In her article, Hannah Smith analyzes believability and subjectivity in Lance Oppenheim and Nathan Fielder’s You Can See Everything (2026) through a focus on camera work and dialogue. She argues that the questions their documentary asks are not ones of truth, but ones that hinge on belief—or disbelief—in the subject.

We often like to point out other people’s biases, but why don’t we examine our own? In the mercurial You Can See Everything, Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim explore this question through a mind-bending kaleidoscope of perspectives, semantics, and doubt. By the end, the most unsettling subject isn’t Elizabeth Holmes but the documentarian himself, and the audience, who, like Fielder, tend to hear exactly what we need to.