Pinned Tweet
The Territories (2025) takes place in the early 1980’s during the dying glory days of a nation wide system of regional wrestling territories before a major company from New York puts them all out of business in a bid for national wrestling dominance. The times, they are a changin
Thank god some people aren’t allowing a famous fraudster to trick them into thinking they are innocent without even knowing the majority of bad shit said fraudster did!
LD retweeted
Started rereading Bad Blood after seeing this doc and trying to reconcile Elizabeth Holmes’ doe-eyed, passive persona in the film and claim that she’s done nothing wrong with the unrepentant, short-tempered bully her former employees describe.
Elizabeth Holmes is “almost unrecognizable” in Nathan Fielder’s documentary, “You Can See Everything,” to Theranos whistleblower Tyler Shultz: “The woman that I saw on screen looked, frankly, like a broken woman.”
Shultz tells @gayleking and @norahodonnell about his reaction to the film, speaking out about Theranos in 2015 and why the documentary is garnering sympathy for Holmes, who is serving a more than 11-year prison sentence for defrauding investors: “She is not playing victim. She is an actual victim.”
Someone will read all this and the court documents and then be like
“I dunno! Elizabeth may have just not known any better… and that Amanda seyfried sure was stuck up!!!”
My favorite thing is when some random guy assured of his scruples morales before giving a mundane sports take, like we care
“I NEVER call for a coach to be fired….. BUT”
LD retweeted
Weird watching people leave the Holmes movie newly unsure she did anything wrong. The film strangely never mentions that Theranos’ machine ran only ~12 of 200+ offered tests and the rest were secretly diluted and run on other company's machines. Or that Theranos destroyed the only decryption key to its lab database 3 mo after a grand jury subpoenaed it. Charisma isn’t exculpatory.
LD retweeted
A few readers have taken me to task for “missing the point of the film,” which is apparently that Elizabeth Holmes is unknowable and everything is ambiguous. Here’s my response: She went after Tyler Shultz and Erika Cheung with everything she had. I was threatened with litigation on a daily basis for months on end. It was a ruthless cover-up of a breathtaking fraud, and she was at the controls. Just a little context for those who have forgotten or didn’t follow the original story. By the way, I loved the film. #BestPicture, IMO.
A ton of people have asked me for my thoughts about “You Can See Everything,” the new Elizabeth Holmes documentary. Here they are: nytimes.com/2026/10/17/busin… via @NYTimes
Not to mention no one would ever value a company with the version of the machine Elizabeth “understood” to have made, anywhere near what Theranos was valued at. She obviously knew what she was doing the entire time and anyone leaning otherwise after the movie got Fielder’ed
Gen Z’s defining trait that will be ridiculed future generations will be the “streamer voice” where they intentionally act like the dumbest person alive, asking people obvious questions and repeating what they say, to deliver exposition to their audience
Anyone who walks out of the movie with any sort of desire to see Billy Evans get more of something positive should be put on a list somewhere
I loved “You Can See Everything.” But it left a sour taste: why would it be unethical for Holmes and Evans to get paid??
This is not a straight documentary. Fielder is shaping a performance amongst the 3 of them. So the conventional journalistic prohibition on paying sources doesn’t clearly apply. Framing A24’s financial interest as the neutral business of making a movie, while Evans’s as a moral failing feels flawed.
And then the part that gets sour is turning that negotiation into material. Which is quintessential Nathan Fielder, but AGAIN makes any appeal to conventional documentary ethics even less convincing.
People love talking about Surfing Dracula but what about Sad Dracula?
Back in the day you’d want Dracula to be vanquished. No questions asked. Now it’s all about how really, Dracula is only raising an army of the undead because hes lonley. He drinks blood to feel more human!
This take is insane. Elizabeth Holmes came off sympathetic because of how awful her husband is. She in no way looked better than Nathan Fielder or the celebrity member of the cast. Ridiculous claim
I said before hand fielder v Holmes would be like a human horse interviewing an alien horse about what it means to be human. I nailed it
Sometimes you get so political you defend a press secretary who appears to be unable to read or speak out loud
The same people who are telling you @KatieZacharia is already bad at her job on her very FIRST day are the same people who told you Jen Psaki and Karine Jean-Pierre were great at their jobs.