Hollywood Releases Four Films Criticizing Tech Billionaires
New movies portray Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Elizabeth Holmes, and Sam Altman as flawed leaders, while the industry faces financial risks and internal conflict.
By Rebecca Svoboda ·
Four new films arriving this fall depict the leaders of major technology companies as flawed and often hostile figures. The projects include The Social Reckoning, Musk, You Can See Everything, and Artificial. These narratives contrast sharply with earlier cinema that portrayed tech founders as heroic innovators who built tools for a better society. The current wave of films suggests a rejection of that earlier optimism and presents a critical view of the past decade in the industry.
Each film targets a specific executive. The Social Reckoning focuses on Mark Zuckerberg and his role in exacerbating violent extremism. The documentary Musk examines Elon Musk’s impact on democratic norms. You Can See Everything profiles Elizabeth Holmes and her efforts to mislead the public. Artificial portrays Sam Altman as a figure playing roulette with humanity’s future. The movies argue that these individuals used their power to create harm rather than just innovation.
The storytelling approaches vary significantly across the four productions. Alex Gibney’s Musk is a four hour documentary that methodically details the Tesla founder’s corporate decisions. Aaron Sorkin wrote and directed The Social Reckoning, a drama that traces the disillusionment of whistleblower Frances Haugen. You Can See Everything operates as a psychological match between Elizabeth Holmes and filmmakers Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim. Despite their different formats, all four films converge on the question of why these leaders think and act the way they do.
The films depart from the traditional Hollywood character portrait established by Citizen Kane in 1941. Earlier movies like The Imitation Game and The Social Network attributed tech leaders’ flaws to past emotional pain. The new films argue that these executives are callous and different from ordinary people. They suggest that the drive for speed and scale, a strategy popularized by the PayPal Mafia in the 2000s, baked failure and deception into the process of building these companies.
The industry is responding to the critical tone with financial and legal pressure. Elon Musk threatened to sue director Alex Gibney for defamation. Amazon’s movie division abruptly dropped Artificial from its slate in June, even though the company holds a $50 billion investment in Sam Altman’s OpenAI. Neon subsequently picked up the film. These actions illustrate the tension between Hollywood studios, which are often controlled by billionaires invested in AI, and the critical content they produce.
The films also address the shift from social media to artificial intelligence. The documentary NAZA, shot in Tel Aviv, depicts how anonymous Israeli officers used AI tools for mass surveillance in Gaza. The officers described their targets as ants or a factory of targets. The Israel Defense Forces have rejected many of the claims made in the film. Other movies, such as Musk and Artificial, carry apocalyptic overtones regarding the future of life on Earth.
Box office performance for the new releases has been mixed. The Social Reckoning has earned $17 million, a fraction of the $225 million earned by The Social Network in 2010. The documentary Musk has grossed $730,000 despite strong reviews. You Can See Everything has performed better, likely due to the public fascination with filmmaker Nathan Fielder. The financial stakes are high because AI companies have borrowed hundreds of billions of dollars and need consistent revenue to repay their debts.
Tech leaders are changing their public strategies in response to this scrutiny. They are increasingly withholding access from traditional journalists and opting for friendlier settings like podcasts. They are also shaping social media perceptions, with some platforms initially declining to run trailers for the Musk film due to its political content. Additionally, these executives are building AI tools for virtual actors and animation that could replace human roles in filmmaking. This creates a cycle where the subjects of the films are actively building the technology that could obsolete the medium used to critique them.
