Academy Documentary Branch members respond to unconventional techniques
2 Oct 29 3:15 PM · 14d ago · 1 article · 2 posts · 3 comments · 3 sources · development 2 of 4
Members of the Academy's Documentary Branch weigh in on Fielder's approach, examining whether his methods align with or challenge documentary standards.
“it literally tells you throughout the movie as nathan grapples with her words and his own feelings. at the end it's revealed that he lied to us. it makes him an unreliable narrator.”
SaxRohmer, Reddit commenter · reddit ↗Nathan Fielder Filmmaker and subject
Lance Oppenheim Collaborator
Elizabeth Holmes Documentary subject
The whole story articlespostscomments the bright band is this development · numbered dots are the others · click one to jump
What was reported 1 claim about this development
-
first by IMDb, 14d ago
What people said 3 voices · verbatim
-
its not even a crazy interpretation lol. it literally tells you throughout the movie as nathan grapples with her words and his own feelings. at the end it’s revealed that he lied to us. it makes him an unreliable narrator. before the credits they point out Billy didn’t take the money, but they crucially do not mention if there was a conclusion to…
-
Nathan’s entire schtick is blurring the lines of reality. He’s literally always in character and pretty clearly hamming it up in the film. I use the term film bc I don’t think this is really a documentary. Everyone in the film is acting, it’s not real. The only portion of the movie when one of the major characters is being their genuine self is…
-
well yah it's not going to happen, that's why i said i want to see it instead of i look forwards to seeing it but also have you seen a compulsive liar cornered in a police interrogation? it's really funny
All 4 developments of Nathan Fielder's 'You Can See Everything' Sparks Debate… →
Google NewsMastodonReddit