Jobs movie is a rotten apple at the box office, movie grosses under $7 million on its debut weekend

Jobs movie is a rotten apple at the box office, movie grosses under $7 million on its debut weekend
Failing worse than the Newton handheld PDA, the biopic Jobs opened this weekend on 2381 screens, bringing in an estimated $6.7 million. The movie's distributor, Open Road Films, was hoping to sell $8 million to $9 million in tickets for the opening weekend. But with Steve Wozniak criticizing the truthfulness of the story, it would seem that even Apple fans stayed away from the movie.

Starring Ashton Kutcher as Steve Jobs and Josh Gad as the Woz, Jobs garnered a aggregate score of 25% from the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. But even with the poor turnout at the theaters, Jobs still could turn a profit since the budget for the movie came in at $12 million. After DVD sales and television rights, the movie should surpass its budget.

Another movie about the late Apple co-founder is in the works, written by Aaron Sorkin and produced by Sony. This film is expected to be in three acts with each act showing Jobs backstage before the introduction of an Apple product including the Apple iPod. Loosely based on the Jobs biography penned by Walter Isaacson, casting has not been announced.

Wozniak's major complaint with the movie seems to be the portrayal of "early" Steve Jobs as having the personality and skills of the later Jobs who apparently was much different during the era that spawned the Apple iPod, Apple iPhone and Apple iPad. Woz has said that he wished that the Jobs of the past was more like the man he was in the last few years leading up to his passing.

source: BoxOfficeMojo via AppleInsider



2. GoBears

Posts: 456; Member since: Apr 27, 2012

Should have got Charlie Sheen to play him. At least it would have been a funny boring stupid movie.

21. tedkord

Posts: 17469; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

That's actually brilliant. Charlie might be the only other person in the world with such a large ego and narcissistic bent.

32. AwesomestMaximuss

Posts: 148; Member since: Jul 09, 2013

Please no....We love Charlie,,,,he is awesome,,,After playing such lame role, he wont be the don't drag him in2 this...

33. GoBears

Posts: 456; Member since: Apr 27, 2012

Nah man I agree with you 100%, Charlie is one of my favorite actors of all time. Also one of the funniest. Maybe he can do a spoof of it. Now that I would watch haha.

47. TechBizJP08

Posts: 495; Member since: Mar 25, 2013


52. AwesomestMaximuss

Posts: 148; Member since: Jul 09, 2013

Haha yeah that wud be fun..

3. PhoneArenaUser

Posts: 5498; Member since: Aug 05, 2011

Other sites doesn't pay so much attention to Jobs movie.

4. KingTrust

Posts: 1; Member since: Aug 18, 2013

Awesome movie

61. DaHarder

Posts: 177; Member since: Oct 10, 2009

Not Even Close... I found it to be pretty made-for-TV amateuristic and far too full of needless 'artistic liberties'... as did a large percentage (75%) of professional movie reviewers as per Flixster. I went on opening night and there were only about 40 people in the theater (around 10% capacity) and 3 of those viewers walked out before the movie ended, while the majority of the rest just looked bored as they exited the theater. Looks like movie goers just aren't 'that into' old Steve pr Apple these days.

5. threeline

Posts: 321; Member since: Sep 11, 2011

Who cares, why do people treat the iPhone like its so revolutionary. Its not, just an expensive phone with a small screen and a picture of an apple with a bite of it on the back. I knew this movie would suck.

14. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

If it wasn't for the iPhone, the mobile world would be different than what it is now. The iPhone revolutionized the mobile industry in 2007 and that's a fact. As of now, Apple is behind, but for you to say a comment like that is absurd. Learn your facts!

36. fanboy1974

Posts: 1345; Member since: Nov 12, 2011

I do give Steve credit for revolutionizing the smartphone. But I don't give Apple credit for keeping up. Apple has allowed Android to become a major force in a short period of time. You can't just be content with how much cash is in the bank and forget that competitors are at your doorstep. No different than what happened to Palm, Microsoft (windows mobile) and Blackberry. People want choice but Apple is so reluctant to give us that. And Apple's business model is dying. I remember laughing about how silly the word Google sounded to me and now look at them. Once famous athletes start wearing Google Glass it's going to change how sports are done on TV. To see Lebron James dunk on someone in first person view is going to look sick. And where is Apple? In the court room trying to sue Samsung over bouncy effects or rehashing another iPhone 5x in fruity colors. Apple has no real ideas left.

43. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

No, it maybe Evolutionized it a bit, but the industry was already going to touchscreen-based smartphones, and a number of touchscreen phones and devices had been on the market long before the iphone, and the iphone wouldn't have been much of anything if they hadn't blatantly stolen others' tech, one of the reasons it was made in China, a haven for copycats. It was well-marketed, yes, but hardly revolutionary. Remember, "revolutionary" doesn't mean same, copied, or even different, it means a complete turn from the norm or direction of the subject, such as the Revolutionary War, a revolt by the American colonies against the British empire, or Henry Ford making his cars affordable to almost all working adults when the norm had been for cars to be exclusively for the rich, as a replacement for their traditional horse-and-carriage, or the cotton gin, which turned the industry of labor-intensive effort into a machine-based one requiring far fewer laborers, or the idea of interchangeable parts, in an industry where everything was custom-made and if it broke had to be specially repaired or expensively replaced. Etc., etc.,

45. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 2012

Really, apple is a marketing company that sells overpriced tech to folks easily susceptible to falsehoods and half-truths. Did they invent the mp3 player or produce the forst one? No, but their brainwashing and flooding the airwaves makes you want to believe so. Did they invent the smartphone or make the first one, or make the forst app store, or smartphone camera, or offer video calling, or have a high-red display? No, but that's what they want people to believe. Did they make the first "ultra-thin" laptop? No, they made one, put it in an envelope, and advertised the heck out of it with catchy music. Do their computers never get malware, crash, freeze, or need repairs and updates? No, but again, they want you to think that. Do you need an apple device to run the best video and graphics programs on the market, and have the best experience with them? Nope, not for almost two decades.

58. squallz506

Posts: 1075; Member since: Oct 19, 2011

You sir, are correct.

41. Bigg6987

Posts: 14; Member since: Aug 18, 2013

As an avid Android fan, not fanboy though, I disagree with your comment. Well, sort of. The iPhone isn't revolutionary ANYMORE. However, when it first came out, all the other companies had to step up. There weren't touchscreen phones really before the iPhone. You couldn't really download apps from a store. I mean, a few from BlackBerry and Palm, but nothing like when the iPhone came out. Wouldn't buy an iPhone, but I'm thankful they were created

53. bsims85

Posts: 2; Member since: Feb 29, 2012

There were quite a few touchscreen phones before the iphone was released. The iPhone removed the need for a stylus and optimized the user experience. It was a fairly drastic evolution, but I wouldnt call it a revolution. Had we gone straight from flip phones to the iPhone, then I wouldve called it a revolution.

62. stopresisting

Posts: 16; Member since: Mar 05, 2013

I owned a Palm Treo 600>Palm Treo 650>HTC Mogul...all touch screen smartphones long before apple conceived the iphone. What Apple did was make everyone step up their game and pushed the smart phone to the next level, and the reason why I am delighted to have a Galaxy Note 2 today.

7. amancarlos

Posts: 42; Member since: May 09, 2012

if the movie was not better than 'Pirates of the Silicon Valley', then there is not much to look forward to in this movie. i would wait for a free copy.

48. TechBizJP08

Posts: 495; Member since: Mar 25, 2013

+1 One of the best movies i've watch.. Pirates of the Silicon Valley I would rather watch if they remake another story like that..

8. darkkjedii

Posts: 31607; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Not something I'd want to go see, Star Wars episode 7 is though.

9. MrsPotatoHead

Posts: 48; Member since: Aug 18, 2013

I enjoyed the movie immensely. It was very insightful, it was funny at times, it was sad at times, although it was a bit confusing. Some of the scenes were unrealistic but then that was probably due to the guy they got to play the part, I didn't think he was very interesting. It wasn't my first choice this weekend I really wanted to see The Butler movie but it was sold out, and so was We're the Millers and Kick 2 - I'm not really into Matt damon movies so that Asylum movie was out. But at least I saw something.

13. JunitoNH

Posts: 1946; Member since: Feb 15, 2012

Reason Movie Bombed: 1. Most people don't know or cared who Jobs was 2. Horrible actor portraying him 3. based on lies or half truths 4. Didn't consult with living co-founder 5. This should had been a HBO or Tv movie 6. Was not a "loved" human being

15. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

Did you just say many didn't know who Steve Jobs was? Everyone knew who he was... Everyone who has lived through the 90's at least.

35. softfurryanus

Posts: 232; Member since: Jul 09, 2013

Mainly because nobody cared that much about Jobs, most people buy their iPhone and couldn't care less about the former CEO. The movie was a cute idea but I don't really think Steve deserved his own movie.

50. leolzn

Posts: 7; Member since: Aug 19, 2013

Yeah I wouldn't watch that movie at the theater, I prefer waiting for it to be on redbox.

16. PapaSmurf

Posts: 10457; Member since: May 14, 2012

No offense to the movie, but I wouldn't spend $10 to watch it. I'd be more than happy to pay $1.25 on RedBox when it releases or wait a year and watch it for free on HBO. Just goes to show how powerful Woz's words are.

18. chemhaz

Posts: 161; Member since: May 04, 2012

"IF" i was interested, I would rather watch a TV documenatry on facts regarding the company and a little about his life, not a dramatisation of his life..... Most techies and into facts, specs and function, not drama and BS.

24. AfterShock

Posts: 4147; Member since: Nov 02, 2012

This would have been laughable at best for myself. I'll gladly pass as I didn't care for the man, his actions, his products or predatory litigation.

25. AfterShock

Posts: 4147; Member since: Nov 02, 2012

Actually, technology as a whole in mobile is better off with him passing on. IMO but bet many agree.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.