jOBS 2013

Critics score:
27 / 100

Reviews provided by RottenTomatoes

Christy Lemire, ChristyLemire.com: The irony is that a man who treasured innovation and sleek, stylish design should be the subject of a film that's so bland and bloated. Read more

Mary F. Pols, TIME Magazine: Not that the real man's career wasn't marked by conflict, but does Jobs have to be such a drag? Read more

Manohla Dargis, New York Times: After a while, you don't care. Read more

John Hartl, Seattle Times: It's a daring performance that instantly undermines Kutcher's pretty-boy features and makes them seem ugly and brutally uncompromising. Read more

Kyle Ryan, AV Club: Gets points for ambition, but ultimately feels like a made-for-TV movie mistakenly playing at the multiplex. Read more

Kerry Lengel, Arizona Republic: The deeper problem with the film is that it doesn't really add anything to the established narrative on its subject. Read more

Peter Keough, Boston Globe: It seems like an extended Apple ad, with a few gossipy asides, but less entertaining. Read more

Sandy Cohen, Associated Press: The history of a company isn't as compelling as the history of a person, especially one as complex, innovative and influential as Steve Jobs. Read more

Ben Sachs, Chicago Reader: Two movies seem to be wrestling for control [here]. One is a poor man's Social Network that depicts Jobs as a brilliant, antisocial jerk; the other is an embarrassing piece of hagiography that treats Jobs like a messiah. Read more

Michael Phillips, Chicago Tribune: Kutcher is everything except interesting. Read more

Adam Graham, Detroit News: The performance at the center just isn't up to the job. Read more

Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly: I was surprised and frequently compelled by what a starkly honest portrait it is. Read more

Justin Lowe, Hollywood Reporter: A biopic that's perhaps too respectful of the tech icon's innovations still remains frequently engaging. Read more

Mark Olsen, Los Angeles Times: "Jobs" feels curiously out of touch with its subject, both as a man and regarding his impact. Read more

Charlie McCollum, San Jose Mercury News: There is no depth to the piece and, while it might be asking too much of any film to show the "real" Jobs, it barely hints at the complexity of his ambitions and emotions. Read more

Rene Rodriguez, Miami Herald: "Jobs" works much better as a history of Apple than it does as a portrait of the genius who dreamed it up. Read more

Rafer Guzman, Newsday: "Jobs" turns out to be the IBM PCjr of biographical dramas, hampered by creaky formatting and thinking entirely inside the box. Read more

Stephen Whitty, Newark Star-Ledger: He was a charismatic leader, and the greatest salesman the industry ever saw. Read more

Mark Jenkins, NPR: [A] merely serviceable film ... Read more

Joe Neumaier, New York Daily News: Like the man it's about, "Jobs" is thin and unassuming, but keeps surprising you with ideas and innovation. Read more

Lou Lumenick, New York Post: [Kutcher's] performance, like the movie, is all surface. Read more

Steven Rea, Philadelphia Inquirer: It's an American success story of epic proportions, but Joshua Michael Stern's biopic of the Apple co-founder is hardly epic. Read more

James Berardinelli, ReelViews: A missed opportunity. Read more

Peter Travers, Rolling Stone: Jobs is a one-man show that needed to go for broke and doesn't. My guess is that Jobs would give it a swat. Read more

Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle: At its best, it's a good picture, and at its worst, it's almost good. Read more

Dana Stevens, Slate: It's a film whose plea to the audience resembles Jobs' appeal to the crowd in that iPod-unveiling scene: "Believe this is important and exciting," it asks, "because I say so." Read more

Colin Covert, Minneapolis Star Tribune: Other than people who are mildly curious about the guy who put the smartphone in their pocket and the tablet computer in their knapsack, I'm not sure who "Jobs" was made for. Read more

Liam Lacey, Globe and Mail: If Jobs had been a producer on Jobs, he would have sent it back to the lab for a redesign. Read more

Linda Barnard, Toronto Star: A film that can be described using a term that Jobs spits out with palpable distaste as "the worst thing you can say" about anything undertaken by Apple: "It's fine." Read more

Alonso Duralde, TheWrap: At an overlong 127 minutes, Jobs paradoxically feels like it's rushing through Jobs' life and times, never capturing the man's contradictory nature or satisfyingly placing him in a specific historical context. Read more

David Fear, Time Out: We walk away knowing nothing about what made this revolutionary tick. He deserves a 360-degree portrait. What you get is a mini recap of a pioneer's life-a biOpic shuffle. Read more

Claudia Puig, USA Today: A blandly superficial treatment of a deeply complex man. Read more

Justin Chang, Variety: Avoids outright hagiography, but more or less embodies the sort of bland, go-with-the-flow creative thinking Jobs himself would have scorned. Read more

Stephanie Zacharek, Village Voice: The movie itself, ultimately worshipful, ends up being Jobs-like in the cold way it treats flesh-and-blood people. Read more

Bilge Ebiri, New York Magazine/Vulture: Jobs is the equivalent of a feature-length slow clap. Read more

Michael O'Sullivan, Washington Post: There's a void inside the man that Kutcher never manages to fill. Read more