????我有點被嚇到了。

????雖然我對電影《喬布斯傳》（Jobs）的總體評價是“無聊”，甚至《財富》雜志（Fortune）的亞當?拉辛斯基給出了更刺耳的“糟糕透頂”這樣的評價，但我認為電影主演艾什頓?庫徹表現得太好了。他的表演甚至讓我回想起當初與史蒂夫的幾次會議和交談，這些回憶或好或壞，但從來都不無聊。而且，電影還讓我回想起每次跟史蒂夫談完之后，我都會心潮起伏——要么憤怒，要么被他蠱惑。艾什頓不僅模仿了史蒂夫的外表——棕色胡子、沒有胡子、灰色胡子等等——也抓住了史蒂夫的機智多變，以及有些瘋狂的怪癖。

????我知道肯定有很多人會說：“我非常了解史蒂夫，他肯定不是那樣。”對此，我認為a) 得了吧，這只是一部電影，而且b)想想還有誰會比艾什頓演的更好？當然，如果史蒂夫在世，他恐怕也會討厭艾什頓的表演。誠然，艾什頓的表現達不到“出神入化”的地步。但他和運行安卓的三星（Samsung）手機一樣，正如我之前所說，兩者都很棒。

????電影主要表現了喬布斯在里德學院（Reed College）的學生生活（其中包括由詹姆斯?伍德飾演的一名教授，這個配角純屬浪費膠片），還描述了蘋果公司（Apple）的誕生，以及喬布斯被放逐與回歸的經歷。所以，這部電影的精彩之處在于，看著這位通常有些粗暴的天才如何創立一家標志性的科技公司，最后又遭到邪惡的風投亞瑟?洛克（J?K?西蒙斯飾演）排擠，（農夫保險公司（Farmers Insurance）？）由德蒙特?莫羅尼飾演的邁克?馬庫拉在關鍵時刻卻并沒有支持史蒂夫。演員馬修?莫迪恩做了一次有趣的戲路改變，飾演成為蘋果公司CEO的前百事公司（Pepsi ）高管約翰?斯卡利。

????電影中確實有幾位明星，但畢竟電影只有較低/中等的預算（據報道為850萬美元），當然這不見得是壞事。而且，我認為制片人憑借手頭的資源（特定時期的汽車和場景等）做了大量的工作。電影對細節的關注值得稱贊。史蒂夫在伍德賽德的大莊園比較簡陋。飾演勞倫?鮑威爾的女演員有一頭漂亮的金色長發。艾什頓最初告訴我們：“我們在史蒂夫和沃爾茨發明第一臺蘋果電腦的車庫進行的實地拍攝。”太酷了！

????整部電影之所以令人感覺平淡無味，更多是在于電影的敘事、連續性和其中的對話。史蒂夫辭退馬庫拉（他本人肯定記得當時的情景）時，史蒂夫和董事會成員艾德?伍拉德跟他說：“帶上你的黃金降落傘走吧。”可惜，現實中沒有人會那么說。（只有記者會這么描述一筆收購。在公司內部，你會說：“……接受這個慷慨的條件吧。”）此外，這部電影有些拖沓，高潮剛剛到來——喬布斯光榮回歸——電影卻戛然而止。

????I got a little freaked out.

????While overall the new movie Jobs rates a definitive 'MEH' from me, and an even harsher, "soooo bad," from Fortune's Adam Lashinsky, I thought Ashton Kutcher in the lead role was pretty damn good. Even to the point where it brought back memories of my various meetings and conversations with Steve, which were sometimes great, sometimes horrible -- but never boring. And it reminded me of how amped I would get -- angry or enthralled -- after talking to him. Not only did Ashton get the many looks of Steve -- brown beard, no beard, gray beard, etc -- but also the mercurial and often maniacal mannerisms.

????I know, I know there are going to be all kinds of people who say, "I knew Steve really well, and he was NOTHING like that." To that I say, a) hey, it's a movie and b) imagine someone doing it orders of magnitude better. Of course Steve himself would probably hate Ashton's performance. And true, Ashton wasn't insanely great. But he was as good as a Samsung running Android, which is, as I said, pretty damn good.

????The movie focuses on the years between Jobs' student days at Reed College (which includes a wasted cameo of James Woods as a professor) and tracks the birth of Apple (AAPL), and then Steve's banishment and return. The dramatic narrative therefore is watching this often abrasive genius figure out how to build an iconic tech company, only to have it snatched away from him by the evil VC Arthur Rock, played by J. K Simmons, (Farmers Insurance anyone?) Dermot Mulroney is Mike Markkula, who doesn't stand by Steve at a crucial moment, while Matthew Modine does an amusing turn as former Pepsi (PEP) exec John Sculley, who becomes Apple's CEO.

????Yes there are some stars in the pic, but overall the film has a low/medium-budget feel to it, (reported to be some $8.5 million) which is not necessarily a bad thing. And I think the filmmakers did an adequate job with what they had (period cars and scenes etc.). Attention to detail was pretty good. Steve's hacienda in Woodside was sparsely furnished. The actress who plays Laurene Powell has beautiful long blond hair. And Ashton told us at the premier that, " ... we shot in the actual garage where Steve and Woz created the first Apple." Cool!

????It was more the storytelling, continuity, and dialogue that fell flat. At one point when Steve is firing Markkula (and who knows if it really happened that way) Steve and board member Ed Woolard tell him to "Go ahead. Take the golden parachute." Um sorry guys, no one would say that. (Only reporters would characterize a buyout thusly. Inside a company you would say, " ... take this generous a package.") Also the movie dragged a bit, and then just as you get to the good part -- Jobs triumphant return -- it's over!???