You Can See Everything theory claims Elizabeth Holmes ‘broke character’ in this ‘smoking gun’ moment

You Can See Everything has sparked plenty of debate about whether Elizabeth Holmes is showing her true self. But now, a new theory suggests one seemingly throwaway moment in the documentary is the “smoking gun” that gives the game away. 

Directed by Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim, the A24 film follows the disgraced Theranos founder in the weeks before she began serving an 11-year prison sentence for defrauding investors.

The filmmakers were given extraordinary access to Holmes, her partner Billy Evans and their children, spending 34 days documenting the family’s life at their California home before she went to prison in May 2023.

Amazingly, You Can See Everything’s second weekend in US theatres surpassed the first, earning a reported $19.5 million thanks to word of mouth and repeat viewings. 

Why? Because it’s not just about Holmes or the Theranos scandal. It’s also about the limitations of documentaries. Across its nearly three-hour runtime, the doc asks the question of whether it’s possible to separate the truth from the version of events someone wants us to see.

When it comes to Holmes herself, it’s hard to tell how much of what she’s saying is genuine. While this is deliberately left ambiguous in the film, one viewer has a theory based on a seemingly innocuous comment. 

The ‘smoking gun’ moment in You Can See Everything

Taking to TikTok, Emmy-winning TV writer and professor, who goes by Fitted Prof, pointed out a moment they believe is the “smoking gun” that suggests Holmes is in “complete control”. 

“The entire movie is sort of setting up this idea – Elizabeth Holmes’s mind is not normal, and that is what allows her to see the world in such a brilliant way, and that is what makes her uniquely talented to have this vision and to change the world,” they explained. 

“And they do that by insisting that she never lies, that she almost doesn’t know how to lie, and that she is so socially inept and she is so literal that she does not experience or understand sarcasm. She doesn’t understand the idea of crossed wires, and that’s why the whole ‘who’s on first’ bit is so important.”

But, they argue, the moment this changes is when she’s on the bed watching The Dropout – the show about her starring Amanda Seyfried – with Fielder. In the scene, Nathan asks Elizabeth, “Did that really happen?” And Holmes replies, “What do you think?”

Fitted Prof continues, “I’m sorry, I thought that this woman didn’t understand innuendo. The Elizabeth who she is pretending to be would’ve said ‘no’, and she would not have laughed.

“She wouldn’t have seen the joke. She wouldn’t have found it funny. She wouldn’t have asked him anything sarcastically. She would not have responded, ‘What do you think?’ That is the response of someone who is tapped in socially. You cannot respond with that sort of sarcasm if you don’t understand sarcasm.”

Fitted Prof believes this is when Holmes’ “mask slipped” and she “broke character”, by responding in the way others would. 

“She’s too focused on saving the world to understand the tiny little verbiage, and now she has this husband who’s able to be a human translator for her. But she messed up,” they added.  

“She forgot that she’s supposed to be playing this character who does not understand the concept of sarcasm, and she used sarcasm, and that is how we know. That is how we know that this entire thing is an act.”

Of course, this is just a theory rather than proof. And, as said, You Can See Everything purposely leaves her true self open to interpretation. 

But Fitted Prof isn’t the only person to have questioned how Holmes is portrayed in the film.

Theranos whistleblower reacts to the Elizabeth Holmes film

Tyler Shultz, a former Theranos employee who helped expose problems with the company’s blood-testing technology, has raised a separate concern about a scene involving one of its devices.

Writing for STAT, Shultz took issue with a scene in which Holmes demonstrates a Theranos blood-testing device to Fielder.

According to Shultz, the machine shown wasn’t the one used to test patients’ blood, but an unfinished device that never made it into clinical use. 

“During that scene, my wife had to squeeze my arm to prevent me from jumping out of my seat in the theater and screaming, ‘THAT IS NOT THE DEVICE,’” he wrote. 

“That was not the device I worked with 12 hours a day, not the device we hid from regulators, not the device that constantly failed quality controls, not the device we used to knowingly give patients inaccurate medical results. 

“The device she showed Fielder on the kitchen table was not the reason she went to prison. Elizabeth showed him a future version of the Theranos product that was never completed and never used.”

He added, “I wish I could have told director Nathan Fielder what I told [New York Times reporter] John Carreyrou when he started investigating her: Do not underestimate Elizabeth Holmes.”

And while Shultz said You Can See Everything is an entertaining piece of art, he argued “it’s dangerous to pretend that it is” a documentary.

For all the latest film and TV updates and hot takes, like our Facebook page.

Featured image credit: A24