THERE IS nothing more seductive(诱人的) than the idea of unfettered access(不受限制的接触权). When a subject is mysterious, slippery(难以捉摸的) and high-profile(备受瞩目的), it is even more enticing. The longer a person is in front of a camera, the likelier one is to spot an inconsistency or a lie, or feel resolved they have found out the truth.(一个人在镜头前待得越久，人们就越有可能发现其言行不一或谎言，或者确信自己已经查明了真相。) For truth-telling was surely the goal of Nathan Fielder, a Canadian film-maker and comedian, when he entered Elizabeth Holmes’s home for 34 days before she reported to federal prison in Texas in May 2023. She had been sentenced to more than 11 years for fraud(欺诈) and conspiracy(共谋) related to her blood-testing startup, Theranos(Theranos血液检测公司).
没有什么比不受限制的接触权更诱人了。当拍摄对象神秘莫测、难以捉摸又声名显赫时，这种诱惑就更加强烈。一个人在镜头前待得越久，人们就越有可能发现其言行不一或谎言，或者确信自己已经查明了真相。内森·菲尔德——加拿大电影制作人兼喜剧演员——在伊丽莎白·霍姆斯于2023年5月前往得克萨斯州联邦监狱报到之前，进入她家待了34天，其目标无疑就是揭露真相。霍姆斯因与其血液检测初创公司Theranos相关的欺诈和共谋罪，被判处超过11年监禁。
“You Can See Everything”, Mr Fielder’s documentary, is an enthralling(引人入胜的) display of the tension between observer and observed(观察者与被观察者之间的张力). (It opens in American cinemas on October 16th and in British ones in November.) Mr Fielder and his co-director, Lance Oppenheim, moved in with “Liz”—as well as her partner, Billy Evans, and their two young children—in their oceanfront(海滨的) cottage in San Diego. Subjects who throw open their door(敞开大门) would seem to have nothing to hide. But is their openness itself a disguise(伪装)? The documentary keeps viewers guessing—and riveted(被深深吸引的).
菲尔德的纪录片《你能看到一切》精彩地展现了观察者与被观察者之间的张力。（该片于10月16日在美国影院上映，11月在英国上映。）菲尔德与联合导演兰斯·奥本海姆搬进了“莉兹”——以及她的伴侣比利·埃文斯和两个年幼的孩子——位于圣迭戈的海滨小屋。那些敞开大门的拍摄对象似乎没有什么可隐瞒的。但他们的开放本身会不会就是一种伪装？这部纪录片让观众不断猜测——同时被深深吸引。
It is a film of two acts. In the first, viewers witness a brilliant and surreal(超现实的) sequence of intense and often uncomfortable scenes: Ms Holmes insisting that she has not once told a lie in her entire adult life, for example, and Mr Fielder quizzing Mr Evans on whether he has been scammed by Ms Holmes. Time and again Mr Fielder tries to pin his subject down(把拍摄对象问住) on matters big and small, such as whether Theranos’s device really could “perform any test” (she says she was misinterpret(误解)ed) or whether she understands the joke in a famous comedy routine (apparently not). Often she obfuscate(含糊其辞)s; her replies sound like the “Glomar” response the CIA(美国中央情报局) gives in testimony (neither denying nor confirming the existence of material).
这是一部两幕电影。第一幕中，观众目睹了一系列精彩而超现实、紧张且常常令人不适的场景：例如，霍姆斯坚称自己成年后从未说过一次谎；菲尔德追问埃文斯是否被霍姆斯骗过。菲尔德一次又一次地试图在大小事情上把拍摄对象问住，比如Theranos的设备是否真的能“进行任何检测”（她说自己被误解了），或者她是否理解某段著名喜剧桥段中的笑点（显然不理解）。她常常含糊其辞；她的回答听起来就像中情局在作证时给出的“格洛玛”回应（既不否认也不确认材料的存在）。