MUX Vinson Cunningham: This is Critics at Large, a podcast from The New Yorker. I'm Vinson Cunningham. Alex Schwartz: I'm Alex Schwartz. Naomi Fry: And I'm Naomi Fry. Each week on this show, we make sense of what's happening in the culture right now and how we got here. What a day. What a day it is. Okay, everyone, you've probably heard about the topic of our final Movie Month episode because it's been near damn impossible not to hear about it, I think. Uh, and yes, my friends, today we are talking about the new film, You Can See Everything. If you're like the one person who somehow hasn't heard about it, here, here's the gist. So we have disgraced Theranos founder and convicted felon Elizabeth Holmes, who invites a documentary crew into her home to film her and her family in the final days before she goes to prison in 2023. That crew is headed by Lance Oppenheim, who also directed the recent movie Prime Time, and also crucially by the comedian, prankster, devil himself- ... philosopher king Nathan Fielder. CLIP - YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING TRAILER FIELDER: [00:00:00] You really feel you did nothing wrong? HOLMES: I did not. FIELDER: So where did things get lost? Like, how are you where you are right now? HOLMES: I, I wish I knew, you know? I, I don't know. I don't, I don't feel like I understand that. Naomi Fry: I haven't seen this much excitement about a documentary maybe ever, or at least not in a very long while. Alex Schwartz: Would you guys agree? I would agree. I think it's objectively true. We've seen that this movie has made $15 million in its opening weekend, and- Naomi Fry: Yes ... Alex Schwartz: I texted everyone on the podcast in a- ... in an absolute panic a week before the movie released to say, "Tickets are flying. You need to get your tickets now, now, now, otherwise you will not see this by the time we need to discuss it." Vinson Cunningham: It's been all over the place, so I can't... If there has been another, I missed it. Naomi Fry: Yeah. I think it's, we can safely say that it's a phenomenon, right? Yeah. It's a cultural phenomenon. So today we're discussing You Can See Everything, which it's, yeah, it's technically a documentary for sure, but it seems at times more almost like a philosophical treatise on the knowability of other people. Like, w- what kind of big questions did it bring up for you guys? Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. It, and it certainly introduces, introduces a lot of themes, like sort of like reenactment- Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm ... Vinson Cunningham: um, uh, interpretation. Alex Schwartz: Mm-hmm. Vinson Cunningham: Trust, truth. Alex Schwartz: Mm-hmm. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. Alex Schwartz: Mm-hmm. Yeah, those are some, those are all the enormous ones. Trust and truth, pretty big. Mm-hmm. Yeah, I would say, Nomi, I like your focus on the knowability of another person, and you wrote a great piece about that for The New Yorker online. And I also think it's about the documentary form and what it is for, and- Naomi Fry: Okay ... Alex Schwartz: if documentaries can get at the truth, if they should get at the truth, how we in the audience perceive different things that are on screen. It's a kind of Rorschach test I think- Mm-hmm ... for the public. Naomi Fry: Yeah. Alex Schwartz: Um, yeah. Naomi Fry: Yeah. Alex Schwartz: What is reality? Naomi Fry: What is reality? And we're also gonna be talking about Nathan Fielder as a, as a figure. I mean, his work is extremely hard to categorize. It's kind of this odd blend of comedy, reality television, documentary. And even though it's often excruciatingly uncomfortable, I mean, it's just simply, you know, it's sometimes it's really hard to watch, even for me, who generally loves it. It's very hard for us not to be captivated by it, or not to be at least intrigued by it. And so my question for us today is, what does it say about us as viewers that we're so caught in Nathan Fielder's web? So that's today on Critics at Large, the Rorschach test of You Can See Everything. ________________ So you guys, before we get into talking about this movie, we need to address something, the question of spoilers. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Right? When I went to the press screening, you guys went to just a regular showing, right, after the movie already opened. Alex Schwartz: With the public. Naomi Fry: With the public. Vinson Cunningham: I went with the public. Naomi Fry: In the press screening, um, there was a little video, like a little video clip before the movie in which you can see Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim addressing the audience, their faces kind of like an extreme closeup, kind of like in a photo booth camera vibe, saying, "If you're writing about this, if you're posting about this, we implore you not to share anything from the second half of the movie." There was a, a, a, a great, um, kind of sense just generally That you don't wanna spoil. Not just coming from the filmmakers, but between people. You know, I went to a birthday party this weekend. Mm-hmm. People were like, "Have you seen it?" Uh, "Oh, I haven't yet. I'm gonna move away while you talk about it." Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. You know, there was a lot of discussion about spoilers. Alex Schwartz: Yeah. Well, yeah. Naomi Fry: Yeah. Alex Schwartz: I mean, the beauty of the podcast is that you don't even have to move away. Just pause it and come back after you've seen the movie. That's what I'm gonna say. I mean, let's, I wanna hear how you guys roll. We're gonna discuss everything. You can hear everything on this show. That's what I say. Because I totally respect what Lance Oppenheim and Nathan Fielder wanted critics to do in the written material. We're publishing this episode. The movie has been out for a week. You can, it will be there for you after you've seen the movie. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. Alex Schwartz: And even from what I've seen, uh, from what Nathan Fielder's been saying at this point in the, in the press cycle, a lot of his talking points have been around the idea that he doesn't fully understand what happened to him during this experience. Lance Oppenheim said a very similar thing to our beloved former colleague, Alex Barasch, who just published a profile of him in New York Magazine. They're kind of soliciting this reaction from audiences to try to make sense of the movie too. Mm-hmm. So here we are. Naomi Fry: Here we are. Alex Schwartz: Do not feel a need to listen to this if you haven't seen the movie yet. Just come back. Uh, Vinson Cunningham: I- Vincent, what do you think? I totally agree. S- uh, by the way, um, I love it when our colleague, Richard Brody, sometimes goes away from, uh, reviewing individual works and gives, like, sort of interesting, like, he does takes on the, the state of the movie business. And, um, couple days ago he did a piece on The New Yorker website called Spoiler Alert: Keeping Movies Under Wraps. It's all about the sort of increased pressure on the spoiler. On the one hand, he talks about how on some level it's a kind of marketing that, like, um, the sort of element of surprise, knowing that you don't know as much about a work as you will is a reason to hasten and get yourself into the theater. So it works as a sort of forcing mechanism to see something quickly. And on the other hand, that there are a lot of sort of mass entertainments that are indulging in very sophisticated formal play. Um, and he gives a lot of, uh, examples of this. And sudden- suddenly even talking about the dramatic shape of a work and not necessarily the content of it does have a more fraught thing going on with it. It's a really interesting exploration of the spoiler, if you're interested in it. Um, I think we should talk about the whole work- Right ... because I don't think we can competently talk about this movie without it, honestly. I think it's just, um, there are certain- Works because of their sort of drastic turns and twists and whatever, um, that you can't... If you talk about only one part, you will not have delivered the thing that we all wanna do. That's what I think. Alex Schwartz: I completely agree. Absolutely. I think it would be a wan and senseless experience. Naomi Fry: Okay, let's fucking go. So giddy up. Okay. Giddy up. Who wants to synopsize, friends? Alex Schwartz: I'm gonna do it. Naomi Fry: Do it. Let's do it. Do it, Alex. Alex Schwartz: I'm gonna do it Okay. You all know that this movie, maybe you don't, but you should know by now that this movie- You should know everything. You should know everything. This movie begins 34 days before Elizabeth Holmes reports to prison in Texas to begin her prison sentence as a felon for defrauding investors in Theranos, her, um, tech, biotech startup company that purported to be able to diagnose hundreds of medical conditions from a single drop of blood taken from a finger. Elizabeth Holmes, at this point, is living in a rental house in Southern California, near San Diego, with her romantic and business partner, Billy Evans, their two children, young William and Invicta, their baby. Naomi Fry: In- Invicta, who they refer to as Ivy, I believe. Alex Schwartz: They refer to as Ivy. They innocuously refer to her as Ivy, but in fact, her name is Invicta, to profess a kind of, you know, we shall overcome vibe for felon Elizabeth Holmes. And into this mix they've invited- Vinson Cunningham: Felon Elizabeth Holmes, that's very New York Post. I love that. Please continue. Alex Schwartz: I mean, I'm saying it because I think, to some degree, one of the fascinating things about this movie is just the degree to which, um, Elizabeth Holmes curries sympathy. Yes. And one of the slippery things about this movie is the degree to which we feel that Nathan Fielder is leading us to feel sympathy or not for her. Sure. Um, and we're gonna get to all of that. But into this house, they invite the last person on earth- ... anyone should want to be near them at any moment, let alone a moment of duress, Nathan Fielder. There is a shot early in the movie, and my entire theater exploded with laughter. You've seen Billy on the phone, you've seen Liz, you've seen the kids, and then suddenly, behind the glass of a window pane, like a horrifying Halloween spectacle- you see Nathan Fielder, his characteristic now a bit saltish and peppery hair, full head of hair, the kind of hulking stature, the absolutely expressionless gaze. It's a jump scare. It's terrifying, and everybody laughed. Yes. And he and his camera crew are there for many, many hours a day, and the premise is that the Holmes-Evans household has solicited this, has asked them to come and to film everything, that nothing is off limits, including Billy Evans in a naked shower sequence after his rather rigorous workout at the gym. Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm. The schmeckle does dingle dangle. Alex Schwartz: The schmeckle dingle dangles, and doesn't he want you to know that it does? So Nathan is there to see everything, to presumably ask everything, and we are brought into, immediately, a very strange interpersonal dynamic between this couple, where Elizabeth Holmes seems like a lobotomized person who basically understands nothing, has no memories of anything. The only thing she will say concretely She's, Naomi Fry: she's like Reagan in the Iran-Contra hearings. Alex Schwartz: It's a lot of I don't recalls. Um, she, she with her enormous blue eyes and her very expressive mouth, um is continuously presenting herself as a kind of animatronic doll- Mm-hmm ... basically saying, "I did nothing wrong. I don't understand how this even happened. No, I actually don't understand- Vinson Cunningham: How Alex Schwartz: it even went on ... the sequence of events that have- Yeah ... led to me being in this position." There are face-offs between her and Nathan. Um, and meanwhile, Billy Evans is circling about, circling about. He seems to be a bit of an overactive, over- um, overbearing kind of partner. Mm-hmm. But each of them really holds... They, they share two core truths. One, Theranos would have and could have worked, and in fact, they believe in this to the degree that they are gonna create Theranos b- 2.0. Mm-hmm. And two, that their love for one another is the stuff of fairy tales, is the stuff of storybooks, that they l- it was love at first sight at a party two years after the collapse of Theranos. And from that moment on, their foundations as a couple have been as solid as anything you can imagine. So we're gonna talk about all of that. Yeah. That's the first part of the movie, and then Liz goes to jail. Goodbye. She's off. Bye-bye. She's going to prison. We see her go, we see the paparazzi scrum, and Nathan drives away. Half of the movie is left, and here is where we're gonna get into some spoilers. The second half picks up two years later. Uh, Liz has been in prison in that time, and we get more Billy Evans and his increasingly, um, sort of off-kilter behavior, and then we also get Nathan trying to make sense of what is going on, what his experience was, and who Elizabeth Holmes is. And to do that, it will not surprise viewers of The Rehearsal to know he turns to this question of reenactment and how to recreate scenes that he was present for, that the camera wasn't present for, that the camera was present for. And to do that, the kind of big surprise here is that he uses Amanda Seyfried, the actress who played Elizabeth Holmes on The Dropout, and she becomes increasingly involved in helping to parse and interpret the material and the character of Elizabeth Holmes, which all of us are trying to do at the same time in the theater. Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm. Alex Schwartz: Mm-hmm. What'd you guys think? Vinson Cunningham: That's Naomi Fry: it. Yeah. That's, that's great. That's great. Of the movie. And it's a hard- It's the synopsis ... it's a hard... No, it's, it's, it's, it's difficult. It's difficult, and it is, yeah, a three-hour movie. I just wanna hear kinda reactions. Mm-hmm. Like thumbs up. Yay, nay. Thumbs up, thumbs down. What did you guys think? Vinson Cunningham: I had a devil of a time trying to figure out what the big deal was supposed to be. Naomi Fry: Okay. Vinson Cunningham: Uh- Okay ... I have never had this experience in a movie- Naomi Fry: Oh, wow. Okay ... Vinson Cunningham: where by the end of it, I was like, "I must have fallen asleep for a part," but I did not. Naomi Fry: Wow. Wow. Say more. Vinson Cunningham: Uh, you know- Naomi Fry: Okay, I love this, actually Vinson Cunningham: number one, and, you know, part of the deal with Nathan Fielder is supposed to be, he's always talking about how, you know, "I'm not the best verbal communicator. I don't understand people that well." And so it's like we're supposed to be understanding these as explorations through his, um- At least, you know, self-avowedly limited frame of reference. Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm. Vinson Cunningham: And so the first question is, like, has he never met a really bad liar? Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm. Vinson Cunningham: Like I'm, God forgive me, I'm related to some terrible liars. And let me tell you, it's actually not that interesting. Naomi Fry: Yeah. Vinson Cunningham: You can't believe the things they say, and sometimes they blend the truth and the lie, and the best/worst of them- Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm Vinson Cunningham: sort of believe their lies- Mm ... such that it becomes hard to interpret what they say. Okay. That's just like experience. That's just life. And so I don't want i- i- so there are all these, like, really big themes of truth and thing- like, he's, like, gesturing at these themes, but never once did I think he was getting any closer to them by any means.[a] Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm. Vinson Cunningham: Whether it was by the sort of strict reportorial, uh, approach, slightly funny reportorial approach of the first half, Billy Evans' California brown homesteader dick notwithstanding, um- Naomi Fry: Not California- ... brown homesteader dick. Vinson Cunningham: Uh, and certainly not through the interventions- California brown ... of Amanda Seyfried. You know, um, yeah, I mean, he looks like there was a, that's a, that is a horse and buggy dick. Okay, sorry. Naomi Fry: Like, like an oak in- Vinson Cunningham: It's just like he- Naomi Fry: Like Vinson Cunningham: an old oak. Like a- It's just he... It's, it's a dick that says, "I built the house that I live in." I don't know. It, I can't tell you. I don't know. It's like- Or Alex Schwartz: at the very least, that I'm renting it for many thousands of Vinson Cunningham: dollars a week. Yeah, it's like some Joan Didion dick. It's like some, like- So it's not wow ... you know, the Santa Ana winds dick. I- Naomi Fry: It's not the Alex Schwartz: wind blows. The more you say, the less I understand, but the happier I am that you're saying it. Naomi Fry: Yeah. No, I kinda, I kinda see what you're, I kind of- The Vinson Cunningham: Donner Party dick. Naomi Fry: Okay. It's Donner Party. We got Alex Schwartz: it. Let's Vinson Cunningham: go to the wrap. Anyway, don't make me, don't anyway, I'm sorry. Yes. Naomi Fry: Okay. Vinson Cunningham: Just like Naomi Fry: whatever. No, I could, I could do this for, like, the next, like, 50 minutes. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah, tan speckled kettle bell ass looking. So, um, and, um- ... uh, and then on the other hand, um, oh, y- oh, now I'm gonna get a Amanda Seyfried in- involved because what? 'Cause she played her? It just seemed like everything that he wanted us to be like, "It's leading me into a further mystery," was like, okay, duh. And then so the f- and the whole second half of the movie is, is should I believe her that she... Does she know that Billy has arranged to be paid for this? Just like another question of truth on top of this person who's already a spectacular liar, as demonstrated by the first half of the thing and as demonstrated by the person's whole history. The answer is, who gives a shit? So the whole time I was like, "Is there a part that's supposed to tell me who gives a shit or what this..." Like, I just, I m- I was short-circuiting the whole time. I was like, "Who cares?" Naomi Fry: Oh my God, I love this. Vinson Cunningham: I was like, "Who gives a shit? She's lying or she's not, or a little bit of both. She's a psycho, dude. Everybody can see it." [b]So I don't know. I just, I've, I, I left it just, like, disoriented. I was like, "Did I sleep through a part of it?" I was talk- tell- asking friends like, "Okay, and this happened, and then that happened, right?" I was like, "What did I miss?" And the answer is nothing. And so I don't know. Okay. I totally respect this. Mm-hmm. I respect this, and it's almost like a, I love a dissenting opinion. I love a dissenting opinion, and I love anger- as you know. Yeah. And so I'm, like, kind of relishing in this- Yeah ... and, and your reaction. I feel like maybe I'm like a huge patsy because to me, not that I don't think she's not a liar, like something is very wrong with her. Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm. Naomi Fry: But I think it's a little, to me it was a little more complicated, like the r- the relationship to... Like I feel like she believes what she's saying. And o- one thing that struck me about it, when, uh, Fielder is talking to Amanda Seyfried, and they're talking about the relationship between Billy- Mm-hmm ... Evans and, uh, Elizabeth Holmes, and they're talking about their seemingly th- telepathic connection, their like great love, their like, their- Vinson Cunningham: Building monuments of Naomi Fry: love- Building monuments- one for the other ... of love. You know, which is like- Vinson Cunningham: Insane ... Naomi Fry: insane. But I think they believe it, and I think- Mm-hmm ... in their hearts, and similarly I think they also believe that she's innoc- Like I think- Yeah ... that they have convinced themselves that she is somehow, as Billy Evans murmurs to her at one point, "You're so good and so true." So true. You know? And I'm like, I think they believe it. Yeah. And I, and I find that- interesting. And I find the enforced intimacy between all of these people- Mm-hmm ... that this process enacts, I find that interesting. I feel sympathy towards that, towards your annoyance. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. Naomi Fry: But I did feel like there were questions here that were worth asking, uh, and that there was kind of a core of, of, of, of a problem there to investigate.