The curious case of Elizabeth Holmes and why Fielder's documentary does her justice

Elizabeth Holmes, a name now synonymous with fraud and even sociopathy,  is back thanks to Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim's critically acclaimed documentary on the convicted fraudster titled "You Can See Everything." For 34 days leading up to her prison sentence, Holmes, or Liz as she was often referred to, allowed Nathan and his crew to document every aspect of her life. The documentary opens in medias res, and from the very beginning, the audience knows this depiction is very different from what we've been used to. 

In the past, we've seen Amanda Seyfried cosplay as a Liz who's unstable, unhinged, and deeply criminal in Hulu's “The Dropout”—more on Amanda's role later. This time around, the opening scene features the real Holmes taking care of her young children as well as her complex dynamic with her partner Billy Evans.

Whether Holmes is a narcissist and master manipulator who got caught, or a startup founder who cut corners and has been made an industry scapegoat, remains an unresolved question of the film. While many viewers might have been disappointed with this inconclusiveness, the documentary was meant less to answer the question of her criminality than it was to explore her intentions and character.

Subscribe to Chicago Star's Weekly City Buzz Newsletter

A major struggle with many documentaries is how the creators highlight certain scenes and edit out others to fit a preconceived narrative. In Liz's case, this last risk is very real. Evidently, since Theranos collapsed in 2015, it seems the whole world is forever set against the disgraced entrepreneur. This is what Nathan Fielder does right: he refuses to construct a simple good guy/bad guy routine. At the end of the day, everyone is to be doubted. Even in Liz's most genuine scenes, Fielder plays the unconvinced, a vestige of his long history of deadpan humor. The end is inconclusive.

For the first half of the documentary, the theater would erupt in laughter whenever Liz would profess her innocence. Yet by the end, the audience wondered about the motives of not just Liz, but also Billy, and even Nathan. Even Amanda Seyfried—who plays a central role in the latter half of the film—seems to regret her previous depiction of Holmes. Nathan Fielder put it best at the New York Film Festival: "When I met her, I remember having this weird experience where she seems so genuine at times. But then I'm like, 'no,' and clocking and tracking my thoughts and being like, 'Okay, I know she's a liar.' It was a weird mental thing." 

Read more on Chicago Star:

• Anthropic officially files for an IPO, raising questions about the future of AI

• Three must-watch TV series that you may not have heard of

• Victory over Seattle on Monday Night Football announces Bears as serious title contenders

• Humboldt penguins steal the show again at Brookfield Zoo Chicago as Robin makes public debut

• Films come to life! Lyric Opera of Chicago puts on Disney movie nights for Encanto & Amadeus 

During his appearance on the All-In podcast, Billy Evans shed light on the purpose behind the documentary: "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."

In this respect, the documentary made a central conclusion: Elizabeth Holmes is clearly a layered character—so complex that 34 days living with her means just scratching the surface of who she really is behind the blank expression.