I think this is a key thing that separates people who were blown away by "You Can See Everything" and people who weren't. And it deserves to be taken seriously. And the critics' concerns deserve to be taken seriously.
Here's why I love the movie: Nathan FOREGROUNDS the filmmaking artifice that exists in EVERY documentary whether the filmmaker admits it or not. The average person might think that the more traditonal documentary style makes a documentary more truthful. But people in or near the film community are well aquinted by default with all the ways that all these styliistic choices are just as contrived and manipulated. Nathan making his filmmaking and presence so prominent and open to audience interrogation therefore makes it feel MORE honest to that audience. It isn't hiding the puppet master or the strings. So it empowers the audience as much as is humanly possible to separate the truth from the puppetry, while encouraging deep humility about our limits of ever doing so. In many ways, that makes it a deeply Christian--and perhaps even deeply Protestant--work.
That doesn't mean more traditonal documentaries are bad or people are dupes for watching them. Documentaries that hide the observer help us focus on the subject. But to watch them well we have to watch them with the same awareness of how our view of the subject is being guided that "You Can See Everything" forces us to have whether we want to or not.
i seem to be the only person who saw "you can see everything" and didn't like it. a few reasons why:
- the tone felt wrong. the audience was laughing for much of the film, but i don't find the subject matter particularly funny. made it feel like the film was making light of a serious situation, intentionally or not.
- i couldn't tell what was real. how much of this was scripted, rehearsed, or manipulated in the editing room? everyone spoke a little too perfectly for it to be entirely unscripted. the ambiguity made it difficult for me to trust what i was watching.
- nathan felt like an unreliable narrator. his relationship with elizabeth blurred the line between observer and participant, making me question his motives and the film's perspective.
- so many layers of performance...i understand that blurring reality and performance is part of the point, but at some stage, the cleverness started getting in the way of the story. it's one of the most confusing documentaries i've watched from an audience perspective.
- i'm simply tired of elizabeth holmes having a platform.
i'll also be the first to admit that i fell asleep during the middle of it and knew absolutely nothing about nathan fielder going in. both definitely influenced my experience & i will watch it again to see what i missed the first time.
was it interesting and provacative? yes, of course. i'm not arguing with that. but i seem to have missed the genius everyone else saw, but i left feeling like the film was more interested in being clever than in saying something meaningful.
The wildest part of this is this is EXACTLY what he sounds like in the documentary
Elizabeth Holmes' partner Billy Evans admits "she looks insane" in the "You Can See Everything" trailer and says "I might think this is the dumbest thing I have ever done" when he finally sees the movie.
"There's been a lot of media produced on her. There's been a lot of people who have told her story. That narrative is pretty ossified. The whole idea was here she is, see her and make up your own mind. It's not to re-litigate the case. It was to have people see who she is. I have gone through this consistent experience with the people who love me most, from my grandmother to my best friends. They'd hear I knew [Elizabeth Holmes] or I was falling for this person and now we're going to have a kid... in the beginning, every single one of these people thought I was crazy. 'Do you know who she is?' I would tell them, 'I understand why you feel that way but just meet her.' And they would meet her and spend time with her and see her in a totally natural environment, like going on a hike or helping a friend. Every opinion of her would radically shift. That was the intention of the film. To help scale that up and allow other people to sit with her and make up their own minds."
"Am I nervous [for the movie to be seen]? I have been through so many intense, surreal experiences that it takes a bit to raise my blood pressure. With this there's certainly concern but it's ultimately our decision." (via All-In Podcast)
variety.com/2026/film/news/b…
Joseph Holmes retweeted
Why does everyone act like an expert online now? How does the modern social media ecosystem encourage bad takes and misinformation? @NathanJClarkson and I discuss with super cool media psychology expert Dr. Dannagal Young.
