People had similar things to say about The Social Network. It was wrong about history, but it was also a good movie on its own. We will see if "Jobs", as a movie, can stand on its own.
Often, anticipation is what ruins a movie. All of the best movies I've seen (The Matrix, Fifth Element spring to mind) had such obtuse trailers that I had no idea what was going on before I got in there.
But a movie isn't just a movie. Every movie has a narrative that makes a point, and that makes it valuable.
If what we are hoping to learn from 'Jobs' or The Social Network is "How did this guy do it? What personal qualities can I emulate, what situations can I apply the same approach in", then it is only valuable if it is accurate.
After all, if the narrative is something the writer more or less made up (i.e. he's missed out the bit where Jobs goes into the wilderness and comes back another person), then what the movie teaches us is coming from the writers head. The writer didn't build a leading company, so I am not really interested in what he thinks about how to do it.
That's not the writer's intention though - that's what you want the intention to be. And that's not really fair. The point is probably an entertaining biopic aimed at mass-market success, not a how-to on building a successful company.
What makes a movie valuable is the "point" it's trying to make? You sound like my brother, who used to see me reading novels and say "What's the point of reading that? You do know the stuff in that book didn't actually happen, right?". :)
