1. Musk

This is Alex Gibney's documentary Musk about Elon Musk.
Released nationwide today!

* Director: Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Going Clear)

* Length: about 3 hours 45 minutes, with an intermission.

* It covers Musk's rise, Tesla, SpaceX, X, his political influence and accumulation of power.

* Gibney spent about four years working on it.

* Musk has been extremely hostile toward the film and Gibney.

* It's much more of an investigative portrait than a conventional biographical documentary. Gibney's stated purpose is essentially to examine how Musk acquired and exercises power.

Interestingly, Gibney says he hasn't ruled out a Musk 2 someday because Musk simply keeps generating new material.

2. The Social Reckoning

This is the follow-up to the 2010 The Social Network, written and directed by Aaron Sorkin.

The official title is The Social Reckoning, and it opened October 9, 2026.

The really interesting part is that it's not simply "what happened to Zuckerberg after the first movie." Sorkin describes it more as a companion piece: the first film was about Facebook being created; this one is about what Facebook became.

The central real-world story is the 2021 Facebook Files:

* Frances Haugen, the Facebook whistleblower, is played by Mikey Madison.
* Jeff Horwitz, the Wall Street Journal reporter who worked with her, is played by Jeremy Allen White.
* Mark Zuckerberg is played by Jeremy Strong, replacing Jesse Eisenberg.
* Sorkin directed it himself; David Fincher did not return.

And that's actually a pretty fascinating pairing: Gibney's Musk and Sorkin's The Social Reckoning are both essentially examinations of enormously powerful tech founders and the consequences of concentrating that much power in one person/company.

Interview with Musk filmmaker. Scariest thing is he got access to terabytes of data of all us via DOGE that can be used with AI to manipulate elections outcomes.

Interview with Aaron Sorkin re his "Facebook 2" film.

concordtom said:

---

1. Musk

This is Alex Gibney's documentary Musk about Elon Musk.
Released nationwide today!

* Director: Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Going Clear)

* Length: about 3 hours 45 minutes, with an intermission.

* It covers Musk's rise, Tesla, SpaceX, X, his political influence and accumulation of power.

* Gibney spent about four years working on it.

* Musk has been extremely hostile toward the film and Gibney.

* It's much more of an investigative portrait than a conventional biographical documentary. Gibney's stated purpose is essentially to examine how Musk acquired and exercises power.

Interestingly, Gibney says he hasn't ruled out a Musk 2 someday because Musk simply keeps generating new material.

2. The Social Reckoning

This is the follow-up to the 2010 The Social Network, written and directed by Aaron Sorkin.

The official title is The Social Reckoning, and it opened October 9, 2026.

The really interesting part is that it's not simply "what happened to Zuckerberg after the first movie." Sorkin describes it more as a companion piece: the first film was about Facebook being created; this one is about what Facebook became.

The central real-world story is the 2021 Facebook Files:

* Frances Haugen, the Facebook whistleblower, is played by Mikey Madison.
* Jeff Horwitz, the Wall Street Journal reporter who worked with her, is played by Jeremy Allen White.
* Mark Zuckerberg is played by Jeremy Strong, replacing Jesse Eisenberg.
* Sorkin directed it himself; David Fincher did not return.

And that's actually a pretty fascinating pairing: Gibney's Musk and Sorkin's The Social Reckoning are both essentially examinations of enormously powerful tech founders and the consequences of concentrating that much power in one person/company.

---

Nice to see some intellectual thought on this board.

Gibney is interesting that he views Musk as good and bad, and says you can't view people like him through just one lens. He gets into Musk's way of branding himself, which the wealthy Americans tend to do today (e.g.,Gates, Buffet, Zukerberg's sister, and now Bezos, etc.) and calls him a confidence man. The thing about Musk is he keeps doing new things, which really sets him apart. There is electric cars, electric batteries, Starlink, Space X, PayPal, the Las Vegas Underground transportation system (which will become a huge deal in a year or two), advancements on dementia, smart/green custom home development, Neuralink, social media, DOGE, now a an AI company, and more to come in the future. But there always is an angle to (1) make money which is fair game in a capitalist society, and (2) to enhance his ego. He is a flawed guy, and admits to Asperger's, insomnia, sleep depravation, and ketamine use to help with these. And always with too many opinions. An Aaron Rodgers personality. People either view him as evil or a great innovator. Everyone admits he is brilliant and flawed. The problem with Gibney as much as he tries to act neutral, it is clear he has an agenda from the interview, and I'm sure we will see it in through what will no doubt be a propagandist documentary (and thus will have a limited viewership). That is a shame, because a more straight forward documentary on such a usual and powerful guy would be fascinating.

