A newly released documentary on Elon Musk deploys a computer-generated avatar alongside artificial intelligence-driven voice synchronization to fabricate an interview with the SpaceX and Tesla magnate, drawing exclusively upon his own previously articulated remarks from real-world interviews.

The choice, filmmaker Alex Gibney remarked on Tuesday in Venice ahead of the film’s world premiere, was deliberately ironic.

It simultaneously invokes Musk’s contention that we exist within a simulation and takes aim at his somewhat contradictory and evolving stance on the technology.

Gibney noted that its purpose is to convey the “reality of what he’s done and unreality of his narrative.”

The filmmakers engaged legal counsel prior to traversing an imprudent extent of that trajectory, thereby procuring the requisite authorization to deploy the Musk avatar.

The Oscar-winning filmmaker was joined at the Venice Film Festival by Ashley St. Clair, erstwhile a conservative influencer, who shares a child with Musk and who appears in the film.

She discusses their relationship, his character, and the non-disclosure agreement she was entreated—and declined—to sign in order to secure paternity support.

"I was tendered the substantial sum of $40 million as an inducement to forego my right to speak," she observed.

Earlier this year, St. Clair also initiated legal proceedings against Musk’s AI enterprise, alleging that its Grok chatbot permitted users to fabricate sexually exploitative deepfake images of her, precipitating profound humiliation and psychological anguish.

The film meticulously dissects Musk's takeover of X, delving into what Gibney posits as the deliberate manipulation of the platform's algorithm.

“One aspect I failed to fully apprehend upon commencing the film was how Musk manipulated Twitter’s algorithms to, in effect, elevate vitriol and animosity above the proverbial town square,” Gibney remarked.

“Wired” reporter Zoë Schiffer, who likewise features in the film, remarked that “he has modified the algorithm, both to suppress mainstream journalism and subsequently to amplify certain of the more incendiary comments and voices on that platform.”

St. Clair posited that he is deliberately fanning the flames, engendering a schism of such magnitude that, absent stringent regulation or containment, the ramifications could prove calamitous.

Spanning nearly four hours in runtime, “Musk” probes the psychological scars of his fraught upbringing—including an interview with his father, Errol Musk—and charts his trajectory from nascent days in Silicon Valley through his stewardship of DOGE under the second Trump administration, extending to his forays into right-wing politics on the global stage.

According to Gibney, the film was initially conceived as a considerably more concise endeavor, until Musk’s embrace of Trump’s campaign compelled a dramatic expansion of its scope.

The roster of interviewees encompasses Tesla co-founder Martin Eberhard, his first wife Justine Musk, the neurologist Sam Harris, technology journalist Kara Swisher, and former USAID Administrator Samantha Power.

Gibney asserted that he regards Musk as “extremely” perilous to democratic governance.

The film, slated for theatrical release in October, sounds the alarm regarding the intelligence amassed by the “DOGE boys” on American citizens, afforded as they were unfettered ingress into a multitude of federal agencies.