'You Can See Everything' Review Thread

[u/chanma50]

I will continue to update this post as reviews come in.

Rotten Tomatoes: Fresh

Critics Consensus: N/A

Critics	Score	Number of Reviews	Average of Rated Reviews
All Critics	100%	43	9.50/10
Top Critics	100%	16

Metacritic: 97 (21 Reviews)

Sample Reviews:

Bill Goodykoontz, Arizona Republic 5/5 - You’ve seen elements of “You Can See Everything” in documentaries before. But you’ve never seen them combined like this. It’s a true original.

Cary Darling, Houston Chronicle 5/5 - "You Can See Everything" throws into sharp relief audience's expectations while skewering the entire idea of the traditional documentary and its contemporary off-shoot, reality TV.

Tim Grierson, Screen International - Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim’s extraordinary documentary soon goes in unexpected directions, becoming an uneasy treatise on love, reality television, and the ways filmmakers try (and often fail) to capture ’real’ life.

Monica Castillo, AV Club A- - Like Welles used his camera to play tricks on audiences some 50 years ago, Fielder and Oppenheim use their film to shake up their audience’s understanding of how we believe one another.

Liz Shannon Miller, Consequence A - The film is more than an extension of Fielder’s blending comedy and documentary with shows like The Rehearsal — it’s an evolution upon it. It asks everyone involved to look at themselves, and face the difference between perception and reality.

Marshall Shaffer, Slant Magazine 3.5/4 - You Can See Everything innovatively probes this gray area between the fabulations made about Elizabeth Holmes and those made by her.

David Fear, Rolling Stone - You will likely have no idea what you have just seen, besides that it's simply, unabashedly, unashamedly brilliant.

Alison Willmore, New York Magazine/Vulture - In You Can See Everything, the closer we get to her, the less knowable she is — a set of pointillist dots in the shape of a person.

Kristy Puchko, Mashable - You Can See Everything is a masterwork of interrogation, not only of the whole Holmes situation but of documentary as a form itself.

Adrian Horton, Guardian 5/5 - There is something extremely satisfying in watching Fielder’s sharp angles tangle with Holmes’s disposition of guileless warmth, a strange and compelling chemistry building within a reality distortion field.

Nick Schager, The Daily Beast - Not just the film of the year—it’s a documentary that stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the form’s all-time greats.

Kyle Smith, Wall Street Journal - With co-director Lance Oppenheim, Mr. Fielder gets around the restrictions on his access to the locked-up Ms. Holmes with his customary hilarious meta-narrative brilliance.

Tomris Laffly, RogerEbert.com 4/4 - The significance of 'You Can See Everything' is clear as a film that might advance a new cinematic language in the mainstream non-fiction sphere.

Angie Han, The Hollywood Reporter - What begins as a fascinatingly intimate portrait of a deluded or disingenuous scammer reveals as something even wilder, more ambitious and less predictable, until we’re left to ponder what value a personal truth has at all.

Cortlyn Kelly, IndieWire A - For how disquieting it is, the film never goes too long without forcing a laugh.

Owen Gleiberman, Variety - It’s a one-of-a-kind reality-TV-as-hangout-movie psychodrama circus. Yet it’s been made with a spirit of true inquiry, driven by Fielder’s acidly quizzical personality, and it gets its hooks in you.

SYNOPSIS:

Thirty-four days before she’s sent to prison, notorious Silicon Valley founder Elizabeth Holmes invites a skeptical film crew to document her every move. What begins as an intimate portrait of an enigmatic felon becomes a mind-bending three-year journey into the abyss. From boundary-pushing directors Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim comes You Can See Everything.

CAST:

• Elizabeth Holmes as Herself
• Nathan Fielder as Himself
• Billy Evans as Himself

DIRECTED BY: Nathan Fielder, Lance Oppenheim

PRODUCED BY: Nathan Fielder, Lance Oppenheim, Tatiana Bears, Maggie Ambrose, Jack Davis

EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS: Emily Osborne

DIRECTOR OF PHOTOGRAPHY: David Bolen

PRODUCTION DESIGNER: Alex DiGerlando

EDITED BY: Adam Locke-Norton

MUSIC BY: Ari Balouzian

RUNTIME: 174 Minutes

RELEASE DATE: October 16, 2026

[u/lostinjapan01]

First documentary best picture nominee? I could see it.