Zuckerberg, by comparison, is a light weight who achieved nothing beyond Facebook, despite speeding a lot of money to try and diversify into other areas. But I probably will watch that because Sorkin can make a good movie.

calpoly said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

concordtom said:

---

1. Musk

This is Alex Gibney's documentary Musk about Elon Musk.
Released nationwide today!

* Director: Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Going Clear)

* Length: about 3 hours 45 minutes, with an intermission.

* It covers Musk's rise, Tesla, SpaceX, X, his political influence and accumulation of power.

* Gibney spent about four years working on it.

* Musk has been extremely hostile toward the film and Gibney.

* It's much more of an investigative portrait than a conventional biographical documentary. Gibney's stated purpose is essentially to examine how Musk acquired and exercises power.

Interestingly, Gibney says he hasn't ruled out a Musk 2 someday because Musk simply keeps generating new material.

2. The Social Reckoning

This is the follow-up to the 2010 The Social Network, written and directed by Aaron Sorkin.

The official title is The Social Reckoning, and it opened October 9, 2026.

The really interesting part is that it's not simply "what happened to Zuckerberg after the first movie." Sorkin describes it more as a companion piece: the first film was about Facebook being created; this one is about what Facebook became.

The central real-world story is the 2021 Facebook Files:

* Frances Haugen, the Facebook whistleblower, is played by Mikey Madison.
* Jeff Horwitz, the Wall Street Journal reporter who worked with her, is played by Jeremy Allen White.
* Mark Zuckerberg is played by Jeremy Strong, replacing Jesse Eisenberg.
* Sorkin directed it himself; David Fincher did not return.

And that's actually a pretty fascinating pairing: Gibney's Musk and Sorkin's The Social Reckoning are both essentially examinations of enormously powerful tech founders and the consequences of concentrating that much power in one person/company.

---

Nice to see some intellectual thought on this board.

Gibney is interesting that he views Musk as good and bad, and says you can't view people like him through just one lens. He gets into Musk's way of branding himself, which the wealthy Americans tend to do today (e.g.,Gates, Buffet, Zukerberg's sister, and now Bezos, etc.) and calls him a confidence man. The thing about Musk is he keeps doing new things, which really sets him apart. There is electric cars, electric batteries, Starlink, Space X, PayPal, the Las Vegas Underground transportation system (which will become a huge deal in a year or two), advancements on dementia, smart/green custom home development, Neuralink, social media, DOGE, now a an AI company, and more to come in the future. But there always is an angle to (1) make money which is fair game in a capitalist society, and (2) to enhance his ego. He is a flawed guy, and admits to Asperger's, insomnia, sleep depravation, and ketamine use to help with these. And always with too many opinions. An Aaron Rodgers personality. People either view him as evil or a great innovator. Everyone admits he is brilliant and flawed. The problem with Gibney as much as he tries to act neutral, it is clear he has an agenda from the interview, and I'm sure we will see it in through what will no doubt be a propagandist documentary (and thus will have a limited viewership). That is a shame, because a more straight forward documentary on such a usual and powerful guy would be fascinating.

Zuckerberg, by comparison, is a light weight who achieved nothing beyond Facebook, despite speeding a lot of money to try and diversify into other areas. But I probably will watch that because Sorkin can make a good movie."

---

"Everyone admits he is brilliant and flawed."
Not everyone but thanks for speaking for everyone.

---

Fine most people who have worked with Musk think he is brilliant but with a flawed management style, and with a messy social life. Happy?

I agree with your post and have two sticking points for me. After the definition of Confidence Man, which is buyable, they then get into all the ways he lies and Cons people. That's troubling!!! Upsetting!

