I didn't even waste my time with the Odyssey and I am their target demographic, it just didn't seem interesting at all to me. Is what it is. This movie however absolutely screamed captivating from the one trailer I saw. Glad I wasn't offshore and was able to catch literally the first showing on "opening day".

Moe Jzyslak said:

---

Yes, but did he have really good grades?

---

Door City over here!

Glad I didn't follow this movie anywhere and the spoiler never made it to me. That was a really cool surprise.

The movie does NOT feel like it is nearly three hours long. It is incredibly captivating and you definitely end up with mixed emotions on who to "root" for, so to speak as the movie progresses.

Nathan has some absolutely hilarious lines and I don't feel like he was goading, as I think TC put it, Elizabeth and Billy, at least he didn't feel that way. He just seemed like he was very guarded and distrusting, which is the perfect way to be around these people, particularly Billy.

Came here specifically to see the first reviews. I have been vested in this story since before she was exposed, and I was sure she was a fraud from the first time I heard her story. The claims she was making about the blood analyzer machine simply aren't possible, and anyone with any knowledge of analytical chemistry would have called BS.

Bought my ticket for tomorrow morning at 1035.

No spoilers, but my only question is if the movie tries to paint EH in a sympathetic light. I really don't want to sit through 3 hours of image rehab. I immensely dislike the woman and want to keep it that way.

If there's any image rehab it's not due to that being the outright goal of fielder. If you have an ounce of empathy, you will feel for her though. You may also hate her more after viewing, or see her as a naive pawn of bad men. I think there are a lot of ways to view the info this movie provides.

Manni can't wait until more of y'all see this. I was so in to it and captivated that I found myself sitting forward in the seat with my head in my hands.

The movie is really really good.

TXTransplant said:

---

Came here specifically to see the first reviews. I have been vested in this story since before she was exposed, and I was sure she was a fraud from the first time I heard her story. The claims she was making about the blood analyzer machine simply aren't possible, and anyone with any knowledge of analytical chemistry would have called BS.

Bought my ticket for tomorrow morning at 1035.

No spoilers, but my only question is if the movie tries to paint EH in a sympathetic light. I really don't want to sit through 3 hours of image rehab. I immensely dislike the woman and want to keep it that way.

---

Nathan definitely doesn't WANT to paint her in a sympathetic light. He's openly leery of possibly being taken advantage of. But whether it does or not is up to your interpretation, and I'm curious to hear your thoughts about it after you see it tomorrow!

Just saw the Elizabeth Holmes/Nathan Fielder movie.

You know how in “Heat” De Niro and Pacino only appear together in the diner scene but it’s two apex predators in their prime facing off against each other? This movie is like that but for the apex autists in their field.

— This American Adam (@adamconner) October 16, 2026

I have no idea who the documentary filmmaker is, have never seen any of his stuff, although he seemed faintly familiar in the trailer. Do you have to be a fan of his stuff to"get" this movie? Seems like he might make it more about himself than Holmes?

We are thinking about seeing it on Sunday but the reviews almost seem like a cult of personality feel about the filmmaker.

He does not make it more about himself than Holmes, but he plays a large role in the documentary.

The movie is effing awesome, go see it. You almost certainly won't see anything like it again.

Also I like the ambiguity and tension about whether Nathan is getting swept up in her manipulation or isn't he. He clearly never falls for Billy's bs.

it's a well made film and I even appreciated the quality of the footage, maybe "the cinematography" is going too far but it looked nice. The close ups have to be a bit intentionally funny but they also work in the context of what I think they are trying to do.

I do feel it is just a film, though. I'm left with the same impression I get when I watch other Fielder creations - it's kinda entertaining but if a big piece of what makes it work for most is that they totally believe it's just a random creation in the moment, well.....it's not, imo. It's a crafted piece.

Fielder is just in a league of his own.

This was never termed as a "documentary"' by anyone at the studio, Fielder team, etc. It was only ever really described as something resembling a documentary other than "guys, we didn't make this up."