[c] Um, because obviously many people, many, many people believed Elizabeth Holmes. And it's interesting, I think, to understand why. Yeah. Like, why some people, why she even believes herself, you know? Yeah. Much less, like, many, many others that she- Like General Mattis or whatever[d][e][f]. Yeah ... that she, that she duped. And so I found the movie very interesting. Uh, so that question of, like, she's a liar, case closed, I don't wanna deal with... You know? Yeah. Uh, it's like, I appreciate it, but I, I don't know if I'm totally there- Yeah ... or there at all, actually. Alex, do you wanna say something? Alex Schwartz: Ugh, I'm already loving this conversation so much. Um- I'm Vinson Cunningham: glad ... Alex Schwartz: uh, it's just delightful. So the first thing I'll say is that the, I'm really glad I saw this as part of an audience of the public and not a screening audience- Mm-hmm ... because the experience of seeing the film itself was exhilarating and fun. The audience was loving it. I was by myself on the very end of a row with a bunch of, like, a big group was next to me, and I felt like I was with their group. You know, I was saying, "Oh, my God," all the time, and I was like, "Oh my," I was like, "Oh my God," I'm saying, "Oh my God, I'm embarrassing this group. This, they probably- ... they probably want me to shut up at this point." Kick these guys out, yeah. But everybody is kind of hooting and hollering. It was a big hooting and hollering experience, and there was a lot... You know, Nomi, I know you wrote in your piece that you didn't find it very funny. Um- Yeah, Naomi Fry: and I wanna say something about that. Alex Schwartz: Uh-oh. Naomi Fry: Yes. Alex Schwartz: The finger's out. Naomi Fry: Yeah, the finger's out. I'm getting a finger shake from me. I wanna say something about that. So I saw it at a screening. There wasn't much laughter at all- Mm-hmm in the screening. Mm-hmm. I certainly didn't laugh much at all. I get it. Like, all the people- Alex Schwartz: I have a feeling this is an address to me ... Naomi Fry: who responded... No. No, Nomi. Vinson Cunningham: Commenters, you're on Naomi Fry: notice. Commenters on my Instagram, "Actually, it was really funny," okay, yeah, I get it. Like, I get, I did laugh. I'm not saying it wasn't funny. I'm just saying that in the Nathan Fielder oeuvre, this three-hour movie, I don't believe you that you laughed from start to finish. That's very good. And if you did, like, what the fuck is wrong with you? Okay, I'm sorry. I love it ... it's like, okay. Alex Schwartz: Okay. I love it. Now that, Naomi Fry: now- Now, now that we got that out of the way Alex Schwartz: Now that we've, now that we've directly addressed the haters- and have put them- I love it ... and have put them in their place. There we go. We're flying fast and loose today. Um, okay, now that we've gotten that out of the way, and we've put- ... the haters on notice, one thing I have to say in response to what Vinson said is that this movie is fundamentally about Nathan, and it's fundamentally about Nathan going through this experience. Mm-hmm. That's why, and it makes total sense to me that Nathan is walking around saying in his various press clippings, "I still don't know what happened to me. Tell me if you know what happened to me." It is about what happened to Nathan Fielder. Yeah. It is not what Eliz- about what Elizabeth Holmes did. It is not even about what Billy Evans did. Elizabeth Holmes committed cri- I, I mean, I'm fascinated by the degree to which this movie seems to open people up to the idea that Elizabeth Holmes didn't know what she was doing. Vinson, everything you said about lying is spot on. Elizabeth Holmes is a lying liar who lies. That's who she is. There's, there's no doubt about this. We can, I can name 100 lies, you know, off the top of my head simply from just, like, standard issue information. Yeah. You know, here's one. She claimed that Theranos devices were used by the US military in war zones. She had to say under cross-examination during her trial that that was not true, yet she tells Nathan Fielder, "I've never total- told a lie. I can't remember telling a lie." You know, my dear, you told a lie on the stand. You had to, you had to admit to telling a lie- Under oath, yeah ... on the stand. So there are 100 things like this. This, to me, really is a movie, everyone is parsing this as a movie about truth and layers and what you can believe and what you couldn't understand, but to me, the fascination of the movie is in large part this is the first time we've seen Fielder, I'll call him Fielder just to see how it is, this is the first time we've really seen Fielder take on a very different kind of target and different kind of subject. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Usually the comedy and the discomfort in his work is from watching him go up against extremely ingenuous people, and here, for the first time, he's actually up against, I think, like, really worthy targets, and I think that kind of explains why the comedy doesn't work in the same way. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Because the comedy is not on this gap of ingenuity and then wondering how ingenuous or disingenuous- Mm-hmm ... it is. What I found to be very pleasurable and enjoyable about the movie was watching that flip take place, where suddenly Nathan is in the position of one of his own subjects. Mm-hmm. Because he's, like, that's why I don't think the movie is at all about Theranos or Elizabeth Holmes or how much tru- I think that whole conversation is complete red herring. Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm. Alex Schwartz: I think it's about the Fielder method being applied weirdly to Nathan. Naomi Fry: But is it, though? I mean, like, how do you see him becoming- Vinson Cunningham: Fielder-ized ... Naomi Fry: Fielder-ized? Because he, because is he, like, possibly duped by her? Is that what you- Alex Schwartz: I think that's part of it, yeah. Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. I think part of it is the, is watching- The weirdness is, like, he is put in more of a journalist role in this- Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm. Alex Schwartz: Mm-hmm ... film than he's been in any other kind of work. I mean, it is- Mm-hmm ... a documentary. You have Nathan in the simulation that they've created of their lives- Mm ... trying to unravel it. That's what I mean. Naomi Fry: Yes. Yes, yes. Alex Schwartz: And increasingly- Yes ... feeling sympathetic towards Elizabeth Holmes. And very Naomi Fry: herself, Alex Schwartz: and very herself. Going down this whole lane of how much does she know about what you're doing? Does she know that you agreed to be paid for the documentary? As Vincent says, "Who cares? Doesn't matter." But he gets a little bit spun around in the simulation that these two have created, and that's what I think is field-er-ized.