Nathan Fielder's You Can See Everything splits Barstool

Before the podcast got anywhere near it, Feits had already seen it and was not holding back.

feitelberg

@FeitsBarstool

You Can See Everything lives up to every bit of hype you’ve heard. Insane. Incredible. Never seen anything like it.

That lines up with basically everyone else. You Can See Everything is a documentary Fielder co-directed with Lance Oppenheim, and it's his first feature as a director. It follows Elizabeth Holmes, the Theranos founder, and her partner Billy Evans, who let a film crew follow them in the days before she reported to federal prison. The thing was shot mostly in secret, nobody knew it existed until a surprise screening at Telluride in September, and A24 has now put it in theaters. Critics went nuts for it: Rotten Tomatoes had it at 99% the week it opened. It also runs 174 minutes, so you need a real commitment to sit through it.

So Project Big Screen did a whole episode on it. The review led the show, with a Street Fighter review, an interview with David Dastmalchian and a round of Oscars: True or False after it.

Project Big Screen

@ProjBigScreen

🍿 NEW EPISODE 🍿 • #YouCanSeeEverything Review • #StreetFighter Review • Interview with David Dastmalchian • Oscars: True or False?

What's interesting is that the crew didn't land on one take. Jack Kennedy says they disagreed basically scene by scene, and he doesn't see that as a problem. He sees it as proof the movie works.

Kenjac

@JackKennedy

We fully recapped You Can See Everything and basically had 4 different opinions on any given scene. One of the many things that makes the movie great imo

Project Big Screen

@ProjBigScreen

🍿 NEW EPISODE 🍿 • #YouCanSeeEverything Review • #StreetFighter Review • Interview with David Dastmalchian • Oscars: True or False?

Honestly, that's the best endorsement you can give a Fielder project. The Rehearsal and Nathan For You were never built to give everyone the same answer. They're built to make you squirm, and then argue over whose side you're on and how much of it was real. A 3-hour documentary about one of the most famous con artists in Silicon Valley history was always going to go that way. If 4 people walk out with 4 different reads, the movie did its job.

Not everybody in the building is expected to be a fan, though. TJ walked out of the theater with a prediction about one of his coworkers.

TJ

@TJHitchings

Also been thinking about this since I left the theater: Steven Cheah is going to HATE this movie

TJ

@TJHitchings

Jesus Christ what a rollercoaster. That is NOT a documentary. I felt physically uneasy for half the movie. I love Nathan Fielder and have for years. Somehow every one of his ventures outdoes the last in emotional weight, legitimacy as a media product, and also execution to make a point or have an impact. This is his peak. I do not see how he can possibly Nathan Fielder harder than he Nathan Fielders in “You Can See Everything”. I look forward to his Oscar speech for Best Documentary (although again I don’t even know if you can call this a documentary). I’m left with 1000 questions and a handful of concerns. What a ride. I can’t believe this movie exists. I kept looking at Connor with my jaw on the floor. Also: the fact that Nathan Fielder was working on this project secretly while also actively learning how to pilot a commercial 747 for “The Rehearsal” S2 is one of the most astonishing accomplishments in film and television history.

That's a bit, not a review, since Steven Cheah hasn't actually said anything about the movie yet. Still, it's a fair guess. A slow, nearly 3-hour Fielder documentary that refuses to tell you what to think is not made for everyone. So far the Barstool scorecard reads: Feits calls it incredible, the Project Big Screen crew is split 4 ways and loving it, and Cheah's verdict is still to come. If TJ is right, that one is going to be worth hearing.