Which, that's a line to walk with Fielder, is it may be wild on some level initially, but like leads end to serious results later.

If you can name me anyone else who's doing anything even resembling that, on both a hilarious/legit manner, please do so.

Just saw it. Wow. Just wild and entertaining.

Sea Speed said:

---

Also I like the ambiguity and tension about whether Nathan is getting swept up in her manipulation or isn't he. He clearly never falls for Billy's bs.

---

Remember the "I love you" rehearsal from Nathan for You?

I genuinely can't wait to see this. There's a good article by John Carreyou in the NYT today with his take.

For someone who's not a fan of Fielder, has no interest in seeing this, but is mildly curious about this supposed twist y'all are taking about, what's the tldw? (In spoiler tags.)

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

For someone who's not a fan of Fielder, has no interest in seeing this, but is mildly curious about this supposed twist y'all are taking about, what's the tldw? (In spoiler tags.)

---

Amanda Seyfried comes in and the whole second half of the movie has her in it. She is shown Holmes reaction to her playing Holmes. She reenacts a bunch of scenes that weren't caught on camera and it culminates with her meeting Holmes husband and talking to Holmes on the phone. She gets in an argument with Holmes husband as well. She comes out looking bad in the film imo.

One thing I don't understand is how they both claim to be broke but could afford a beach front rental in del mar. Just saw on twitter that house has a $9mm zestimate on zillow lmao.

I need this to win something at the Oscar's to see Nathan give a speech

He actually seemed like a normal person in this

But good lord this was definitely weaponized autism just staring each other down

What I was not expecting was Billy. Guy was in his own world

Even knowing the test in advance it ended up being more
wild than I had imagined culminating that scene with the cell call

It is really true

Billy liking Charlie Kirk got a lot of groans in my theater. As someone who liked Charlie it was one of those "agreeing with the worst person you know". That scene was just so weird for him to double down on the person he was talking to and her views on Charlie

Saxsoon said:

---

Billy liking Charlie Kirk got a lot of groans in my theater. As someone who liked Charlie it was one of those "agreeing with the worst person you know". That scene was just so weird for him to double down on the person he was talking to and her views on Charlie

---

That whole interaction was insane.

That was wild. I had actually read about the "twist" yesterday in an online article but wasn't fully certain that was the twist. And there was more to the story that I didn't read and it did surprise me.

1) I dislike EH as much as I ever have. No sympathy or empathy from me. She is delusional. But I think I understand why she is so adamant she did nothing wrong.

2) I didn't think anyone could be more delusional than EH, but her husband says hold my beer. Also, he is a sociopath. He reveals this in the first 10-15 min.

3) The only person I feel a little sympathy for is EH's dad. But even that's limited because they've all been smelling each other's farts for too long.

4) It is better in a theater. There were only 2 tickets left when I bought mine. I could tell we were all really vested in the story.

5) If I didn't know the story, I would have thought this was a movie. That's the mind blowing part. It's almost too crazy to be believable!

6) I hope when she gets out these two fade into obscurity. I've seen enough.

7) The license plate. OMG. Just needs to be on a Tesla truck to complete the stereotype.

8) I wanna know who the crackpot "entrepreneur" BE was working with is. Just out of curiosity.

TXTransplant said:

---

That was wild. I had actually read about the "twist" yesterday in an online article but wasn't fully certain that was the twist. And there was more to the story that I didn't read and it did surprise me.

1) I dislike EH as much as I ever have. No sympathy or empathy from me. She is delusional. But I think I understand why she is so adamant she did nothing wrong.

2) I didn't think anyone could be more delusional than EH, but her husband says hold my beer. Also, he is a sociopath. He reveals this in the first 10-15 min.

3) The only person I feel a little sympathy for is EH's dad. But even that's limited because they've all been smelling each other's farts for too long.

4) It is better in a theater. There were only 2 tickets left when I bought mine. I could tell we were all really vested in the story.

