Midterms 2026See who we think should earn your vote, based on our standardsThe guide →
WRITTEN IN PLAIN AMERICAN ENGLISH.
CLAY TRIBUNE.
Advertisement

‘You Can See Everything’: Fielder’s Close-Up Look at Holmes Is a Masterpiece of Doubt

A docu-mindfuck wherein Fielder courts Holmes and the camera lies not at all, forcing the viewer to doubt both subject and filmmaker alike.

By mitch·4 min read
A cameraman peers into a dim chamber wherein a solitary woman sits in silent repose.

On Sept. 30, the lobby at Alice Tully Hall was crowded with press, patrons and the public as they waited for the New York premiere of You Can See Everything. The documentary had been a closely kept secret until A24 released a teaser on Sept. 6. That short clip showed Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes speaking privately with comedian Nathan Fielder, which turned the film into an internet sensation overnight.

The undertaking seemed absurd, as though it had sprung from MadLibs or a meme. Yet the world premiere at a secret screening at the Telluride Film Festival confirmed its reality, arriving alongside the teaser’s unveiling. The audience came ready to judge whether You Can See Everything, co-directed by Fielder and Lance Oppenheim (Primetime), had earned all the attention.

I personally had my doubts about it. Holmes has already been the subject of the book Bad Blood, with Alex Gibney’s documentary The Inventor, the podcast series The Dropout, and Hulu’s adaptation starring Amanda Seyfried. What else was there left to say about her?

Advertisement

The film is a masterwork of questioning, not merely of Holmes but of documentary itself, and I was wrong to doubt it. It features full-frontal nudity, outrageous statements, laughs that land hard, and something more unsettling that keeps it from being a crowdpleaser and makes it a real stunner instead.

Fielder’s Long Ride With Holmes

The film opens with Fielder asking why he’s involved. He’s a comedian who blurs reality and performance with shows like Nathan For You and The Rehearsal. Holmes answers with a warm smile, her answers deliberately elusive. She insists she’s being transparent and truthful, but it’s hard to trust her.

Things grow odder. The film’s opening scenes were shot during the 36 days before Holmes turned herself over to authorities to begin serving her prison sentence for fraud. She let Fielder and his crew of seven enter her home while her children and fiancé Billy Evans were present, and she invited him to take up residence in their tight beach house in Del Mar, Diego. He remained there.

The movie pushes you to doubt more than just Fielder’s bond with Holmes. It wants you to question his entire outlook on life, which is a fair thing to wonder about.

The Camera Never Lies

The opening shots position the viewer as an unseen witness, with the camera catching every exchange between Holmes and Evans. They talk directly to you’re not there. Then Fielder appears, lurking from a corner or outside their home. He treats you as the audience’s representative — curious, watching from the outside.

As the story develops, Fielder draws nearer to Holmes and her kin. He comes to occupy the role of every person she has ensnared previously. The 4:3 framing gives the screen the shape of a vintage television set, narrowing focus upon intimate close shots. Multiple cameras track every subtle shift in countenance, every shudder or involuntary motion.

“We — like Fielder — are forced to look Holmes in her unblinking eyes and determine for ourselves what is truth and what is a lie.”

It’s not easy.

Reenactments and Doubt

Holmes ends up behind bars roughly halfway through the nearly three-hour film, which comes as a genuine surprise even though it isn’t a spoiler. Once that happens, Fielder and Oppenheim can no longer reach her directly. From that point onward, they rely on recreations to carry the narrative forward.

The director brings in actors to re-enact scenes that the crew failed to capture on camera, a technique similar to The Rehearsal. While reading through his scripts, he questions his own memory. An actor goes so far as to accuse him of being too fond of Holmes to remain objective.

This is the core of You Can See Everything, and it isn’t solely about Holmes. Documentaries can never claim objectivity, since they are built from human stories. Choices are made about what enters the frame, and what gets left behind carries just as much weight as what remains. The final cut determines the message entirely.

The film asks you to doubt both Holmes and Fielder. It also pushes you to consider the nature of documentary and news media more generally. Objectivity is not possible. We are beings ruled by instinct and feeling, shaped by impulse and a desire for self-protection.

The film You Can See Everything is a splendid mindfuck. It makes its own creation its subject, compelling viewers to question both Holmes and Fielder — and, by extension, any documentary they view.

Source material: “Does You Can See Everything live up to the hype?,” Mashable.

The Notebook

Get the Notebook.

The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.

We send one note to confirm. Every issue has a one-click way out.

Advertisement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

As an Amazon Associate, Clay Tribune earns from qualifying purchases.