[g][h] Naomi Fry: When we're back, the world of Nathan Fielder. This is Critics at Large from The New Yorker :: MIDROLL:: Okay, guys. I wanna turn for a second to talk about Nathan Fielder himself, or rather his persona as it appears in the movie, but also in, in his earlier work. Have you seen a kind of progression or transition of, of this figure of Nathan Fielder over the last, like, you know, decade or decade- Mm-hmm ... plus? Vinson Cunningham: Well, one thing that we can say about this persona is something that we've kind of been trying to talk about in various way- ways over the past couple of months on this podcast, which is like especially in various portrayals of tech figures. Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm. Vinson Cunningham: There is a certain kind of Representation of neurodivergence happening. Mm-hmm. And like, this is one of the key aspects of his appeal. Someone who asks questions, and perhaps this, this goes to the point that Alex makes about him being a good journalist, which is like a[i][j] good sort of proto-journalist in this, at least as it, as it shows up in You Can See Everything. By asking seemingly very obvious questions about human behavior that the rest of us kind of skate past, perhaps he's able to get at certain truth, that this might be, you could talk about it in this way. One of the more memorable scenes of You Can See Everything is him sort of, it's almost like he's trying to implant an idea in Holmes's head, which is like, basically they're having this, um, interpretive... It's already, by the way, he's already being manipulated because, uh, she's done this in many other forums, including in court, talk about what did she mean by this device can, uh, do every kind of blood test, whatever. You know, can or could or blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. They're going down this interpretive wormhole, which is just her wrestling him to the ground, but fine, whatever. He says, "I'm the kind of person who, I don't know lots of words, you know what I mean? I don't know how to say it." "Yeah, I'm the kind of person where, you know, I don't know how to say stuff." And she's, and, and he's like, "Are you like that too?" And then she kind of sits with it, and she's like, "You know, yeah, maybe." And then, you know, later on, it's like a nighttime scene. He's on the couch with the, the two of them. Admittedly very funny that they're just, like, on the couch again. Yeah. And he's like, uh- Yeah, they're like Alex Schwartz: a throuple. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. He's like, "Have you ever seen this very famous, uh, bit, Who's on First?[k][l][m]" CLIP - ABBOTT AND COSTELLO ABBOTT: [00:00:00] Now, on the St. Louis team, we have, uh, Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third. COSTELLO: That's what I wanna find out. Now- I want you to tell me the names of the fellas on the St. Louis team. ABBOTT: I'm, I'm telling you. Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third. COSTELLO: You know the fellas' names? ABBOTT: Yes. COSTELLO: Well, then who's playing first? ABBOTT: Yes. COSTELLO: I mean the fella's name on first base. ABBOTT: Who. COSTELLO: The fella playing first base for St. Louis. ABBOTT: Who. COSTELLO: The guy on first base. ABBOTT: Who is on first. COSTELLO: Well, what are you asking me for? [fade down] Vinson Cunningham:And she li- you know, watches it. She doesn't get the wordplay involved. She doesn't get the whole joke. Naomi Fry: Or she claims not to. Vinson Cunningham: She claims not to get the whole joke. This is one moment when I actually kind of believed what I was seeing a little bit because Naomi Fry: She tries to- Vinson Cunningham: She tries to pretend like- To pretend. She's like, " Naomi Fry: Yeah" ... Vinson Cunningham: uh, whatever. But Billy's like, "See, I'm not surprised by that." Like, looking over her, talking to Nathan, being like, "Yeah, isn't she fucking weird?" And I, I, I could see her, like, she was kind of annoyed by this, and I, I was like, "That's real." Um, m- whatever, maybe not. Um, uh, they're playing around with this, that idea, and I think it really actually works particularly well because he's in the milieu of Silicon Valley. It's like, maybe these people don't know what words mean, and maybe I'm the, the perfect interpreter, you know? And so I think there is a, that, the kind of person who doesn't understand human sociality at a moment when hu- human sociality is rapidly changing and kind of up for grabs. Mm-hmm. How we relate to one another- Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm Vinson Cunningham: is a ver- is a, is a swiftly changing thing- Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm ... Vinson Cunningham: because of various technolo- tech- technological trends and et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Um, and so perhaps somebody who is walking around always disoriented by other human beings is the perfect emissary from, you know, us to them. I don't know. Alex Schwartz: So you're talking, Vinson, about Nathan's persona as well, about his persona as being kind of like- Detached, guileless- Vinson Cunningham: Never Alex Schwartz: heard of nothing neutral, flat- Yeah ... never heard of nothing. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah. I think, so that is exactly the fundamental Nathan Fielder persona. And people have referred to him as a performance artist, which I think is true. Uh, I think [n][o]he's also in line with, like, a social scientist. I think the big thing about Nathan's persona was when, in the Nathan For You era, which was his show in which he played a version of himself, a kind of avatar of himself, who would come up with these horrific ideas to help struggling small businesses. CLIP: Nathan for You Alex Schwartz: This kind of cunning coldness- Yeah ... behind this flat, affectless facade- CLIP: Mm-hmm ... Alex Schwartz: that collided with the general willingness of people to help each other, help someone understand, take someone else seriously. The kind of so, the so, uh, like it was like watching someone unsocialized interact with the socialized. And the socialized impulse to facilitate connection, be agreeable, all of that, created these absurd results because it kept going farther and farther. