Metascore
44

Mixed or average reviews - based on 35 Critics What's this?

User Score
5.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 145 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5 out of 35
  2. Negative: 6 out of 35
  1. Reviewed by: Joe Neumaier
    Aug 15, 2013
    80
    Entertaining and smart, with a great, career 2.0 performance from Ashton Kutcher.
  2. 63
    It’s superficial, but that plays into the hands of the film’s star, Ashton Kutcher.
  3. Reviewed by: Justin Lowe
    Mar 18, 2013
    60
    The filmmakers do fall into the trap of overly sentimentalizing a widely beloved public figure who represents an enormous cultural significance. At the same time, however, they keep the movie frequently engaging.
  4. Reviewed by: Kyle Ryan
    Aug 14, 2013
    50
    For (nearly) every yin of Ashton Kutcher’s Steve Jobs flashing a moment of brilliance, there’s a yang of someone saying he’s changed or is his own worst enemy. The unwritten, but understood, full title of Joshua Michael Stern’s film is "Jobs: Brilliant Asshole."
  5. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    Aug 15, 2013
    50
    One thing it doesn't do is offer a revealing look at the mercurial entrepreneur. The movie that bears his name settles on a blandly superficial treatment of a deeply complex man.
  6. Reviewed by: Marc Savlov
    Aug 21, 2013
    40
    It fails to rise above the inherent limitations of the traditional Hollywood biopic and it's about as insanely great as a Mac "low cost" LC model – which was, to be fair, pretty cool.
  7. Reviewed by: R. Kurt Osenlund
    Aug 12, 2013
    0
    Steered by a lead actor and director, Joshua Michael Stern, who are both way out of their respective leagues, Jobs is excruciating, failing to entertain and all but pissing on its subject's grave.

See all 35 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 39
  2. Negative: 10 out of 39
  1. Aug 30, 2013
    10
    Ashton kutcher did an amazing performance. The movie itself could be better directed. Yet it is still inspiring and amazing. Kutcher by far did the best performance of his career and showed that he has a great potential. Expand
  2. Sep 20, 2013
    8
    Great movie but once again another rushed ending. Kutcher did a very great job and this movie makes me sort of want to buy a mac or and iphone(NOT) but in all great movie you wont be disappointed. Collapse
  3. Jan 3, 2014
    7
    This movie is nothing like The Social Network. I'm not saying that as a bad point or as a good point. I'm just starting my review with a common mistake. The Social Network was about two friends and how a big corporation ruined their friendship. Jobs is about the big corporation, not the people involved with it. Ashton Kutcher was a decent actor in this movie. When it was announced that he was going to be play Steve Jobs, everybody lost their But he's actually alright, nothing special, but not a bad performance. Pretty much everyone is nothing special. Ashton Kutcher is the only actor who I can name off the top of my head, who was in Jobs. Besides JK Simmons who has such a memorable face that I will always recognise him. You may think that the story of the movie was already prepared, but the writers had to pick some events in Steve Job's life which were interesting. They did not do it too well. I would have preferred to have seen more about the later life of Steve Jobs, than him sitting in an office shouting at people. The writers obviously noticed how good Ashton Kutcher looked as old Steve Jobs and decided to give him as little screen time as possible. Also it was not made clear what year's things were taking place in. I'm not an expert on Steve Jobs so I have no idea what year he was born in (probably in the 50's), after watching the movie about his company. I still don't know. One of the things I did like was the soundtrack. There was some of The Beatles some of The Rolling Stones (I think) and it really gave the movie a vintage feel. I'm guessing that's when a lot of it took place because I had no idea what year it was most of the time. To be honest Jobs did not teach me much about Steve Jobs at all. I can't remember what college he went to (even though it's in the second scene). I can't remember the name of his wife. Or whether she was even his wife?

    As an autobiographical movie Jobs is not good and focuses more on which people he shouted at than what products he made. But watching people getting shouted at is funny. As a movie overall Jobs is good and for the most part enjoyable.
    Expand
  4. Aug 22, 2013
    5
    Ashton Kutcher may have the talent to play Steve Jobs, but the rest of the movie cuts out a few very important details of his life, while being monotonous in the process. But it is worth watching. Expand
  5. Mar 10, 2014
    5
    An okay film but not what I wanted to see, in any simple way of putting it's disappointing, only hope Steve Jobs gets a better quality film about him and not just the products he made. Expand
  6. Nov 23, 2013
    4
    Joshua Michael Stern's "Jobs" is like an assembly line for the best moments in the career of Steve Jobs, but seriously lacking in depth, and without much significance. It is a truly unremarkable biopic of the "master of innovation" as you could possibly imagine. "Jobs" follows an overly safe, unimaginative course that clocks in at a tiresome 122 minutes. The storytelling is painfully straightforward, covering only the principal events of his professional trials and tribulations, and providing little else beyond what is already public knowledge.

    Developing his imagination for computer programming at Atari, Steve Jobs (Ashton Kutcher) brings in his friend Steve Wozniak (Josh Gad) to help with the hardware aspect, forming a partnership that would soon lead to the founding and development of Apple Computers, a force within the industry throughout the 1980s. Steve is not prepared for the financial demands and the ruthless business mentality, and is eventually forced out of the company he began, only to return in the 1990s with a fresh game plan on how to bring Apple back into the public consciousness, and to dominate the industry once again.

    "Jobs" is a biopic with a very narrow focus, and without any sense of risk or adventure. It is so intent on covering Jobs' entire corporate career, that it simply reduces his personal life to a footnote. Stern completely glosses over Jobs' personal life, which is essential to any self-respecting biopic. The entire production feels rushed and slapped together simply to benefit from being the first one out of the gate.

    To his credit, Kutcher puts forth a good effort, and he undeniably looks the part of Steve Jobs. Unfortunately, Ashton always looks like he is trying too hard to play the part, and never fully becomes the character he's portraying. His limitations on the big screen prove to be a major liability. He has developed a screen persona as likeable character, which has served him well with numerous TV sitcoms. Not so much with movies.

    What emerges is a movie that has "a made for TV" feel, which depicts a self-absorbed creep who stabs everyone in the back to simply to get his way that goes on for two plus hours. A thoroughly unsatisfying tribute, and we are still left none the wiser as to what made "The Father of the Digital Revolution" beyond what we already know.
    Expand
  7. Sep 2, 2014
    0
    I agree with SimpleMethod. Jobs really does come off as a straight to TV movie and try as he might, Ashton Kutcher was a god awful choice to play Steve Jobs. Expand

See all 39 User Reviews

Trailers