i have so many thoughts on this. just finished rewatching the 60 mins interview. if you don't come from an Australian context this was one of the first true dramagedons/ influencer dramas the country had seen, the shenanigans and the gabagookery has trickled through the news even to the last 4 years. i remember watching this interview live as a kid. throughout the show it is constantly reiterated that this story is fiction based on the truth, it does successfully marry both to provide a great drama exploring the varying motivations that could have been for how belle gibson had paved her career. this works so well, ironically with an American who doesn't have this context playing belle, its stripped form any form of imitation and gives, an organic interpretation of the personality and person that might be belle gibson, again we don't know if she's lying. the continuity is a bit jarring but I think it works well in this. however as a few interviewers have noted, even with its important messages about influencencer culture and bio-hacking/RFK/alternative health subcultures rising to the mainstream, it is quite ironic that with Hek's interjections ,'our compulsion to narrativize and dramatise hero's journeys' it leans so heavily on building a person out of lies. but I think its one of these things where we have to accept the fiction and marrying of a few facts. idk how I feel about it but I think its an important message rn.