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. And the, and the comedy was in there, and for me, the discomfort was there. I think something interesting happened with the persona in the rehearsal. Naomi Fry: Mm-hmm. Alex Schwartz: The rehearsal came about because Nathan and his team in making Nathan For You would try to rehearse different outcomes that could happen when he approached these business owners with his outlandish plans. And they discovered that they could rarely predict what was going to happen, but it gave him this idea, he has said, for what if you could rehearse life events, especially uncomfortable ones or difficult ones. Mm-hmm. And in season one of the rehearsal, we get everything from this bar trivia participant rehearsing this confession to his bar trivia mates that he does not have a higher degree as it has been implied, to this fundamentalist Christian woman who's dealt with various addictions in the past rehearsing parenthood using a slew of baby and child actors, which Nathan gets, you know, bizarrely implicated in in his own way. CLIP: Yeah. Alex Schwartz: By season two, Nathan is claiming that this actually has a salutary social benefit, that the thing he's suddenly interested in, which is a true shock when you start season two, is air- airline safety. Like, huh? Like, flight safety. You're like, what? Naomi Fry: Why not? Alex Schwartz: Why not? But that he has concluded that this inability of people, this, this almost like the over-socialized impulse is actually causing disaster. Mm-hmm. Because the second in command has been socialized to be respectful of the chief in command, to not wanna over assert themselves, to, to pipe down. And that basically if people could, like, unsocialize themselves when the higher stake is at, uh, uh, when something big is at stake, this could save lives. And there's one particular moment, Vinson, that you're reminding me of in, in season two of the rehearsal that I think is relevant for The interaction between Nathan Fielder and Elizabeth Holmes. There is a whole weird side plot where Nathan creates this singing competition- Mm-hmm ... to be part of his weird experiment with the airline pilots, and he basically- And then he goes cracking up over it. It's hilarious. Yeah. I mean, he puts out this casting call. It, it turns out that his- What's Naomi Fry: it called? Like Wings of- Alex Schwartz: V- Wings of Voice ... Wings of, yeah. Something like that. He has different airline pilots be judges to try to basically see how forthright they can be about delivering bad news, 'cause if they can say to these singers, "Sorry, you're not advancing," maybe they have a better chance of saying to a pilot in charge, "Sorry, sir, you don't see actually where the landing strip is. I'm taking over the controls." And he finds that one Of these pilots in particular does a great job, and he watches a video to try to figure out what makes her be great at it. CLIP - THE REHEARSAL PILOT: Hello. How are you? SINGER: I'm well. And yourself? PILOT: Fantastic. Your volume control is fantastic. ALEX: Oh, thank you. PILOT: You have an absolutely beautiful voice. SINGER:Thank you. PILOT: Fantastic voice. Alex Schwartz: It's not a mystery. Vinson Cunningham: Right. Alex Schwartz: She's friendly and personable, and always has a nice thing to say even when she's rejecting someone. But he concludes that the answer is that she keeps saying fantastic.So she keeps saying fantastic when these people come in, and you're watching him genuinely not understand how to interact with another human being in a way that might make them feel good. And by the end, he does. He can play the role. And once again, the question is, is he for real? Yeah. Right. So the reason I'm bringing all this up, I think Elizabeth Holmes is a perfect pairing for him because I think she is someone who has effectively learned what the airline pilot did. She wa- has watched the video of the airline pilot- Vinson Cunningham: She's Alex Schwartz: done it, yes ... the metphor- metaphorical video, and figured out what to do. Vinson Cunningham: Yes. Alex Schwartz: And so Nathan is sitting with, like, a successful product of a social experiment. And to me, her sociopathy is real, but is her persona fake on top of it? Whereas with Nathan, is his persona real, but his sociopathy is fake? Mm-hmm. Are they like a perfect weird mirror image- Like weird convex. Yeah ... of each other? Yeah, yeah. Mm. Yes. Yes. Where, like, they're either both performing the same thing or they're performing opposite things, and that is what leads- I think they're Naomi Fry: performing opposite Alex Schwartz: things, right? I think they might be. I think, yeah. Naomi Fry: Because he's performing... And again, who knows? Is this real? Is this not? He's performing blunt unpleasantness, right? He's performing I'm going to come into your home where you're, like, nur- about to go to jail, nursing your child. You know, a, a- Yeah ... no matter what she did, no matter whether she's a liar, whatever, it's like an intimate and difficult situation, right? Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. Naomi Fry: I'm gonna come in, and I'm not gonna give a fuck, you know? I'm gonna be like, "So did you do... Are you a liar? Did you do it?" She's like- ... you know, nursing and, like, uh- Yeah ... going to jail in two days- Yeah ... and never gonna see her family ever. Just, like, giving Vinson Cunningham: her a wig as a give- getaway costume Naomi Fry: as a Vinson Cunningham: joke. Naomi Fry: Right. Like... Right, right. That was a funny moment. Yeah. And everybody did laugh. That Vinson Cunningham: was funny, yeah. Naomi Fry: Uh, but it's, like, also, like, what are you, insane? Like, something is wrong with you. So he's, like, really leaning on that. Yeah. Yes. And she is really leaning... You know, prepping for the episode, I said she reminded me of a turtle. You know, the sort of, like, round-headed, like, wide-eyed, blinking, you know? Vinson Cunningham: Always nodding. Naomi Fry: Always nodding. Like, I'm gonna amble around slowly with my shell. Vinson Cunningham: I'd never wear shoes. Naomi Fry: I'd never wear shoes. I am a good person. I'm... Like, you know. Yeah. So she's kind of leaning on performing that, and vis-a-vis his kind of performed Meanness or whatever you wanna call it, uh, it's, it's, that's, I think it's the o- those opposites, right? Yeah, Alex Schwartz: I think each, I think each has maybe the underlying condition and is performing the reverse. Right. And that would be one of my points of speculation about why this is hitting the culture so hard. Because what's definite and definitive is that it's hitting. Like, what is putting him right here at the center? Why is every ticket to this sold out before reviews? What's happening? Naomi Fry: We're gonna take a quick break and try to answer that question right after. This is Critics at Large from The New Yorker. :: MIDROLL:: Okay, guys. We've been talking about, you can see everything we've been talking about Nathan Fielder's persona and his past work. If we could turn now to ask, you know, the kind of double prong question of what is Nathan Fielder's project about right now, and why is this project, why is this figure of Nathan Fielder so magnetic to us right now? Why is this movie making so much money? Why, you know, there isn't a ticket to be found in the tri-state area, you know, on opening- This is a documentary, you know? This is like- Right, right ... it's, this is not, we're not talking, like, Top Gun: Maverick here, right? Why? Vinson Cunningham: I do think there is