Producers: Zhang Xin, Joey Marra, Nick Shumaker, Jessica Grimshaw, Dana O’Keefe, Ronan Farrow, Lawrence Wright, Jessie Deeter, Erin Edeiken and Alex Gibney Director: Ales Gibney Screenplay: Alex Gibney and Michael J. Palmer Cast: Elon Musk, Justine Musk, Ashley St. Clair, Kara Swisher, Martin Eberhard, Zoë Schiffer, Geoffrey Hinton, Sam Harris, Errol Musk, Samantha Power, Cory Doctorow, Reid Hoffman and Katie Drummond Distributor: Bleecker Street
Grade: B
At the start of his four-hour documentary, Alex Gibney, serving as narrator of what is basically a massive cinematic essay on Elon Musk, discusses his initial misgivings about doing a piece about the much-covered trillionaire at all and then, after being persuaded to proceed with the project, trying to contact Musk for interviews. Elon, he says, reportedly referred to the documentarian as a “douche” and said any film coming from him would be a “hit piece.”
Well, if that wasn’t his opinion before, it will certainly be so now. “Musk” is a deeply critical examination of the man, admiring to a degree of his ambition and drive but otherwise very unflattering. In large measure, however, that’s Mask’s fault. Not only did he refuse to participate himself, but prevented others who might have provided positive assessments from doing so. (Still, that might have been the wiser course. When footage of his father Errol talking about his son’s unhappy childhood is inserted, it’s likely to make one queasy rather than sympathetic.)
As a result, Musk’s initial involvement in Tesla is basically recounted through the testimony of Martin Eberhard, the co-founder and initial CEO of the company whom Musk forced out. And his personal life is treated not just through the reminiscences of his father but those of two women whose experiences can hardly be described as happy—his ex-wife Justine and Ashley St. Clair, the estranged mother of one of his many children. (Musk’s apparent desire to ensure the passage of his purportedly superior genes to future generations is one of the many curious plot elements.)
Add to that Gibney’s inclusion of much archival footage and clips from interviews with colleagues, journalists and experts regarding his business practices, personal habits and often extreme views that cumulatively paint a very dark portrait. As befits its prodigious length (four hours, with a ten-minute intermission), the coverage is broad: in addition to Tesla, Space-X and the social-media platform once known as Twitter and now called X are treated in detail, emphasizing the governmental financing of the former and Musk’s remaking of the latter, with its transformation into a virtual market for right-wing expression.
That perspective is reinforced when the film turns to Musk’s forays into Republican politics in the 2024 elections and his involvement in the second Trump administration via the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, whose activities are treated with a combination of astonishment and disdain.
Admirers of Musk, and there are many, will undoubtedly denounce Gibney’s documentary in terms even more aggressive than his own. But though its point of view is made abundantly clear, Musk’s attempts to suppress its making (St. Clair was reportedly offered tens of millions not to participate in it), as well as his refusal to appear in it himself, except in archival form, can only deepen one’s confidence in its factual accuracy, although one could reasonably note that the language used to characterize some of his actions smacks of purple prose. But then Musk doesn’t pull any punches in his X postings, so why should others pussyfoot around expressing their criticism of him?
On a purely technical level, “Musk” is conventionally made, an assemblage of the usual sorts of material one would expect in such a profile. The cinematography by Benjamin Bloodwell is excellent in the newly-shot material, and Michael J. Palmer edits the huge mass of footage to add a sense of propulsion even as the coverage expands. Daniel Pemberton’s score adapts itself well to the shifting subjects.
Truth be told, Gibney was right in initially doubting whether to undertake a study of a man who’s been so widely covered already. “Musk” doesn’t offer startling new revelations, but its comprehensiveness and almost obsessive detail are justification enough for its existence. Exhaustive, and to some extent exhausting, it provides an incisive, if bloated, look at a man whose enormous wealth, extremist views and political reach represent, in the opinion of many, a real and present danger to the country and the world—a malevolent, abrasive, avaricious, duplicitous egomaniac consumed by self-interest.
Anyone who disputes the accuracy of Gibney’s portrait is invited to provide an alternative one arguing that Musk is benevolent, cuddly, generous, truthful, and humble, motivated by a genuine love of others that leads him to be self-sacrificing and unconcerned with his own reputation. It’s doubtful that anyone would take up that challenge, however large a bankroll he might provide.