5) If I didn't know the story, I would have thought this was a movie. That's the mind blowing part. It's almost too crazy to be believable!

6) I hope when she gets out these two fade into obscurity. I've seen enough.

7) The license plate. OMG. Just needs to be on a Tesla truck to complete the stereotype.

8) I wanna know who the crackpot "entrepreneur" BE was working with is. Just out of curiosity.

---

The audience lost it when he said he worked for Enron

Same in my showing

YOU CAN SEE EVERYTHING had a superb opening day, making $5.5M, on track for a $12-13M weekend.

It is the biggest domestic debut this century for a movie released in less than 1,000 locations. pic.twitter.com/TLOBPw8k9s

— Global Box Office (@GlobalBoxOffice) October 17, 2026

no one is talking about pamela handerson

— Kylie Robison (@kyliebytes) October 17, 2026

Sea Speed said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

For someone who's not a fan of Fielder, has no interest in seeing this, but is mildly curious about this supposed twist y'all are taking about, what's the tldw? (In spoiler tags.)

---

Amanda Seyfried comes in and the whole second half of the movie has her in it. She is shown Holmes reaction to her playing Holmes. She reenacts a bunch of scenes that weren't caught on camera and it culminates with her meeting Holmes husband and talking to Holmes on the phone. She gets in an argument with Holmes husband as well. She comes out looking bad in the film imo.

---

Curious why she comes off looking bad iyo.

https://t.co/cT9JVoVsfo

— Alex Kohut (@KohutAlex) October 17, 2026

am i crazy or https://t.co/9ZfnE3xxKA pic.twitter.com/Z2IRZCNx4J

— onion person (@CantEverDie) October 17, 2026

Elizabeth Holmes is an extraordinary person

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

was Nathan attracted to Billy?

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

could have been better

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

agree

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

because he saw that Nathan wasn’t trustworthy

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

and to show that Billy has a big dick

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

I can’t believe people use that as an example of Billy being abusive

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

I think he’s just awkward but because he speaks confidently and he’s attractive people think he’s sinister

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

that’s just your perception I just think he’s very direct

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

yes

— Khoee (@khoee) October 17, 2026

Texas: Fraud Alert pic.twitter.com/oAeAyxfoaB

— Top Tier (@TopTierStateX) October 17, 2026

ATM9000 said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

For someone who's not a fan of Fielder, has no interest in seeing this, but is mildly curious about this supposed twist y'all are taking about, what's the tldw? (In spoiler tags.)

---

Amanda Seyfried comes in and the whole second half of the movie has her in it. She is shown Holmes reaction to her playing Holmes. She reenacts a bunch of scenes that weren't caught on camera and it culminates with her meeting Holmes husband and talking to Holmes on the phone. She gets in an argument with Holmes husband as well. She comes out looking bad in the film imo.

---

Curious why she comes off looking bad iyo.

---

Her covering for the portrayal of holmes in that show and how they made stuff up, and saying essentially she wasn't actually playing Holmes, or something to that effect, culminating with "it's tv!". It wasn't a good look imo but I think a lot of that was also defense mechanism against Billy after being called out about Charlie Kirk.

She also seemed very wishy washy in her thoughts about Holmes as the film unfolded.

I agree with your take completely. And it's one of the big reasons why I said I would have thought this was a movie if I didn't know it was actually a true story.

I wouldn't say AS comes off bad as much as I would say she just looks like an actress who is way out of her league trying to be a detective/psychoanalyst. The whole time she was on screen I couldn't help but wonder if she was just playing another part. I give credit to the director, though. It's a creative approach to a documentary and part of why it blows your mind.

She is a completely unserious person and that comes out as it progresses. Agree with your take. Maybe bad was not the correct word.

Very much "I'm not a doctor but I play one on tv" vibe.

I did not watch the Hulu show. Had no desire to and thought it was completely unnecessary. I strongly dislike when things like this are sensationalized, particularly when the people involved are still alive.