Steve Jobs and Story Structure

Steve Jobs - the new Aaron Sorkin-scripted movie, not the person - is incredibly unique. Certainly not in its subject matter, since Jobs has been featured in like, four dramas/documentaries in the same amount of years, but in the way it's structured. Because of this (and the acting, and directing, and everything else that makes this movie great) I would venture to say that this movie, this iteration of possibly the most well know technological innovator of our time, should be considered the definitive screen version of Jobs and his life story. Everyone else wanting to make a Jobs movie, just stop. It's not worth it. You can't win this one. I don't care if it's not the most accurate, or if "Apple Experts" hate it, or even what your most basic opinion of the real Steve Jobs is. This is the one.

Even if you push aside most of the things that you'd normally focus on when seeing a movie, things like actors, direction, and cinematography, and focus solely on Sorkin's story structure, you've got something that is far more original than most films being made today. For a studio-backed biopic to break away from a more traditional "follow our main character throughout their entire life" story is huge. If you haven't seen it (and judging by the way it's doing at the box office, you probably haven't) Steve Jobs is broken down into three main scenes, with each one taking place before a major product launch. With the exception of a few brief, well placed flashback scenes, all exposition, all character introductions, everything is done in real time, within the boundaries of these three product launches. Is it what happened in real life? No, probably not. But Sorkin uses this structure to tell a damn good story.


There will always be movies that try to radically change the structure of a typical story, films like Memento, or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. These can be fun, a nice break from the monotony of characters going from point A to point B over the course of a film, and some of them (these two may be some of the most notable) use non-linear storytelling to a stronger effect than just trying to confuse the audience. Other than these handfuls of non-linear scripts, movies tend to stick to the same basic structure. Sorkin broke this with Steve Jobs. It wasn't the most radical idea in the world, and you still see the development of Michael Fassbender's Jobs over the course of the film, but even Sorkin expressed his surprise at being allowed by the studio to follow through on such a different premise. In a way, it really mirrors its subject matter. A big part of the movie is how Jobs focused on adding a human component to a scary new machine (one of the major crises in the first act is how they can't get the Macintosh to say "hello) and that's more or less what Sorkin did with the script. Instead of of looking at the big picture, at Jobs' entire life, he narrows it down to five or six particular conflicts, and shows how they develop from '84-'88, and then again from '88-98.

It's also, in general, an overall compellingly human film. Again, was it totally accurate? Maybe not. But when you see the character of Steve Jobs struggling to admit that his daughter is actually his daughter, or when Wozniak is demanding that Jobs show some retroactive respect for the Apple II team, accuracy kind of stops mattering. It's a character portrait of a man who wants to change the world - who is actually in the very midst of that change - but of one who loses and finds his priorities along the way. And it's all done in a neatly wrapped, beautifully designed, three act package. It's aesthetically and emotionally fulfilling, and I'm sure Steve wouldn't have wanted it to be any other way.

South Park - 6 Days To Air

Last week I watched a documentary about Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of the hit animated comedy series, South Park. The documentary was titled, "6 Days To Air" and It followed the South Park creators over the six days that it took them to create the season 15 premier episode for the show. The documentary took the viewer through the entire pre-production, production and post production process and explained just how an episode of South Park is created. I think the most interesting thing about the documentary was that Parker and Stone created an entire episode of South Park in just 6 Days! It usually takes similar shows, like Family Guy and The Simpsons, approximately 9 months to create a whole episode and they are doing it in less than a week.

Trey Parker and Matt Stone had just finished making their new Broadway musical, The Book of Mormon. I saw the musical over the summer by winning lottery tickets to the show. I won 475 dollar tickets for only 30 bucks, it was sweet! The Book of Mormon was without a doubt the funniest show that I have ever seen, better than any TV show or movie. The songs were incredible and the acting was great. It was hilarious and I highly recommend it to everyone. I also recommend trying to win the tickets through the lottery because they are very expensive.

After completing The Book of Mormon, Parker and Stone had to get back to focusing on South Park. The documentary took you into the writers room and showed the viewer how they came up with the ideas for the episode. The documentary also took the viewer through the storyboarding process, voice recording process, the animating process and the distribution process. I thought that it was incredibly how these guys could create an entire episode in under week. They worked day and night for that week but were able to pull it off.

The episode was called, "Humancentipad" and it made fun of Steve Jobs and Apple. I thought that it was one of the best South Park episodes of all time. This documentary was very interesting and I really liked how it took the viewer through the whole process of creating an episode of South Park.

Mac Pros? More like Mac Woes

It has been three years since Apple has given any sort of major overhaul to the Mac Pro line. Given Apple's current fiasco with Final Cut X (replacing the industry-standard Final Cut with some iMovie / Final Cut hybrid update that completely lost their market share and gave it directly to Avid), a lack of an update on this line of computers seems like another step away from catering to their professional creative demographic.

In an email response from Apple CEO Tim Cook, he confirms a major update to the line of Mac Pros this 2013, saying not to worry, and that "we're working on something really great for next year". One is led to believe that it is a major update and not a minor hardware update because he specifically mentions the small spec bump the line received last year, and then goes on to mention "something really great" in typical Steve Jobs fashion.

Rumors are swirling about when the release of the new update will be and when it will be announced. MacDailyNews, a source with a hit-and-miss track record when it comes to confirmed rumors, announced that one of its sources claimed that Apple will be announcing the update during the month of April. Don't hold your breath.

An update at this time would be a much-needed reassurance in the direction Apple is taking as a company. With so many studios and production companies using only Macs in-house (and many still using outdated versions of Final Cut), people are looking for any way to avoid having to restructure their entire corporate workflow. A renovated line of Mac Pros would show that Apple still cares about the prosumer and the professional, and maintain their relationship with their customers that has been very tenuous as of late.