#2 is how you say the film will likely be dismissible because of slant when they should have done a more straight film. Uh, gee, talk about fudging before you've seen. And second to this point, isn't the entire Musk operation a slant in the rah rah direction already?

God forbid criticism.


Thank you for enjoying the "intellectual" post I made.

wifeisafurd said:

---

calpoly said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

concordtom said:

---

1. Musk

This is Alex Gibney's documentary Musk about Elon Musk.
Released nationwide today!

* Director: Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, Going Clear)

* Length: about 3 hours 45 minutes, with an intermission.

* It covers Musk's rise, Tesla, SpaceX, X, his political influence and accumulation of power.

* Gibney spent about four years working on it.

* Musk has been extremely hostile toward the film and Gibney.

* It's much more of an investigative portrait than a conventional biographical documentary. Gibney's stated purpose is essentially to examine how Musk acquired and exercises power.

Interestingly, Gibney says he hasn't ruled out a Musk 2 someday because Musk simply keeps generating new material.

2. The Social Reckoning

This is the follow-up to the 2010 The Social Network, written and directed by Aaron Sorkin.

The official title is The Social Reckoning, and it opened October 9, 2026.

The really interesting part is that it's not simply "what happened to Zuckerberg after the first movie." Sorkin describes it more as a companion piece: the first film was about Facebook being created; this one is about what Facebook became.

The central real-world story is the 2021 Facebook Files:

* Frances Haugen, the Facebook whistleblower, is played by Mikey Madison.
* Jeff Horwitz, the Wall Street Journal reporter who worked with her, is played by Jeremy Allen White.
* Mark Zuckerberg is played by Jeremy Strong, replacing Jesse Eisenberg.
* Sorkin directed it himself; David Fincher did not return.

And that's actually a pretty fascinating pairing: Gibney's Musk and Sorkin's The Social Reckoning are both essentially examinations of enormously powerful tech founders and the consequences of concentrating that much power in one person/company.

---

Nice to see some intellectual thought on this board.

Gibney is interesting that he views Musk as good and bad, and says you can't view people like him through just one lens. He gets into Musk's way of branding himself, which the wealthy Americans tend to do today (e.g.,Gates, Buffet, Zukerberg's sister, and now Bezos, etc.) and calls him a confidence man. The thing about Musk is he keeps doing new things, which really sets him apart. There is electric cars, electric batteries, Starlink, Space X, PayPal, the Las Vegas Underground transportation system (which will become a huge deal in a year or two), advancements on dementia, smart/green custom home development, Neuralink, social media, DOGE, now a an AI company, and more to come in the future. But there always is an angle to (1) make money which is fair game in a capitalist society, and (2) to enhance his ego. He is a flawed guy, and admits to Asperger's, insomnia, sleep depravation, and ketamine use to help with these. And always with too many opinions. An Aaron Rodgers personality. People either view him as evil or a great innovator. Everyone admits he is brilliant and flawed. The problem with Gibney as much as he tries to act neutral, it is clear he has an agenda from the interview, and I'm sure we will see it in through what will no doubt be a propagandist documentary (and thus will have a limited viewership). That is a shame, because a more straight forward documentary on such a usual and powerful guy would be fascinating.

Zuckerberg, by comparison, is a light weight who achieved nothing beyond Facebook, despite speeding a lot of money to try and diversify into other areas. But I probably will watch that because Sorkin can make a good movie."

---

"Everyone admits he is brilliant and flawed."
Not everyone but thanks for speaking for everyone.

---

Fine most people who have worked with Musk think he is brilliant but with a flawed management style, and with a messy social life. Happy?

---

Lol.

Thanks! I guess I needed an audible laugh today!!
Good reply.
You could have even said "many" to avoid the next complaint.

I used to admire Musk a lot for bringing electric cars to the forefront. I first had doubts about him when he called that rescue diver a "pedo guy" in 2018. Who does that? He's kind of shown himself to be a disaster ever since but I bought a Tesla in ~2022 anyway. I wouldn't now.

