High Brow or Low Brow, Steve Jobs Biopics Are Equally Unsuccessful

When Universal released Steve Jobs last month, it was supposed to be a sophisticated counterpoint to the last fictionalized biography of the founder of Apple, 2013's decidely less sophisticated Jobs. The surprising thing is that not only did the new movie fail to draw big audiences, it did so in an almost identical fashion to the 2013 film.

The 2015 Steve Jobs film had a pedigree designed to impress critics. It was written by Aaron Sorkin in a self-consciously theatrical three-act form and directed by acclaimed filmmaker Danny Boyle. It starred Michael Fassbender, who, in a determined bit of acting seriousness, refused to do anything to make himself look like Jobs. The film was talky in Sorkin's trademark style, and critics responded mostly positively to the final product.

The earlier film starred Ashton Kutcher, who is no one's idea of a sophisticated actor, and Kutcher didn't hesitate to don Jobs' trademark glasses and beard for the job. Critics, for the most part, hated the film, calling it superficial and historically inaccurate.

But the differences didn't seem to matter. According to a comparison of the box-office performances of both films at BoxOfficeMojo, their numbers are remarkably close. Both films took in about $7 million in their first weekend of wide release, although the 2015 film did well in early limited release when it was playing in markets favored by critics and tech industry employees. After 26 days of release, both films had taken in $16 million.

The biggest difference is that the production budget of Steve Jobs, at $30 million, was more than twice that of Jobs, which was made for only $12 million. The lesson seems to be that paying for perceived quality is not always a good idea.