iBail: American Psycho actor Christian Bale rejects Steve Jobs role Batman Begins actor Christian Bale has declined the opportunity to channel the spirit of Steve Jobs and will no longer star in a biopic about the erstwhile Apple supremo. The film has been hit by personnel troubles ever since its inception. Bale is the second high-profile thesp to change his mind about playing the fruity …
>I strongly doubt the issue is the script. Maybe they're finding out what sort of chap Jobs was
So... you're saying Jobs was a 'baddie'. Actors enjoy playing baddies, don't they?
If you're suggesting that jobs was a 'baddie', but the script was portraying him as a 'goodie', then surely the issue, from your perspective, is with the script?
Maybe Jobs was neither a goodie or a baddie, but just an imperfect human being like the rest of us. Maybe the actors think it might be a redundant role, since there is video footage of the Steve Jobs presenting products. Maybe Christian Bale has just received a call about work from his old mate Christopher Nolan, since the latter has just wrapped up his latest film?
"So... you're saying Jobs was a 'baddie'. Actors enjoy playing baddies, don't they?"
I'm not saying Jobs is anything, given his reputation I can't imagine how you could write Jobs as anything as a psychopath with a serious personality complex and possibly a messiah complex. There's a difference between playing a lovable baddie and.. modern day board room Hitler.
If I was an actor and wasn't aware of his history a stark look at it might give people cause for concern. Not that I have any reason to suspect Sorkin would write it like that, but knowing his work I wouldn't discount it.
My apple fan boy housemate and I do agree on one thing about this role though - it's an extremely difficult role to cast.
"For a look at Sorkin on a recent angry childish rant, take a look at "Studio 60" on YouTube"
You argument only works if people subscribe to your world view. I was involved in the effort to keep Studio 60 on air so lets assume I don't see it like you? Also Studio 60 was totally not recent. NBC thought they could fill their air with reality TV, and now nobody would work with them either way. But we might have been wrong, or not.
>I'm not saying Jobs is anything, given his reputation I can't imagine how you could write Jobs as anything as a psychopath with a serious personality complex and possibly a messiah complex.
Have you seen Christian Bale in 'American Psycho'? I've worked for people who can go into raging rants when what we are creating falls short of their perception of 'quality'... it tends to be a part of their personality, not its entirety. And I think there's a Woody Allen film which explores the question of whether great art can be created by an unpleasant human being. There's no barrier in principal to there being a good film in these elements... it'd be down to the script.
And that's before the made-for-the-movies 'rags to riches to rags to extreme riches' plot outline.
I think you guys missed my point slightly - if you're expecting a nice easy role with plenty of key demographic fan service which apple fanboys will love filled with plenty of red meat and it turns out to be something else you might have second thoughts. I'm only speculating here but I can imagine why - it might be scheduling or something, only Bale knows at this point the answer.
With Ashton Kutcher?
Do we need a new Steve Jobs movie every other year?
They could do a series, something like Indiana Jones:
- Steve Jobs and the Bending iPhone
- Steve Jobs and the Broken Antenna
- Steve Jobs and the Time-Traveling Stock Options
I agree with the sentiment but I simply cannot agree with or condone your use of language.
A cunt is useful, warm and often welcoming. Something that can provide almost endless pleasure for all concerned.
Perhaps if your prefaced the work with "Slack, greasy and diseased .." it would be more appropriate.
To be honest, although I am not remotely a prude when it comes to "four-letter" words there is indeed one word that I never use except in the positive sense in (if I may be permitted to express it this way) a moment of passion. I have never used that word as a "swear word" in my life. Why? Because of something Dad said to me many, many years ago. "Son, when you use that particular word to curse with you are insulting your mother, your sister and the lady who you may one day marry and any daughters she may, if you are very lucky, present you with". I realise that this may be regarded as a hopelessly old fashioned view but that is the way I feel.
In a previous life/role I included a few diabolical lines in a word vba script that changed the font colour ever so slightly to highlight 4 particular letters when printed; on screen you'd be none the wiser. We had a lot of "Scunthorpe" related memos and communications, which were usually printed out and pinned up on the walls of various business locations... I found it amusing recently upon encountering said *.doc template still in use, along with said VBA, as there were other meaningful things going on within the script and I had a password protecting my masterpiece...
it was 4 letters long..
I would not cross the room to get the remote to switch to such a movie, but come on. Maybe the Khaptain can fill us in on the redeeming virtues of Tamerlane, Coriolanus, etc. etc.
(Of course, if was Tamerlane written by Aaron Sorkin, probably I wouldn't watch that either.)
Yes there are but if you need to pump $50m minimum into a movie you need to guarantee a return or you won't get no funding to start with. That's why Hollywood is stagnating like a fetid pond on a Summer's day, no one will take a risk on a script that might not recoup at least 2x the asking price.
Jobs was an arsehole, no doubt about that but that's why he's perfect cinema material. The saintly uncle like figure to most with the nasty streak who screwed over his best mate, dumped his pregnant girlfriend and denied the existence of his daughter for many years just to make sure his billion dollar fortune was made and secured, only for it all to end with something all his money and fame could never fix for him. It's almost spot-on perfect second rate drivel spewed from the lowest Hollywood screenwriter's copy of Word ( or more likely Pages as they all use Macs! ).
TSN was amusing. But it had essentially nothing to do with technology, except by making programming appear to be a party game like Beer Pong, played at high blood alcohol levels. Mostly it was about shady business deals, a subject that Hollywood knows all about, and which makes for much better drama than writing virtual machines for PHP. (Yes, I know that came later.)
>Because lets face it, unless you had a hidden camera following the subject for his entire life it's basically just made-up 3rd-hand bollocks.
Yeah, but then David Lean's 'Lawrence of Arabia' was a very good film, yet still it differed from T.E Lawrence's book... which itself might have differed from reality at points, and certainly diverged from common syntax.
I think people watching the film will, like you Yugguy, be aware that is not a documentary.
fade in (on an apple, obviously, although not the beatles apple, coz that would be copyright infringement probably. well, its apple after all, maybe it wouldnt)
some clouds...aka simpsons...
a man......with a halo drifts into view obscured by a ball of white light with a bite taken out of the side
light gets brigther...fills the whole screen...
then....deep, booming voice "and so the entire world of tech was invented, BEFORE TIME ITSELF, thus allowing us to invent EVERYTHING before anyone else. mwahahahahaha!"
fin
maybe an outtake where bill gates is crushed to death by an apple, or kicked in the balls by jack black "so now this is happening"
fuck knows.
can i have 50 million billion dollars to make it now please?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