Funny personal story. After car service I have provided reviews in which I say I would not recommend Tesla to a friend because "I try not to do business with fascists". I provided that review twice. After my last review after the questions the commentary window appeared and then quickly disappeared. I think I've been blocked.

dajo9 said:

---

I used to admire Musk a lot for bringing electric cars to the forefront. I first had doubts about him when he called that rescue diver a "pedo guy" in 2018. Who does that? He's kind of shown himself to be a disaster ever since but I bought a Tesla in ~2022 anyway. I wouldn't now.

Funny personal story. After car service I have provided reviews in which I say I would not recommend Tesla to a friend because "I try not to do business with fascists". I provided that review twice. After my last review after the questions the commentary window appeared and then quickly disappeared. I think I've been blocked.

---

I would not doubt it.

Wow, here's a third film about a tech billionaire!
It had a smash weekend at the box office! As in good!

High praise!!

Are these reviews real or bots to pump viewership?





Crazy to me that they loved the film so much - cause I can't stand looking at her!! Gross!!!

concordtom said:

---

High praise!!

Are these reviews real or bots to pump viewership?





Crazy to me that they loved the film so much - cause I can't stand looking at her!! Gross!!!

---

Now I have to see this. They are going to have a tough time eliciting sympathy from me. I put her right there with the Sackler family in perpetrating a fraud that physically harmed masses of people who relied on their product claims.

Musk really is a different, more polarizing character (everyone kinda hates Holmes), that is known for both accomplishments and his often extreme views and behavior. When a film maker boldly starts he making a film to point out wealth concentration and a shift toward influence on the global and political economy, you know you getting a slanted and biased film before you even see it, that will lack credibility for most people, and that the producer with his preconceived views, will not get access to those who matter the most on the topic. It may get some award from liberal Hollywood, but it won't get much viewership.

in contrast, for a look at a documentary where you can see that filmmaker is not trying to inflict propaganda, and simply wants to know what is going on (and therefore gets unprecedented access), watch the Netflix documentary AI Gone Wild, which shows the promise and threat poised by AI in a very understandable manner. I walked away terrified, but others may draw the opposite conclusion.

Update:
I watched this and decided I am not interested in the Holmes film after all.

She's a psycho liar, plain and simple. She's manipulating the filmmakers the same way she manipulated investors.
Story told. Nothing interesting there. I don't need to go through 3 hours of her twisted tale.

Am I wrong?




Regarding Sacklers… OxyContin.
I know the harm - addiction leading to misuse.
But what was their claim? Why were they horrible? Spell that out for me, please. What's the crime and their deception?
(Ignorance)

concordtom said:

---

Update:
I watched this and decided I am not interested in the Holmes film after all.

She's a psycho liar, plain and simple. She's manipulating the filmmakers the same way she manipulated investors.
Story told. Nothing interesting there. I don't need to go through 3 hours of her twisted tale.

Am I wrong?




Regarding Sacklers… OxyContin.
I know the harm - addiction leading to misuse.
But what was their claim? Why were they horrible? Spell that out for me, please. What's the crime and their deception?
(Ignorance)

---

The Sackler's family owned company launched OxyContin in 1996, aggressively marketing it as low-or no risk for addiction and abuse. The product was the personal project of CEO Richard Sackler. They Sacklers used their influence and lobbyist money to cause regulators to look the other way and buried their own's company's testing results that showed the drug was highly addictive. There are many deaths and ruined lives attributable to Oxy/Contin addiction,

Their company pled guilty to various criminal charges, but as is often the case in white collar crime, they were never personally charged. Before and during the company's legal downfalls, members of the Sackler family withdrew billions of dollars from their company into personal and offshore accounts, and then took the company bankrupt to avoid $billions in lawsuits .The U.S. Supreme Court recently blocked a previous nationwide bankruptcy settlement because it improperly granted the Sackler family broad immunity from civil opioid lawsuits without the universal consent of victims. They are known for reputation laundering by donating vast sums to museums and universities, though many institutions have given their money back and removed naming rights.


Holmes basically marketed a blood testing product she knew didn't work accuraltey. People relied on inaccurate test results to make bad medical decisions. She was also convicted of defrauding investors. There is a lot more to it, but I don't want to spoil it for those seeing the movie. You can see parallels, in terms of conduct.