With Apple's extreme push towards the casual consumer, with the user-friendly (to a fault) iOS, the beautiful yet impossible to open new iMac, and the absolute maiming of Final Cut Pro, Apple needs to remember what market stayed with them in the beginning and pushed their brand for all of these years.

Technology and Our Reliance On It

Tonight, my macbook died; something with the logic board or CPU completely stopped working out of no where.  They tell me there going to try and have it fixed by the end of next weekend, but I am a bit skeptical.  I like to think of myself as a person who can live without technology.  Sure, you can usually find me with the latest gizmos and gadgets but I feel that I could survive without them if I had to.  Well now I have to.  Sure, I have an iPhone and I'll be borrowing my parents iPad.  I also will be taking one of my dads crappy IBM computers so I can write papers if I have to. But, I am out of commission with my creativity.  All of my video editing, audio recordings and so much more lie in that computer.  So much of my creativity and soul lie in its wires and connections and I thought for the first time how much I truly do rely on my computer for so much of what I do and theres no really going back at this point.  This isn't my main blog post, I'll be posting a treatment I wrote for a web series type show that I wanted to get feedback on but I thought that it was interesting how much my mindset changed when I lost the ability to use my computer.  It will be interesting going through an entire week of school without it.

Apple

I recently watched a brand new documentary on Steve Jobs.  It was recently done and talked about his life from the starting of Apple, to buying Pixar, to once again becoming the CEO of Apple, until his death.  Admittedly, I am an Apple fanboy.  I own an iPhone, a Macbook, an iPad, and countless Apple applications like Logic, Final Cut Pro, and many others.

Normally, we think of Steve Jobs as just the CEO of Apple, a guy who helped with the iPhone and was ultimately, a computer geek.  What this documentary highlights and why I am writing this is that Steve Jobs revolutionized almost every aspect of the media today.  He was involved with the creation of Final Cut Pro and studio, he was instrumental in starting iTunes, helped launch logic, and also helped create the software that makes all of these tools and assets that we use as communications and Television Radio majors possible.

With just the mention of the word Final Cut (the old version at least), most people think right away about a NLE that was revolutionary, streamlined the editing process, and kept costs down in the process.  It's interesting to think that a man that we all consider a visionary, impacted all of us so closely.  I for one began editing on Final Cut Pro in high school.  Because of Final Cut, I found my love for making films, telling stories, and finding my own way to be creative.  Had it not been for Steve Jobs or even iMovie, my high school may never had the money or resources to have a video production class and I never would have gotten to the point I am at today.

Another thing that Steve did was with audio.  ITunes is gigantic; and unstoppable force in the music industry along with iPods.  People forget that when iTunes was created, there was nothing even remotely close to it on the market nor was there anything reasonably as advanced as the iPod was when it was released shortly after.  Music is one of my biggest passions along with video and when I was thinking about, Steve has literally contributed to almost all of my happiness in my life in some way.  While his programs are not instrumental to my life all of the time now that I have found my passion, I still use them today and without Final Cut or Garage Band and Logic, I may have never realized how creative of a person I really am because there was nothing even remotely affordable on the market or easy-to-use for music and video.

While people are quick to judge "apple fanboys", I think it is important to step back and think about all of the ways Apple has impacted our lives.  Steve Jobs and his company have made so many things possible for all of us that may never have been possible before.  Because of their innovation, so many more innovators were created and made able to realize their true potential.  For this, not for the iPhones I use or the computer I own, do I hold Steve Jobs so highly.  Through his products, he inspired me and many others around me to create, to learn from ourselves, to be our own visionaries, and for this, we are all indebted to Steve Jobs.


May he rest in peace.

Apple Christmas Commercial

APPLE is at again. This years christmas commercial is so clever, I just had to share it with you guys. Although the new iphone 4s isnt as awesome as many people thought it was gonna be this commercial makes me rethink purchasing the phone this holiday season. How about you? I really love how they made siri usable for even Santa and its really funny without losing sight of the product (which alot of comedic commercials have a tendency to do). A+ once again for apples ad campaign i have no idea how they keep doing it. GENIUS.

On another note I really had an amazing time with you all this semester. I just wanted to wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.
Love
Ivannah

Parody or Advertisement?

My question this week has to do with advertising. I'm sure if anyone has watched a Nickelodeon show semi-recently, they have seen the "Pear" computers that the main characters use. Clearly, this is a parody on Apple computers, which they use possibly because they didn't feel like going through Apple to use their computers, but my question is that since everyone clearly knows that the computers are parody-ing Apple, is it really a parody, or a simple and hidden advertisement? I tend to think that it's almost product placement, because not only did they copy the idea of having a symbol on the back of the computer, it was a fruit that looks very much like an apple. I guess my question would better be answered by going to people who know about advertising and product placement, but it's something that's always made me curious.

Interactive Tourism Application

Last week I wrote a long post about the reading, this week I decided to focus my post on our project. For my project I was originally planning on doing an interactive tourism environment that was almost game like. Then a few days ago, I read an article (the link is below) about Apple’s plan for their new tablet. It made me consider a few good points about creating the project. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. Use resources that are available to you.
You should be filling a void in the market. I discovered through research there were environments that did exactly what I intended to do already available. Additionally, I discovered that Facebook doesn’t have any really good travel applications. The best one available is Going Places, which only has a few hundred users (less then 200 active users). Thus, creating an interactive travel application for Facebook would fill the void in the marketplace.
Products can have multiple uses. These uses can be from educational to fun. I realized that what I create should be interactive and fun while still having some educational value. Having a product with multiple uses will expand the market of people who would be interested in the product.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703405704575015362653644260.html?mod=dist_smartbrief