Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim Reflect on the Twists and Audience Reaction to 'You Can See Everything'

Less than two months after it surfaced, the A24 documentary You Can See Everything has become one of the most successful documentaries ever released at the North American box office. It is also being discussed as a possible first documentary nominee for the best picture Oscar. The three-hour film comes from Nathan Fielder, known for The Rehearsal, and Lance Oppenheim, who made Primetime.

The movie first drew attention at a secret screening during the Telluride Film Festival over Labor Day weekend, and its biggest surprises have stayed largely under wraps since. Audiences generally know it follows the last month Elizabeth Holmes spent with her husband, Billy Evans, and their children before beginning an 11-plus-year prison sentence for fraud. Less expected is the strange dynamic between the couple and Fielder, who appears on camera, and a final act that jumps ahead to a point when the filmmakers' access to the now-incarcerated Holmes has slipped away. That turn brings in Amanda Seyfried, who won an Emmy for playing Holmes in Hulu's The Dropout, to help finish the film and re-enact key conversations.

In one of their first public Q&As since the theatrical release, Fielder and Oppenheim spoke at the SCAD Savannah Film Festival about making a film inside what Oppenheim called the bubble of a "real-life human optical illusion."

Oppenheim said the plan originally did not involve Fielder appearing on screen. Early in filming, however, Evans and Holmes kept directing questions at him, and the dynamic seemed to pull him in front of the camera. After an operator panned to Fielder, Oppenheim saw on the monitor that he might serve as an accidental investigator who could try to draw Holmes back from her version of reality into the one the crew occupied.

The initial setup used seven crew members, and Oppenheim said a single-camera approach, his usual method, failed because it missed the first nonverbal reactions to a question. The team ended up with three cameras and two operators, including a wide shot of the whole house and zoom lenses that could close in from far away. Fielder said those reactions were central to judging sincerity. The couple also began telling the crew what they planned to do each day, so the filmmakers started setting up before the family woke, since the front door was left unlocked. A scene such as Evans heading to the gym plays differently, Fielder noted, when it was his own idea for the documentary.

Oppenheim said the limited access pushed them back toward the oldest documentary traditions, including vérité, a director on camera and later the re-enactments. Some viewers have called the film formally new, but he said it channels many ways documentaries have long been made.

Both directors said they repeatedly offered to leave, aware that this was a mother's final month with her children. Each time, they said, the family asked them to stay. Fielder called that part of the "mindfuck" of the project. Asked whether he has gained clarity about why the couple wanted them there, he answered bluntly: "Fuck no." Oppenheim described the film as an evolving Rorschach test and said that at times Holmes' behavior seems unconscious to him and at other times fully aware.

On the back half, Oppenheim said they wanted to see what became of Evans' business. Evans had said he would have something to show in 365 days, but it took two years. Many people outside the San Diego bubble declined to speak with the filmmakers, who said those people regarded Holmes as toxic, and that led them to Seyfried. Fielder said the first half felt complete with Holmes going to prison, but the picture did not, since their conversations were shaped by events that happened off camera.

Neither filmmaker knew Seyfried beforehand. When they reached out, she told them to come over with cameras. In the scene in her apartment, which was their first in-person conversation, she says she has no interest in doing this again, but then began imitating Holmes. Oppenheim said it seemed she had unfinished business. Fielder said they chose the ending in the edit once the audience had the same information they did, adding that it simply felt like the end of the road.