterpiece if anyone hasn’t seen it

[@highlandparkguitarlessons8129]

“Everything is a pressing issue” Keanu Reeves only cameo voice over in the film

[@margarethmichelina5146]

Sure, Michael doesn't look like Steve Jobs but he manages to get better line delivery and performance and also because the script is written by Aaron Sorkin who has been nominated at Oscar many times

[@hujinom]

Fassbender feels more like jobs and Ashton Kutcher well…only looks like him that’s the big difference Ashton is not a great actor whereas Fassbender definitely is

[@danieldominguez5863]

I heard Kutcher went above and beyond for this role. He dove deep into the character and it got to the point where he adopted his diet as well which sent him to the hospital.

[@fluff975]

damn shame all that didnt do him any good

[@jodythomas4324]

Fassbender is just a far superior actor, his portrayal of Edwin Epps in 12 Years a Slave is one of the greatest performances of the 21st century.

[@stepha5926]

He's seriously spectacular in that, and that movie is full of A-list world class actors. He's better than *all* of them.

[@kurtnunn6116]

I like Noel Wyle’s best, Fassbender’s portrayal was great too

[@JuanCarlos-gz2br]

I was expecting the moment of Kutcher revealing to the programmer he just got punk'd.

[@adalmeymorales1658]

Fassbender se lo llevó y por mucho, Kutcher le puede más el sentimiento que el realismo.

[@tommygreenbeans]

i would like to add that filmmaking (directing, production design, costumes, stage blocking, cinematography, editing, score, script, acting and drama) of Fassbender's Steve Jobs is infinitely more compelling than Kutcher's Jobs. Aspects like those are sometimes ones that people with an untrained eye aren't as likely to notice in a film but most will probably subconsciously lean towards a film with more nuanced filmmaking compared to corny and stiff filmmaking

[@ryanblais6208]

Kevin Malone playing Ashton Kutcher playing Steve Jobs.

[@STELLASCUTENESS]

Kutcher was a joke, even in that joke of a movie. Not sure what was worse, his stupid walk or that dude pulling up on a motorcycle in leather. (The “motorcycle dude” NEVER OWNED a motorcycle FFS!)

[@korbo2796]

I don't know, to be honest Kutcher's performance strikes me as more realistic, in that, that may have actually been how Jobs acted as a person. However Fassbender is clearly a better actor and the music and dialogue lends to better screen production. Movies aren't reality, even the 'true stories', and they are very much embellished to be more appealing to a viewing audience.

[@MarquisVonMonster]

This is unfair to Kelso.

[@josephtedesco8429]

Aston looks just like Jobs, but looks don't compare to substance... Fassbender knocked it out of the park!

[@YonalWijesuriya]

Jobs looks like an episode of the office

[@SaintCyrX]

I thought Kutcher's was the more entertaining of the two (ignoring details and just focusing on them as movies).

[@dyll_pyckle]

Thank you YT recommended

[@DMalltheway]

Problem with Fassebender’s performance is it didn’t make money, but he was far superior than Ashton as Jobs. The script in Fassebender’s movie was also much higher quality.

[@RetroCrisis]

Aston looked the part, but Fassbender did a better job

[@RiasatSalminSami]

Tom Cruise should potray Steve Jobs. He looks literally like him.

[@straygameplaywalkthroughps6480]

Fassbender, the last bender of fasses.

[@antnovs]

No one acts in real life or has a soundtrack playing in the background to make it more intense. Chill people

[@DannysHauntedJourney]

They should make another movie, and just call it "Steve." Period and all. Steve.

[@hasekihurremsultan1559]

My favorites movies of Steve Jobs.....

[@mikemoss9559]

Fassbenders version felt like they were just putting steve jobs up on a high pedestal. Kutcher at least captured the true asshole he was.

[@rishabhsharma5610]

Doesn’t really seem like you watched Steve Jobs, then. Several scenes where Fassbender portrays an egotistical and arrogant Jobs. Like when he gets angry at one of his executive programmers (Andy) right before a product launch, or when he takes personal offense to Time magazine’s non-existent slight against him. Fassbender’s portrayal and Sorkin’s abilities in the film industry make it an Oscar-worthy movie. Steve Jobs (the person) deserves to be put on a pedestal while simultaneously showing the world what a terrible person he was. Steve Jobs (the movie) does just that.

[@mewnew]

Kutcher is just a BAAAAAAAAAAAAD actor. BAAAAAAAAAD.

[@walmartpimp2]

I wonder how Two and a Half Men would have turned out if Michael Fassbender was placed as the lead after Charlie Sheen was fired.

[@Simone-Bucn]

It would've been turned into The Sopranos 😄

[@dhirajsriram1100]

Why do I laugh when kutcher says something serious....he's just not got the range of emotions that Fassbender has

[@jnthepassenger347]

Ashton looked the part and his acting was great, but Michael was the better actor. I think the 2013 version was better, purely because of the casting. It was just better, and you could believe that it was THE story of Apple. Not just a reenactment.

[@ivermektin6874]

1:30 pepsi generation, brutal line. Like "boomer" before it was a thing.

[@aden_light]

Michael did a better and far more interesting character and movie (accurate or not) Ashton portrayed Jobs himself better probably because he himself is intellectually gifted and can channel genius more affectively than most actors.

[@davionelliot]

Put in the work, put in the hours and take what’s ours!

[@shizuoh2792]

Steve: whatever I'm beautiful

[@CertifiedFresh7]

They just need to put Michael Fassbender’s acting ability in Ashton Kutcher’s body and it would be the perfect Steve Jobs

[@iana3892]

I’m sorry but regardless of the material he had to work with, Kutcher didn’t play Jobs. He played Kutcher playing Jobs, seriously, I doubt Jobs sounded like someone who was short on breath after each word he said when he was serious. “If you don’t share (breath) our enthusiasm (breath) and care (breath) for the vision (breath) of this company (breath)…”