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas…
Joseph Holmes retweeted
Good interview. Lots of good stuff about how to immerse yourself in a subject to naturally express it in the creative process. And her remarks about focusing on the beauty of creation rather than destruction is great. Also lots of assurances that her imagination and vision are aligned with CS Lewis and the majority of his fan base that I think are clearly way overstated.
youtu.be/gHevSz8Z_KM?is=rTBO…
Joseph Holmes retweeted
I didn't hate @AngelStudiosInc's "Angel and the Badman". But I didn't love it either. And it's certainly nowhere near as good as the John Wayne original. My latest for @WNGdotorg.
wng.org/podcasts/a-shot-at-r…
Joseph Holmes retweeted
I can officially say the best "faith-based" film so far this year is about a Muslim hitman dad fighting a Muslim mafia and non-denom Christian vigilantes starring Mahershala Ali and John Cho. See it if you can.
religionunplugged.com/news/y…
Joseph Holmes retweeted
We're in spooky month now! So now's a good time to talk about why we sometimes need dark stories, not just safe ones. @NathanJClarkson and I are excited to discuss with the brilliant film critic @LarsenOnFilm of "Filmspotting" and author of "Fear Not: A Christian Response to Horror".
Episode here: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas…
Joseph Holmes retweeted
Why does there seem to be a rise in family estrangement? @NathanJClarkson and I discuss with the thoughtful and compassionate @noellem on our latest episode of The Overthinkers.
Link to episode here: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas…
Joseph Holmes retweeted
I think "tried" is likely doing a lot of work here
Greta Gerwig on preparing to write Narnia: The Magician's Nephew:
"I read or re-read everything Lewis wrote. Then I tried to read everything he read."
She also retraced C.S. Lewis's life and steps in Belfast, Cambridge, and Oxford, hoping to better understand the author so that "my instincts would align with his”.
Full report: narniaweb.com/2026/10/greta-…
Joseph Holmes retweeted
I'll have to look at the full quote. But this looks suspiciously like redefining a word so you can answer "yes" when the real answer is closer to "no".
DiscussingFilm@DiscussingFilmOct 13United Kingdom
United KingdomConnected via United Kingdom App StoreAccount-level information, not a live location or per-post device.
Greta Gerwig says faith in her ‘NARNIA’ film is very much present both in front & behind the screen.
“Film and faith have always gone hand in hand… The very act of making a film is an act of faith. Shooting on celluloid is faith.”
I once again must ask: if you have magical powers, how are you victims of human persecution? Always a confusing part of witch stories.
Disney Animation’s ‘HEXED’ will feature a traditional hand-drawn 2D animated prologue depicting the creation of the Kingdom of Hexe — a refuge for witches and wizards persecuted in the real world.
One of the studio’s few remaining 2D animators, Tyler Pacana, animated the sequence.
(Source: cartoonbrew.com/feature-film…)
#YouCanSeeEverything absolutely lives up to the hype. Nathan pushes the boundaries of documentary filmmaking for an examination of why we choose to believe people and what difference that makes--or doesn't make--in our lives.
At this point they should just have a horror category
"Obsession" is competing as a comedy at the Golden Globes, which has reignited "category fraud" debates.
The current Globes rulebook states a movie “primarily intended to have a serious or dramatic tone” with “comedic overtones or elements” belongs in the drama. category.
variety.com/2026/film/awards…
Why does everyone act like an expert online now? How does the modern social media ecosystem encourage bad takes and misinformation? @NathanJClarkson and I discuss with super cool media psychology expert Dr. Dannagal Young.
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas…
Good interview. Lots of good stuff about how to immerse yourself in a subject to naturally express it in the creative process. And her remarks about focusing on the beauty of creation rather than destruction is great. Also lots of assurances that her imagination and vision are aligned with CS Lewis and the majority of his fan base that I think are clearly way overstated.
youtu.be/gHevSz8Z_KM?is=rTBO…
Replying to @artwithinpod
Yes. She does. As well as her Catholic upbringing. Still pretty clear to me she's stretching the word with analogies to claim more commonality with CS Lewis and faith communities than is there. Pretty par for the course when adapting a work with a passionate fan base. But still noteworthy.
Replying to @artwithinpod
No, I'm suggesting that we should temper how we read the "*everything* he wrote and read" quote. Considering how much CS Lewis wrote and read.
I'll have to look at the full quote. But this looks suspiciously like redefining a word so you can answer "yes" when the real answer is closer to "no".
DiscussingFilm@DiscussingFilmOct 13United Kingdom
United KingdomConnected via United Kingdom App StoreAccount-level information, not a live location or per-post device.
Greta Gerwig says faith in her ‘NARNIA’ film is very much present both in front & behind the screen.
“Film and faith have always gone hand in hand… The very act of making a film is an act of faith. Shooting on celluloid is faith.”















