Gibney’s ‘Musk’ Premieres: A Four-Hour Critique of Power and Performance

Key points

• The documentary 'Musk' runs for approximately 3 hours and 45 minutes, including a 10-minute intermission, and opened in limited US theaters on October 9 before a nationwide release on October 14.
• Elon Musk refused to participate in the film, leading director Alex Gibney to create an AI-generated avatar that speaks using Musk’s verbatim public quotes.
• The film features interviews with Justine Musk, Ashley St. Clair, Errol Musk, Kara Swisher, and Geoffrey Hinton, among others, with Errol Musk being the only subject to agree immediately.
• The documentary argues that DOGE’s actions were driven by 'performative cruelty' and aimed at destroying the regulatory state, rather than solely addressing waste, fraud, and abuse.
• Critics note that the film feels like two distinct narratives, with the second half being more adversarial, and some reviewers argue it lacks new information for those familiar with Musk’s public record.

Background

Alex Gibney, known for documentaries on Enron and Lance Armstrong, began working on 'Musk' in 2022 after being approached by investors. The project was delayed and expanded as Musk’s political influence grew, particularly after his involvement with the Trump administration and the creation of DOGE. The film’s release has been marked by legal threats from Musk and initial hesitation from Universal Pictures regarding international distribution due to political sensitivities.

How outlets are covering it

WIRED emphasizes the film’s unique approach to Musk’s 'daddy issues' and the ethical implications of using an AI avatar, noting that Gibney aimed to make the avatar visually appealing to avoid undermining the film’s message. The New York Times highlights the film’s focus on the intersection of tech and political power, describing it as a necessary examination of 21st-century power. AP News reports on Musk’s public backlash, calling the film a 'hit piece,' and notes the legal threats that caused Universal to hesitate on international release. Ars Technica criticizes the film’s length and structure, arguing that it feels like two different documentaries and that the AI avatar is less compelling than archival footage. The outlets differ in their assessment of the film’s effectiveness, with WIRED and NYT focusing on its thematic depth and Ars Technica questioning its execution and novelty.

Why it matters

The documentary 'Musk' offers a critical examination of how tech power has translated into political influence, particularly through DOGE and Musk’s relationship with the Trump administration. It raises concerns about the potential misuse of federal data for electoral interference and highlights the human cost of government cuts. The film’s release also underscores the challenges of documenting influential figures who refuse to participate, and the legal and political risks associated with such projects.

What to watch

The film will continue its nationwide release, and its impact on public discourse about Musk’s influence and the ethics of AI-generated media will be monitored. Legal threats from Musk may lead to further legal battles, and the film’s reception will influence future documentary projects on influential tech figures. The concerns raised about DOGE data and electoral interference may also prompt further investigations and policy discussions.