Elon Musk has escalated his criticism of Musk, Alex Gibney’s four-hour documentary about the billionaire, by threatening legal action before the film’s U.S. theatrical release. The documentary, which premiered at the Venice Film Festival, examines Musk’s influence and includes claims concerning Starlink and the 2024 presidential election.
Musk’s attorney Alex Spiro sent a letter to Jigsaw Productions accusing the filmmakers of producing what Musk considers a predetermined “hit piece.” Spiro also alleged that the production team declined requests to hear Musk’s side of the story during its fact-checking process.
Musk Disputes Documentary’s Starlink Claims
The legal warning centers partly on allegations involving Starlink satellites and the 2024 election. Spiro argued that the film’s implication that Starlink was used to influence vote tabulation is false, stating that
“Starlink was not connected to vote tabulation.”
Spiro further claimed that election officials, cybersecurity researchers and fact-checkers had rejected the vote-rigging allegation in 2024. He warned that the filmmakers and companies involved in releasing the documentary could face litigation, writing that legal action was
“reasonably anticipated.”
Musk has also attacked Gibney publicly on X, describing the filmmaker as lacking integrity and accusing him of deliberately making a “hit piece.” Gibney and his production company have defended the documentary’s approach.
Jigsaw Productions responded by emphasizing Gibney’s reputation for investigative filmmaking and said his work represents an effort to examine influential individuals and organizations through fact-based reporting. The company also invoked the importance of free speech and public debate when discussing powerful public figures.
The dispute has now added another layer of attention to Musk ahead of its theatrical release. Bleecker Street currently lists the documentary among its upcoming films, while the U.S. release is scheduled for October 16, 2026.
Neither Musk’s allegations against the documentary nor the filmmakers’ defense should be treated as a final legal determination. The controversy instead highlights the competing claims surrounding a documentary that has already generated significant attention before reaching U.S. theaters.
