'You Can See Everything' Review: Nathan Fielder's Doc About Elizabeth Holmes
Nathan Fielder’s new A24 film about Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes is prompting strong reactions to its eerie trailer, with many viewers unsettled by Holmes’ affect yet newly aware of how charismatic she once appeared to investors and the media. Commenters revisit the Theranos fraud itself—highlighting the gap between visionary promises and impossible science, and contrasting Holmes’ treatment with that of high‑profile male tech leaders accused of overpromising or causing harm. The project also renews debate over how gender, identity hype, and a hunger for “the female Steve Jobs” helped enable the scam, while fans praise Fielder’s trademark meta, reality‑bending style as a potent way to interrogate these themes.
Trailer and Film Reactions
- Many found the trailer “terrifying,” “unsettling,” and more like a horror film than a documentary.
- Several viewers initially assumed Holmes was played by an actress due to the uncanny vibe, then were shocked to realize it was actually her.
- A24 and Nathan Fielder’s involvement generated strong enthusiasm; people expect another “home run” given his prior shows (“The Rehearsal,” “Nathan for You,” “The Curse”).
Holmes’ Demeanor and Psychology
- Commenters describe Holmes as intense, creepy, and almost inhuman, yet also charismatic in earlier footage, which helps explain how she convinced investors and partners.
- Her smile and stare are widely read as inauthentic or disturbing; some compare her affect to other tech CEOs.
- There’s debate whether this reflects sociopathy, extreme method-acting/self-delusion, or awkwardness/ASD; consensus is that something is deeply “off.”
Science, Engineering, and Fraud
- A key quoted rationale from Holmes (“device works, just the chemistry missing”) is used to highlight confusion between science and engineering, or marketing/management vs. reality.
- Some argue her behavior exemplifies an MBA-style mindset that treats unsolved science as a minor execution detail.
- Others note she did have a technical background, and that academics and engineers can also be delusional or fraudulent.
- Multiple commenters stress that Theranos crossed from over-ambition into outright fraud, particularly with falsified diagnostics.
Technical Feasibility of the Vision
- Several posts argue the fundamental biology of finger-prick samples makes the original Theranos vision essentially impossible, not just “not yet.”
- Others counter that many ideas have seemed unworkable until technology or context changed; but they still view Theranos as fraud because deception overtook genuine R&D.
Gender, Identity, and Hype
- Strong thread debating how much her being a young female founder shaped media, investor enthusiasm, and later backlash.
- One view: she fit a desired narrative (“female Steve Jobs”), and identity hype overrode due diligence.
- Another view: focusing blame on her gender is sexist; male-led scams are common but don’t taint all male founders.
- Goodhart’s law is invoked: once “young female founder” becomes a success metric, it attracts opportunists and distorts incentives.
Comparisons to Other Leaders and Systems
- Frequent comparisons to Musk, Altman, SBF, Trump, private equity, and aid-cutting decisions, with disputes over who has done more harm.
- Some argue tech and finance systems systematically reward charisma, overpromising, and hype, regardless of gender.
Fielder’s Meta-Documentary Style
- Commenters highlight the film’s recursive structure (Holmes watching an actress play her, actress watching Holmes, etc.) as classic Fielder—layered, self-referential psychodrama.
- Expectation that the documentary will be more about performance, self-delusion, and media narratives than a straightforward retelling.