2010's The Social Network bred a new obsession with the tech leaders that formed the modern world, leadership that seems to naturally attract the emotionally complex characters that are able to develop the progressive visions in the first place. Screenwriter of The Social Network Aaron Sorkin returned to write the script for Steve Jobs, but after a squabble internally (or not so internal since the Sony leak), David Fincher left a void that was filled by director Danny Boyle, known for his gritty dramas Trainspotting (1996) and 127 hours (2010).

Many comparisons have been made to the Facebook founder biopic, but ultimately they develop into very different pictures. As Danny Boyle observed, The Social Network is a sitting down film -- "when was the last time we saw that?" he asks, commending the freedom Sorkin was given by Hollywood. Steve Jobs is an entirely different animal, a standing, pacing and shouting one, that's given the same narrative freedom.

The drama follows Jobs (Michael Fassbender) backstage in three specific moments in his life: the product launches of his Apple Mac in 1984, his ill-fated NeXt computer of 1988, and the iMac in 1998. It's an intense affair with Fassbender expertly depicting the meltdowns, hard clashes between Jobs and Apple colleagues such as Steve Wozniak, Apple CEO John Sculley and marketing executive Joanna Hoffman, as well as dramatic scenes between Jobs and his ex-wife and daughter.

Steve Jobs is a theatrical display - with Boyle stressing before the film's release, "This is not a biopic" - and ditches historical accuracy for the sake of character study. It uses the three events as pivot points to cast around various clashes in Jobs' life to not only show the success and failures of his career, but how his personal life corresponded to them, all in the confined spaces of corridors and changing rooms. Jobs even jokingly remarks of the structure, "It's like five minutes before every launch, everyone goes to a bar, gets drunk, and tells me what they really think of me."

Sorkin and Boyle respectfully leave the questions surrounding Steve Jobs somewhat unanswered, not being simply 'for' or 'against' the man as it sometimes obvious with these films. One of the closing scenes even asks one of the big questions directly, with Jobs admitting he's "poorly made." This is not the climax of a conclusive character study, but does shed light on the inherent flaws in his character.

It portrays the unhealthy relationships, the resentment and the delusions, but wisely never dives too deep. The theatrical Steve Jobs comes to terms with these flaws, but this character study centres more on a man with no real character arc, staying true to his imperfections, changing the world instead of the other way round.

Michael Fassbender has shown over the last 4 years that he's at his best when he's abusing the trust of the audience -- a good looking, strong jawed anti-hero, full of anger, resentment, but charming and interesting enough to keep the audience on side. He's able to make us care about his characters while simultaneously giving us numerous reasons not to, which is exactly what Steve Jobs required. Jobs was a flawed human being that gave birth to a beautiful vision, and only through Fassbender's complex performance are we able to really appreciate both sides of that icon.