A24’s 'You Can See Everything' Challenges Oscar Norms in Acting Category

A Genre-Defying Cinematic Experience

Since its clandestine debut at the Telluride Film Festival over Labor Day weekend, the documentary world has been abuzz with talk of Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim’s latest project, You Can See Everything. The three-hour deep dive into the life and legal saga of Elizabeth Holmes has transcended traditional documentary tropes, leading to a heated conversation regarding its potential for Academy Award recognition. While documentaries are a staple of the awards circuit, the film’s unique structure—which leans heavily into performative re-enactments and psychological portraiture—has placed it in a category all its own.

Fielder, known for his meta-commentary on the nature of reality in television, paired with the documentary-focused lens of Oppenheim to create a work that feels less like a traditional biography and more like a psychological thriller. By utilizing unconventional techniques to reconstruct the inner workings of Theranos, the filmmakers have invited audiences to question what constitutes a "performance" in the age of modern non-fiction cinema.

The Case for an Acting Nomination

Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the film’s Oscar campaign is the push for an acting nomination. In a traditional sense, documentaries are excluded from the acting categories at the Academy Awards. However, You Can See Everything features segments so deeply rooted in scripted-style performance and narrative reconstruction that industry insiders are beginning to argue for an exception.

Industry analysts point to the following elements that bolster the film's case:

• Methodological Realism: The subjects and participants engage in highly stylized recreations that mimic the emotional beats of a narrative drama.
• Blurred Boundaries: The filmmakers explicitly play with the audience's perception of truth, making it difficult to discern where the "documentary" ends and the "performance" begins.
• The Fielder Effect: Nathan Fielder’s signature style of social experimentation is woven so tightly into the narrative that the documentary functions as a high-concept character study rather than a straightforward chronicle of events.

Impact on the 2026 Awards Circuit

As the awards season approaches, A24 is positioning You Can See Everything as a frontrunner not just for Best Documentary Feature, but as a contender that deserves recognition for its technical and performative artistry. The Academy has historically been resistant to blurring the lines between documentary and narrative, but the sheer cultural impact of this film may force a re-evaluation of its bylaws.

Critics who have seen the film emphasize that the "acting" within the piece is not mere reenactment; it is a profound exploration of the persona Elizabeth Holmes cultivated during her rise and fall. If the Academy were to grant an acting nod to a documentary subject or performer, it would mark a seismic shift in how the industry categorizes film art.

Why Audiences Are Obsessed

Beyond the awards talk, the film’s success stems from its ability to turn a well-documented story into something entirely fresh. By focusing on the "how" and "why" of the Theranos scandal through a lens of surrealism and hyper-reality, Fielder and Oppenheim have captured a zeitgeist that traditional news-style documentaries have struggled to convey. The film invites viewers to look past the headlines and into the bizarre, uncomfortable reality of the Silicon Valley echo chamber.

Whether or not the Academy ultimately breaks with tradition to honor the film’s performances, You Can See Everything has already secured its place as one of the most significant pieces of media produced in 2026. It serves as a stark reminder that the tools of non-fiction filmmaking are evolving, and the audiences—along with the awards voters—are being asked to keep pace with a new era of cinematic storytelling.