I think most of us can agree that when we heard that Nancy Pelosi's documentary filmmaker daughter had made a film about SF's "digital gold rush" and current growing pains, we could only imagine it was going to be at the very least annoying, geared as it clearly is to everyone who hasn't been living through this for the past five years. Now that I've seen San Francisco 2.0, which premiered on HBO last night, I can say, indeed, that it feels like Alexandra Pelosi's effort to re-explore her hometown, where she no longer lives (she lives in Tribeca), and put a lot of anecdotal "fact" and quotes from tech entrepreneurs together into a glancing, only partly accurate portrait of a city under siege.

As Randy Shaw notes in his review in Beyond Chron, one of Pelosi's first mistakes is to buy into the popular idea that everything that's happening in the local economy is all about "techies." We are also a center of bioscience, healthcare, financial services, private banking, and tourism, not to mention a hub for the national food scene and home to some of the wealthiest people in California, only some of whom are connected to technology. I'm not sure that Shaw's figure is accurate for 2015, but tech workers only represent a tiny fraction — he says seven percent — of the city's population. She speaks to John McEvoy, a gallerist who owns McEvoy Fine Art, who supports this inaccurate idea, saying, "You have tech, and you have tourism. There are no jobs for anyone else in between." That is patently untrue.

Pelosi also ignores the city's huge Chinese-American population. "Pelosi interviews fewer Chinese-Americans than current and former editors of Salon," Shaw quips.

The film gets big names like Jerry Brown, Ron Conway, and Mayor Lee on camera — Lee is quick to defend his tax breaks for tech companies, saying that they created 42,000 new jobs and dropped our unemployment rate by half in two years. And Pelosi wanders around the amenity-rich offices of DropBox and Airbnb getting a feel for this seemingly childlike office culture — of course including shots of a foosball table, which, to be fair, was a central image of the dot-com boom. Was that San Francisco 1.0, just 15 years ago?

Pelosi also tries to sound hard-hitting as she grills Conway, calling him "moneybags" and the "mastermind" of it all and saying, "I barely recognize my hometown anymore," as if he should have to answer for all of Silicon Valley, the housing crisis, and the tech gold rush itself. "That's called progress," Conway says.

I don't begrudge Pelosi the desire to figure out what's happening in her hometown. But given that she lives in another city, New York, which has fallen victim to gentrification a thousand different times in the last century, in various parts of town, it seems naive or manipulative of her to approach this topic in SF with such wide-eyed wonder, even shooting images of $22-per-pound steak in a fancy butcher case, as if this were expensive by New York standards. It seems Pelosi is especially nostalgic for the San Francisco she grew up in, the San Francisco of the 1970s and 80s, which is as long gone as the Manhattan of the 1970s and 80s.

As she tells Re/Code in an interview, kind of glossing over the fact that her dad is a rich venture capitalist and her parents own a mansion in Presidio Heights...

Well, none of my friends live there anymore. I’m a documentary filmmaker; documentary filmmakers can’t live in San Francisco 2.0. Musicians, filmmakers, artists, that’s where my heart is. If you have to ask me, I think I’d say artists and documentary filmmakers should be able to live in the ciy that their families have lived in for generations. But that might just sound like whining.

But, earnestly, she says she wanted to focus on how to move forward, politically, now that the city finds itself in this tense moment, in which everyone she talks to that is not a tech worker tells her that the city has been ruined, and everyone who's lived their whole lives here is being pushed out.

"There are lots of problems," she says. "What are we going to do about it? The question is, are the leaders up for it? That's what I’m trying to ask. I was not trying to say, 'Ooh, tech companies bad; ooh, middle-class all good.' It’s not so simple. The question is, where do we go from here."

In the film she speaks to former Mayor Art Agnos, who, a propos of nothing, points out that he could no longer afford to buy the house that he bought in 1970. But that is probably true in dozens of cities across the country where real estate values have changed dramatically, out of step with incomes, in the past forty-odd years.

Pelosi also includes a poignant quote, which certainly has truth to it, from San Francisco native and eviction-threatened Mission resident, college student Daniel Cosio. "The city's being taken over by something that I thought the city always hated, and that's money... A city that revolved around art, that celebrated the beauty of imperfection, is being lost. To money."

The thing is, and Pelosi certainly knows this, that while the Beats, the Diggers, and the hippies may have tried to question Americans' money-centric values, it's inaccurate and surely naive to say that San Francisco has always hated money. Whether it was 1860, or 1920, or 1998, this is a city that's always loved its gold, and that's exactly why immigrants flocked here. And yes, it's why people are still coming here.

Do we want to live in a bland, uniformly rich city where there is no more middle or working class? No, of course not. But it just feels in San Francisco 2.0 like the problems we're facing are being mansplained to us by someone who just discovered them last year, and who has little insight into present-day San Francisco other than to say, "It looks and feels so different, you guys!"

But Pelosi defends the film by way of saying SF is not unique here. "San Francisco is the prelude. As [UC Berkeley professor and former Secretary of Labor] Robert Reich talks about, the world where you want to live is inaccessible to the middle class. The middle class can’t afford to live in any of the great cities in the world anymore. That’s what it’s becoming."