Apple mastermind Steve Jobs is given the big screen treatment, in this biopic about the trials and tribulations in the evolution of the Mac. Set backstage at three iconic product launches between 1984 and 1998, with the unveiling of the iMac, the film revolves around Steve’s (Michael Fassbender) revolving interractions behind the scenes of the digital revolution to paint an intimate portrait of the brilliant man at its epicenter. Led by an Oscar worthy performance by Fassbender, “Steve Jobs” is every bit as intelligent as the product it represents. The film feels almost like a stage play, with three acts centered around the film’s concrete location of three different launch parties with Jobs at the helm.

With that kind of setting, you would think that this film would be greatly weighed down structurly with how limiting the use of one location makes these stories play out, but it’s quite the opposite. Director Danny Boyle and writer Aaron Sorkin center their story around one man, and it’s the other characters that weave in and out of his life. Jobs is clearly a man with a lot of problems mentally, but it’s related in such a way that is almost forgiving of how he treats the important people around him. That’s not to justify Steve’s behavior, but the film relates to the audience just how many fires this man had to put out daily. Most of those fires being started by him. Sorkin’s script isn’t a truthful one to the source material, but it does skip all of the backstory in favor of the scenes that the audience wants to truly see played out. Most biopics begin with the birth or the childhood of our main character, but this movie instead starts us right at the most infamous moments and makes us work backwards in flashbacks. It’s certainly a creative spin that goes against the status quo of an overstuffed biopic box of films in 2015. Where this can sometimes hurt however, is in the proper time of each story being given. There will be a lot of questions for people who know very little about Steve and Apple in the first act of the movie, and a lot of that is because the movie picks us up and plants us right in the middle during this peak period. I wish the film would’ve focused a little more on the core issues of Steve outside of the workplace, namely the history of the Mother of his child (Played by Katherine Waterston).

Perhaps the best part of the movie is in the buzzworthy cinematography which is absolutely brilliant in it’s representation during each time period. The film serves as kind of a time piece during an age where computers were looked at as just another means to an end, and that’s communicated brilliantly with some of the best editing i have seen this year. The movie narratively does a great job communicating the fears of people taking a chance on something with such uncertainty. Edited craftfully with news pieces discussing some of the most important points of this story, this perk serves as our guide through the post result scenes that aren’t played out on camera. I mentioned the cinematography earlier because it’s creatively beautiful for the time frames that it gets across. I noticed a grainy kind of picture during the film’s first act set in 1984, and it’s the perfect compliment to the fashions of big glasses frames and loud color designed shirts and dresses. The picture slowly gets better as the movie moves into the 90’s for it’s finale, and it’s a part of the film that many will probably miss because of their intrigue by the cast performances.

Make no mistake about it, this film is loaded with noteworthy roles. Fassbender gives a tour de force performance. He has nailed the villain role so easily in other films like “12 Years a Slave” and “X-Men”, but his role as Jobs gets a little more complex, as it casts a cloudy shade of grey. Fassbender plays Steve with such misunderstanding. He feels like he is always right for a majority of this film, but has to play it equally sorrow filled when he finds out he is wrong about a lot. The third act of the movie really drove home the point that Michael is one of the best actors working today, with his commitment to character acting, and i would put his performance among the year’s very best. Kate Winslet was also brilliant as Jobs right hand woman, Joanna Hoffman. Winslet eerily nails the look of Hoffman with ease, but it’s in a Polish accent that Winslet really commits to the role. It is a bit spotty during the first act, but she settled it down and made it her own for a majority of the film. Jeff Daniels was also one of my favorite things about the movie. The film has so many energetic and crisp dialogue scenes between Daniels and Fassbender that for me was the best parts of the film. Daniels hair and makeup are done precise, as an on-going joke between he and Fassbender is that Daniels doesn’t age. This slowly changes as the film proceeds, and does it without making a joke of the aging process.

“Steve Jobs” isn’t a fluff piece to Apple or to the main in question, but it is an entertaining rush that serves as an unconventional biopic. Much more entertaining than the bore that was the 2013 film starring Ashton Kutcher. That film didn’t take enough chances, but this one is full of nothing but chances.  It certainly gives you the legs to think a little differently about the genius whose greatest weakness was appreciation. I strongly recommend this film to everyone even if tech talk isn’t your thing. The operatic layers of dramatic offerings will peel at your emotions like the layers of the strongest onion. In the end, you might even shed a tear at just how clueless one of the world’s greatest perfectionists really was.

9/10