Amanda Seyfried has opened up about her unexpected role in the documentary You Can See Everything, sharing details about the professional risks she perceived and a difficult interaction with Billy Evans, the husband of the film’s subject, Elizabeth Holmes. The A24 film, directed by Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim, was released nearly a month ago. In the third act of the movie, Seyfried reprises her portrayal of Holmes, the disgraced founder of Theranos, a role she previously played in the limited series The Dropout which earned her an Emmy in 2022.
In a new interview with Rolling Stone published this week, Seyfried, Fielder, and Oppenheim provided full spoilers for the first time. They discussed how the actress became involved in the project. While filming the documentary, which chronicles the month leading up to Holmes’ prison sentence, the directors considered how to continue the narrative. Fielder obtained Seyfried’s phone number through his co-star Emma Stone and they connected via video call. Fielder showed her footage, and Seyfried recalled initially thinking he wanted advice on her previous portrayal of the character rather than a full participation in the new film.
Despite the unconventional process of agreeing to participate before consulting her representatives, Seyfried said she felt a strange level of trust with the directors. She noted that her lawyer had to retroactively set up a deal to protect her, as they were not initially considering reenactments. Fielder emphasized that Seyfried had no creative control over the project or the final footage, a fact she described with the phrase, “No approval. Whatsoever.”
Seyfried admitted that a vibration of risk remained in the back of her mind throughout the process. She worried about potentially destroying her career or getting entangled in what she called a wasp’s nest with Evans. She also feared saying the wrong thing or perpetuating negativity regarding Holmes. The actress stated that she became a sort of detective regarding Evans after watching footage of his interactions with Holmes and the filmmakers, feeling a strong need to understand who was pulling the strings.
Her opinion of Evans did not improve after they met in person. Seyfried stated plainly that she did not like him and that her view only got worse following their encounter. She found it exciting yet scary to meet him, noting that she had developed strong negative feelings from the footage. She expressed a desire to get answers and understand his behavior, which she described as yucky.
The tension between Seyfried and Evans peaked during a dinner scene where Evans criticized her performance. They also argued over Seyfried’s criticisms of the late Charlie Kirk. Oppenheim noted that this dinner scene would likely be the moment he thinks about on his deathbed. Seyfried described Evans as aggressive, saying that his behavior made her jaw unhinge. She felt the gloves were off because he had disrespected her in a significant way.
Seyfried explained that she was protective of herself while trying to maintain a rapport with Evans so he would not kick them out. She criticized his use of Holmes as a tool, noting the discrepancy between his claims of building monuments of love and his actual behavior. She aimed to set the record straight while defending herself in a diplomatic manner.
The documentary also features a scene where Seyfried meets Holmes and Evans’ children, which was interrupted by a phone call from Holmes, who was calling from prison. Seyfried recalled that the filmmakers were not expecting the call at that specific moment and confirmed that it was indeed Holmes on the line. Despite her initial concerns and the tense atmosphere, Seyfried said she has no regrets about participating in the project. She concluded by stating that she is having the time of her life right now.