[u/dismal_windfall → u/lostinjapan01]

No. People say this every year and it never happens. A documentary won the Golden Lion in 2022 and it didn’t even get close to a picture nomination

[u/Sellin3164 → u/dismal_windfall]

That's so not true lol. People know Venice awards are weird since a jury selects them. Maybe a few people, but the consensus on Gold Derby or Award Expert never think Docs happen . It happens for Animated movies though where people think it could happen.

I think this movie could happen with the reviews since most of the current films aren't this acclaimed. No 90+ metacritic contender like Tar, Past Lives, or The Zone of Interest.

[u/dismal_windfall → u/Sellin3164]

Venice awards aren’t “weird” they’re an industry award given out by people that work in the industry including big names like Maggie Gyllenhaal (who was the head of the jury this year).

But this is overall incredibly flawed thinking you’re doing. Why this one, why not NAZA, why not both if having a 90+ metascore was actually that important. Do we really think the directors branch is gonna jump that low down the list, skipping all sorts of euro friendly picks like Mingu to get Fielder. Are the writers branch gonna choose it? Are actors even gonna care. Are techs even gonna care, those last two branches are very populist.

[u/Sellin3164 → u/dismal_windfall]

I’ll clarify. Venice prizes don’t guarantee a movie as an Oscar play. They’re not designed as a precursor like Golden Globes or BAFTA. People are generally aware of that. Not a bad thing, and they sometimes award Oscar players, but it’s certainly not a guarantee.

Why this and not NAZA? The film is doing things different than many other docs. It’s not shot like a documentary, and it breaks into “narrative” storytelling including sequences with an A-list actress who some have said could get nominated (especially since category is pretty open). Like it’s fine to have skepticism, but it’s clear that this is not comparable to previous documentaries from the stills alone.

My current director lineup has La Bola Negra, The Odyssey, Wild Horse Nine, Fjord, and You Can See Everything. So I’m not skipping him. In fact, I think they will reach down for Fielder because a lot of the contenders aren’t typical “director plays. Project Hail Mary is too blockbuster. The Debut and The Invite will struggle cause actor/director bias and their metacritcs aren’t 85+ so I’m not seeing it. Dune: Part Three makes sense, but they’ve also snubbed him twice already, most recently to A Complete Unknown. I think they’ll only have 2 international contenders in Director, I don’t see both Fjord and All of a Sudden making Picture/Director, and I’m leaning Mungiu right now. Who’s your 5?

So Picture, Director, and Supporting Actress is what I got. I’m skeptical of editing cause it is pretty tight and I could see Doc branch pass on it.

[u/dismal_windfall → u/Sellin3164]

You’re wrong on like a lot of things lol.

It honestly sounds like you’re still early in the process of learning about awards. Not that I’m awesome for having been doing this for so long. But I would also make similar nonsense statements when I first started back in like 2017.

[u/Sellin3164 → u/dismal_windfall]

Well you’ve resorted to half-committed insults instead of addressing my comment, true sign of a good debater. Like c’mon tell me your director 5, I answered all your questions.

And it’s normal to be wrong. That’s how this goes. And I’ll mention that I was right about The Substance and was told I was crazy for like two months. Also right about Baker here too, and most were predicting The Brutalist for Director at this point. Seems like I’m pretty familiar with how this goes…

[u/Total-Bag1870 → u/dismal_windfall]

You are way too uneducated about this topic to be speaking to other people like this. Get a fucking grip

[u/kikibubbles85 → u/Total-Bag1870]

You’re such a typical obnoxious Redditor

[u/Total-Bag1870 → u/kikibubbles85]

Take a look in the mirror buddy

[u/kikibubbles85 → u/Total-Bag1870]

Oh more insults, how cool of you.

[u/Total-Bag1870 → u/kikibubbles85]

Are you so hideously unattractive that you take someone telling you to look in the mirror as a threat or an insult?

[u/kikibubbles85 → u/Total-Bag1870]

You can’t gatekeep a topic. Let me guess, you’re a dude.

[u/quaranTV → u/dismal_windfall]

This one because it plays more like a “regular” cinematic film. It doesn’t play like a documentary. It’s highly entertaining.