There are a lot of things to question in You Can See Everything, the latest A24 release from directors Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim. One scene that definitely warrants scrutiny is when Elizabeth Holmes, the convicted felon who once led Theranos, brings out the infamous device that she used to scam so many people. Or at least, as an audience, we’re made to believe it’s the device.
Tyler Schultz, who was the whistleblower on Theranos all those years ago, spoke about the scene in one of the best movies of the year during an appearance on CBS Mornings this week. The former Theranos employee (and grandson of board member George Shultz) again called out Holmes for deception. And yes, there are some spoilers ahead.
It’s A Dramatic Scene
At one point in the movie, Fielder asks about the machine, and Holmes reveals to him that they have a deconstructed version of it in the house. She and Fielder pull out the machine, or at least the pieces of the machine, as it’s not assembled, and lay it on the table in front of them. It’s a crucial scene in the movie, as it leads to the conversation between Fielder and Holmes about the meaning of words.
Holmes insists she’s not lying when she says the machine “could” or “can” do what she claims, but Fielder (rightly) insists that it can’t. Holmes pushes back and makes the argument that the machine works, but the chemistry needed to make the tests accurate simply hasn’t been invented yet. It’s those kinds of misdirections and fabrications that got Holmes in trouble in the first place. Tyler Schultz isn’t having it.
Schultz Pulls No Punches In His Reaction
The machine itself looks nothing like the machine I remember. I thought maybe it was some kind of prototype of the original machine, one that hadn’t been featured in the documentaries or in literature put out by Theranos at the time. It turns out that it’s a completely “new” machine, not the one that was used in the scam. Schultz points that out in his interview with CBS:
My problem was that it was not the device that I worked with 12 hours a day. That was not the device that we hid from regulators. That was not the device that failed quality controls. That was not the device that we used to knowingly give patients incorrect medical information, and she completely misled him.
So I was right to trust myself (trust is a big part of the documentary as well) when I was watching, but Schultz is not done and continues to call Holmes out, as he sees it as yet another in a long list of lies coming from Holmes in the documentary. Schultz says:
That was, for me, like, the most frustrating part of the film. I actually started, like, talking at the screen. I almost, like, jumped out of my seat and screamed at Nathan through the screen.
Holmes, in Schultz’s eyes, is once again scamming people with this movie, and you can hear the disgust in his voice when he added:
The reason she went to prison was that the device that we actually used that was actually built was far more rudimentary, wildly inaccurate, and was not a standalone platform. It could only test for one thing at a time–not that it could do any tests. That ambiguity was removed from the device that was actually built.
Schultz has long been one of Holmes’ fiercest critics, so it’s not surprising to hear him react to the film the way he did. He is an important voice in all this, too. The movie, which has been a hit at the box office since it was released as part of the 2026 movie schedule last week, certainly doesn’t paint Holmes in a glowing light. But because Fielder and Oppenheim are not trying to retell the Theranos story, we must be reminded of what really happened in the case that landed Holmes and her co-conspirator in jail for more than a decade each.