something particular about the, call it, like, social political, uh, scenario of encountering Elizabeth Holmes and, and, and the industry and its set of proclivities that she on some level represents. There's a re- there's a very smart gentleman who gets cut off im- like immediately toward the middle of this film who's saying, "Uh, every tech founder is always lying." And she was j- it- it's just, like, kind of laying out the bare fact that yes, she is a particularly deranged liar, but that she only exists on a continuum with everyone who's in, who has oversized power in our public life. But more generally, I think that his ability or at least his willingness to try to kind of estrange normal things, um, or make them, uh, kind of alienating to us, um, echoes a breakdown of just normalcy in society. Naomi Fry: Mm. Vinson Cunningham: I think there's like, you know, nothing feels normal, whether because of, you know, the sort of the tactile is, is going out. The, the written word is on the way out. There are so many things that are estranging, alienating in the way that we just apprehend the basic fabric of reality. It does s- seem to me that there's some justness that, like, the sort of the figure of the, the, the person who is kind of crusading, um, not only against p- political arrangements, but also just against our many incomprehensions, would be somebody who just admits that he doesn't understand anything. Um, 'cause the rest of us, I mean, we kind of walk, uh, out of the house with some things kind of like, you know, we gotta fake it till you make it. You gotta- Yeah ... make it through life and at least kind of, uh, pattern your responses to things by your recognitions of them. But if somebody comes on it and says, "I recognize nothing," it's like, well, you know, maybe he's useful for us. I don't know. Naomi Fry: Int- that's interesting. I, I just, you know, I, I think the question about, like, I totally take your point about, like, nobody knows what the fuck is going on. Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm. Naomi Fry: But I feel like maybe Nathan Fielder is one of the only people who kind of does, or at least where he positions himself and the kind of projects that he makes- Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm Naomi Fry: he is trying to wrap his hands around what is going on. I have to say that, like, his, his kind of like I still don't know what I think thing, like, that's kind of like- Extra textual, you know, like the interviews he's been doing saying like, "I'm not sure yet. Yeah, I'm not sure what I found out. I'm not sure exactly what I think about what happened. I went through a transformation, but I'm not sure." I'm like, really? Come CLIP: on. Naomi Fry: That's, that seems a little guileless to me and, and kind of a little disingenuous. Yeah. Because I'm like, you're really, really, really smart, and you've made a really original, really ambitious movie, and you took many kind of like deci- you made- Lots of strong decisions many, lots of strong decisions. Yes. Tell us what you think about it. Or you can say, "I don't, I don't feel like telling you what I think about it." That's okay, too, you know? But the sort of like I'm not sure what I think about it thing is a little like, Nathan, just tell us what you think about it. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. Naomi Fry: Do you know what I'm saying? Yep. And so what you're, what you're suggesting- I totally agree ... about, like, nobody knows what's going on, I think he does know what's going on. Mm-hmm. I, I don't know what's going on according to him because he won't tell us. I mean, the, the work tells us in a variety of ways but- He won't Vinson Cunningham: articulate Naomi Fry: the, the method or whatever he won't articulate it. I'm not good with words, et cetera, et cetera. He is good with words. He is really, he does know what's going on. I do think th- that, that said, I take your point- Yeah ... about, like, it's, it's a very- At least, at least his act ... confusing time. Yes, yeah. It's a very confusing time, and the act accounts for that. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. Alex Schwartz: I think I have an answer for why Fielder is at the center. Alex Schwartz: Or one possible answer- Mm-hmm ... of many. I mean, simulation. Simulation is everything right now. Simulation is our whole world right now. The, you know, AI of it all, the doubting of reality, which is happening on a larger and larger scale faster and faster. CLIP: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Alex Schwartz: The confusion of truth for, um, for fakeness also. Mm-hmm. Like, I remember one of the kind of disconcerting things of our current moment in AI awareness is when a platform like Instagram marks a real post as AI generated, or like a real photo as AI generated. Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Alex Schwartz: And suddenly you ha- or when people kind of get out their pitchforks and say, "I know this is AI," and the thing isn't AI. We're just in such a state of really not knowing what's real and what isn't real. Naomi Fry: And hypervigilance and panic. Alex Schwartz: Yes. And so Nathan Fielder's work has evolved in that direction, and it's evolved in that direction in this incredibly fascinating handmade way. Mm-hmm. Such as the elaborate sets that he builds on his sound stage in Los Angeles for the rehearsal with their apparently unlimited HBO funds where they can recreate bars and the interiors of people's apartments and the entire, you know, George Bush Airport in Houston. And they can create these- ... these simulations and try to put real people into the simulated reality of it. I think it has a lot to do with how ... And, and try to get, and try to look for something authentic in the social- Yes ... response. Yeah. I think that mix of the simulated and the fake with the authentic human response makes him really Has, he has his finger on something that we're all going through. Yeah. On what it is to be human and to try to like live life and interact with one another and interact with our world while our world is changing rapidly and becoming faker and faker. Most people wouldn't say that's why they love Nathan Fielder. That's not why I would say I like Nathan Fielder's work, you know? Yeah. I think people would say he's funny, he makes me uncomfortable, I can't look away, all that stuff. But I do think this is one big thing that makes him, his work increasingly unmissable. And if you wanna understand where the culture is at or talk about where the culture is at, you need to be looking at what he's making and thinking about what he's making because he knows how to make us uncomfortable in a way that's very personal to this moment. Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm. Alex Schwartz: You know, Emily Eakin's book, uh, her recent book, The Frenchman. Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm. Alex Schwartz: Um, which is about structuralists and, like, the group of French structuralists who brought structuralism to America. And the reason I'm thinking about it is because of this structuralist idea that everything is language, that the entire world is language, that language creates reality more than it reflects reality. Um, and the kind of, again, vertiginous, confusing, upside down possibilities of a world in which that's true, like someone from Derrida creating deconstruction, where the thing you thought was at the center is actually not the center, it's the center of something else. I think Nathan Fielder is a structuralist in this way. Mm-hmm. Yeah. And he's, and this movie is an act of deconstruction, and I actually believe him that he doesn't fully understand what happened here. I think the movie would be more coherent if he did Frankly. And I think it would lead to a more, a clearer place. Yeah. Um, I think it's about that. I think Elizabeth Holmes' whole fixation on the word can is part of the same impulse, and I think our very human need to trust people while knowing that no one is really fundamentally trustworthy, but wanting everyone to be, is at stake. So, like, we're all kind of on trial here, too. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. Naomi Fry: I think another thing is that, as I often say, we are looking for a strong leader. Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm. Naomi Fry:Yeah. And Maybe I'm just speaking to myself, but I do think it's maybe a, a, kind of a broader cultural desire to- Have someone making work that is original and smart and daring in a way that somehow avoids or evades the culture wars. Mm-hmm. And so it's almost like it's not monoculture exactly, it's still kind of a re- relatively rarefied, you know, kind of A24-ish piece of work that, you know, it's, it's not Taylor Swift. Mm-hmm. You know? It's not, it's not Travis Kelce. But I do think there's a need for kind of like a shared, a shared language centered around someone who has a vision. Vinson Cunningham: Mm-hmm. Naomi Fry: I think I really agree with you, Alex. The sort of like handmade authenticity, trying to figure out nature of Fielder's work within the sort of like everything is fake, everything is double, it's a simulacrum, et cetera, et cetera. There's a real hunger for that. Like, show us possibilities in art, show us possibilities in culture that will make us think in a way that doesn't go into these rote grooves, algorithmic grooves that we're kind of like increasingly being, being shepherded into. Vinson Cunningham: Yeah. And, and it, it strikes me, too, just like as a sort of broader sort of maybe like, I don't know, industry point maybe that, yes, it is very surprising that this, you could call it a kind of art house documentary has- Mm-hmm uh, made, already made so much money at the box office, has- it's had a successful, uh, first weekend as we sit here. Yes, that's surprising, but on the other hand, it seems to me that documentary as a form has never been more popular thanks to streaming ser- services and stuff like that. I mean, there's a d- every day there's a new documentary. We've talked about true crime on this podcast. There's a way in which The Elizabeth Holmes story is a kind of true crime, and he's, and he's at least sort of skimming, like, on the surface of that genre as well here. Mm-hmm. Um, and there's a moment in the film where, this is a, I guess part of a reenactment, um, where they're having a conversation about whether, uh, Billy Evan should be paid for his engagement in the, in the film, and, and he's like, "You know, I know people have been paid for this kind of thing. You know, I know that because, you know, I, I've..." And he talks about Prince Naomi Fry: Ha- Because I know a lot of grifters and- Vinson Cunningham: Yeah, exactly. I know various- I'm like that Netflix doc- Yeah, I'm friends with- Made of Evelyn ... every scoundrel you can name. He's like, you know, "What about Prince Harry?" Yeah. And then they're like, and- That's hilarious the one time that the d- the, uh, director, um, Lance Oppenheim speaks up, his only speaking role is to be like, "That's not a real documentary." Like, a lot of the stuff that masquerades on, on, as reality on your streaming services is just a series of stagings and, you know, he's like explaining media literacy to this idiot, you know? Um, but we are increasingly surrounded by this kind of sponcon masquerading as reality. Naomi Fry: Yes. Mm-hmm. Vinson Cunningham: And so it does seem, you know, perhaps in that connection, um, interesting to have a figure that is, like, really interested in at least trying to get at a certain kind of reality.I think true crime is an interesting comparison because, of course, the promise of true crime is we're gonna take you through the details of something, and by the end you're gonna know what happened. And here, you start out with knowing what happened. You get maybe confused about it along the way, but then you get farther and farther from caring about that as the premise or the idea at all. It's more about people and how they are, and what the relationships are, and what they want from each other, and how they're positioned together, and, and all of that. It's a very different kind of reality exposure, and I think a lot of Nathan Fielder's work interacts with the idea of reality TV, um, and which we all know to be a version of reality mixed with a version of fiction. I think, um, you know, Billy Evans is a reality TV performer in this documentary. Mm-hmm. He has shaped himself to be that. Like, he's like a, he's like a WWE heel. Naomi Fry: Heel, yeah. Alex Schwartz: Yeah, like- Naomi Fry: He's like Jax Taylor- Alex Schwartz: Yeah, he's a W- ... from Naomi Fry: Vanderpump Rules. Alex Schwartz: He's a W- yeah, he's a WWE heel. He's just out there, you know, carrying a gun, saying crazy things, talking about Charlie Kirk in a complimentary fashion. Like, that's his role, and that's its own version of, of fake response to reality hunger. Mm. That maybe thinks it's sincere, and maybe becomes sincere, but begins as performance and then ends up as something else. So the loops are endless. The loops indeed are endless. Naomi Fry: This has been Critics at Large. We had assistance on this week's episode from Nora Ritchie. Rhiannon Corby is our senior producer. Our executive producer is Steven Valentino. Our show is mixed by Mike Kutchman, and we had engineering help today from Pran Bandy, with music by Alexis Cuadrado. Listeners, we'll be seeing some of you at our live taping of I Need a Critic at The New Yorker Festival this weekend. We're so excited for that, and for those of you who won't be there, you will be able to hear it on the pod next week. We've never done this series live before, so really anything could and will happen. And as always, you can find all of our episodes at newyorker.com/critics.​