ging retweeted
If you come out of You Can See Everything siding with Billy Evans on even a single thing you should be placed under a conservatorship
My reactions to You Can See Everything (as someone reasonably familiar with the case having read Bad Blood)
— SPOILERS —
- about an hour too long
- Liz Holmes deserved a lesser sentence. The scale of the fraud was great yes but the harm done was minimal; her investors absorbed the loss. Retail wasn’t harmed and patients weren’t either. She was clearly the victim of a highly motivated and politicized prosecution. Frankly the investors completely failed in their diligence and deserved to lose their money
- Liz is genuinely sympathetic. And a pathetic character. She clearly has surrendered all agency and is engaging in some kind of learned helplessness. Seems to bear no relation to the big corporate CEO she was before. Feel bad for her. There seems to be little upside to punishing her so severely.
- didn’t remotely surprise me that she isn’t behind the X account. Did anyone think she was? How dumb do you have to be
- Amanda Seyfriend was super unsympathetic and I ended up siding with the weird domineering boyfriend over her. Which takes some doing
- the film was mostly an exercise in pointless navel gazing about the ethics of making a documentary; I can understand why a film student or a Hollywood obsessive might enjoy it but the stakes felt incredibly low. Shows the real disconnect between what Fielder and Seyfried think matters and what normal people do
- Fielder was more interested in making meta jokes about Holmes/Seyfried than actually exploring Holmes’ psychology. The interesting parts of the films (the pre jail scenes) are too short
- overall decent but wasn’t really about Liz at all it fell into the too familiar trap of the documentarian wondering about how much to insert himself into the story (gee that’s original)
- I am flabbergasted that Fielder expected us to care about whether the subjects should be compensated. “It’s about the integrity of the documentary” uhh dude this is pretty low stakes stuff, also you’re comedian Nathan Fielder who makes a living getting people to beclown themselves, not Werner Herzog.
ging retweeted
one of the most bizarre scenes in YCSE is when Billy is drinking a Celsius and then like 30 seconds later he's drinking a Spindrift
ging retweeted
having Amanda act as the effective second interviewer once Nathan slips into being a subject is an incredible choice.
ging retweeted
wait why did i just realize the title of YCSE is a double entendre. like yeah it’s what liz messaged nathan but also CAN was the word nathan got hung up on that liz used to describe theranos. so yes we have the ability to see everything, but will we?
ging retweeted
there was a huge, glaring connection that nathan fielder doesn’t address at the end of you can see everything bc he’s too holmes-pilled at that point, and it’s going to bother me forever
ging retweeted
Thinking about when Fielder asks Holmes dad a question, Fielder goes “Then say it!” w some of the most sarcastic enthusiasm he’s ever had, and the immediate tonal whiplash of her dad’s answer. One of the lesser talked about but more effective scenes in the doc.
ging retweeted
i don't want to say much about 'you can see everything' because the viewers discovery is so important and i don't want to spoil it, but there's a specific name mentioned 2/3's into the film so unexpected that the entire theater erupted, what an unbelievable movie experience
ging retweeted
nina i’m not nothing but when you lie on the piano i am reminded i am stupid and in every upstairs room the deep and smiling voice is shushing kicking everything to powder throwing music out the window



































