Transcript of NBA Power Poll 1.0, Plus a ‘You Can See Everything’ Breakdown With Wesley Morris

The Bill Simmons Podcast, brought to you by the Ringer Podcast Network, where we put up a new Rewatchables yesterday. We did it live on Netflix. We did A Nightmare on Elm Street, one of the best horror movies of all time. It was me and Van Lathan and Chris Ryan. Uh, we argued about whether it was the best horror movie of the '80s. Had an interesting result to that argument. Van tried to do a hottest take where he defended Freddy Krueger. That was interesting. Uh, really fun podcast all around. That wraps up Horror Movie Month. We did It Follows, Friday the 13th, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, and A Nightmare on Elm Street. I was gonna wait until after Brewers-Rays World Series Game 4 and then realize that not one person in my life has texted me about this World Series except for my buddy Chip Cain, who's a diehard Brewers fan. Um, I just— the Rays had a chance to make people care about this series, and then they shit the bed over the weekend. And we are where we are, and it's probably gonna be one of the least remembered World Series in a long time.

At least we have the WNBA to make fun of because the WNBA announced this week that Game 6 is going to be at 12:30 Eastern time in Atlanta because they couldn't figure out all the stadium stuff. The Hawks had games, the Warriors had games, and you know, it's not like they had time to figure this out because they just found out what the Finals was 2 weeks ago. Oh wait, we're They're supposed to have a bunch of contingencies. Atlanta was the 4 seed and they were completely blindsided that they were gonna make the finals. This is the dumbest thing that's probably, even for a league that has gone out of its way to seem stupid this entire year and has, I think, made 12 or 13 major decisions this year. And I've disagreed with all of the decisions, like literally all of them. This is a new low for them. They had a thing, they can't even simulcast Game 6, it's on USA, which is bad enough that they are showing any Finals games on USA, but it's on USA and then it's being simulcast. It used to be on CNBC for the primetime games, but the market's going on during the day.

So now it's on, I think, Syfy, Spike TV, the Playboy Channel. I don't know where it's being simulcast, but this is just a massive embarrassment. And The commissioner's already announced she's stepping down. Commissioner Cathy, who was singularly terrible down the stretch here. I think she should step down a second time. And I don't know who, who is going to be the next commissioner, but I promise they'll be better than Cathy Engelbert was. Just, I just can't believe how dumb this league is. People want to like this league. People— I don't even care about the finals anymore, and I've cared about this entire season. I've moved on. There's college football. There's NFL, there's NBA. They delayed it with the— with the FIBA. They delayed this final. It started 8 days after both teams had clinched, and we're still going, and they're just driving away their audience. Good luck to everybody. I just can't understand how everybody can be this incompetent. But anyway, good luck to Atlanta and Golden State in Game 6 at 9:30 AM Pacific time. Coming up, I am gonna do a power poll for the first week of the NBA season, and then we're gonna talk to Wesley Morris about You Can See Everything, the new Nathan Fielder movie.

about Elizabeth Holmes. That is next. We're gonna take a break. Pearl Jam, and then Power Poll next. This is the Bill Simmons Podcast presented by FanDuel. Make every NFL week more rewarding with FanDuel Rewards Club. You heard me. Just bet like you normally would, earn points on eligible settled bets, win or lose. Keep collecting points, level up, and unlock bigger rewards. So keep an eye on your Rewards Club progress and see what you can unlock. This is your most rewarding season ever, and it's with FanDuel. 21+ select states or 18+ DC or Wyoming. Game problem, call 1-800-GAMBLER, call 888-789-7777, or visit ccpg.org/chat in Connecticut.

God waits in trouble in my heart.

All right, my first Power Poll of the NBA season. We've only had a week. I'm gonna try not to overreact. We're recording this before Tuesday's games, and the only one that really matters to me for the purposes of the poll as Pistons-Knicks, 'cause I think there would've been lessons from that game. But just gonna have to work on what we had. Going from 30 to 1, separated in categories, and I'm gonna try to zip through this as fast as I possibly can and come up with like 1 or 2 takes on each team. First group is called the Dregs. It's always called the Dregs. And guess what? To nobody's surprise, Sacramento is there as the 30th ranked team. They're 0-3. I, of course, went to Kings Reddit this morning because it's one of the funniest places on the internet. And the top, if you do the hot, and that gives you like the hottest posts of the moment, the top post, it was somebody posting amen, just those 4 letters, to an embedded tweet. And the tweet read, when I die, bury me in my Sacramento Kings jersey so God knows I've already done my time in hell.

789 likes. So there's your Kings season so far. My favorite Kings fact, they're paying $49 million this year to Keegan Murray and DeAndre Hunter. $49 million combined. If you combine them and called them Keandre Murter, I guess you just call it Keandre Murter at this point. Keandre Murter. I think that's the worst contract in the league. 2 swing guys. I don't think either guy would play for the Celtics. And the Celtics aren't even one of the top 5 teams in the league. Kings, Acuff, kind of fun to watch from a league pass standpoint, but this is as grim as we thought it was gonna be. So they're 30. 29 is Brooklyn, 0-3, playing Boston tonight. I'm gonna flag this now. Michael Porter plays really well against the Celtics. Kind of worried about this game, but Brooklyn's where we thought they were gonna be. They'll trade Porter at some point. They'll start playing rookies. And the good news for them is Houston gets to swap picks with them. Oh no, that's terrible news. So they don't even have their first round pick technically. So we'll see what happens with them. This feels like a trade machine team to me.

28, Milwaukee, 1-3, won last night against Indiana without Zubac. I watched it. I watched basketball, was great last night. There was the, I gotta say the multi-view NBA.com or whatever the League Pass thing is called. They fixed the multi-view, so now it's just the 4 games, all just the 4 squares like in NFL. It's, it's wonderful. It's really great. I really appreciate it, NBA. It made up for all of your terrible co-running of the WNBA that you gave us a full multi-view. But I was watching all the games. There were some really good ones last night, and Milwaukee did beat Indiana. So Milwaukee has Miami's pick. Which I guess is the good news here with the way Miami's looked so far. The bad news, Gary Trent's just getting 0-minute games here. This is somebody who stopped playing over the course of last season, who did not look like a rotation player just in general. And then they gave him the $64 million deal that clearly was about as fishy as that place they always show in Seattle before. Seahawks games when they show the people throwing the fish. It was about as— that's where the contract should live.

They're gonna get punished. They're gonna lose a pick in this. I think everybody in the league is expecting them to lose their first-round pick. So we'll see if it has anything to do with this year's pick, because, um, I don't think they would take the Miami pick away, but they might take something away. So, uh, anyway, guess what? Nobody in Milwaukee cares. Like, Literally nobody. The Brewers are about to win the World Series. The Packers look like a playoff team. The Bucks traded Giannis. They got back a bunch of whatevers and some picks from a team that probably isn't that good. And nobody cares. And if you looked at the beginning last night, there was a great screenshot picture, a wide shot of them announcing the starting lineup. Tyler Harrow with the hammer. Unclear if he's the worst hammer guy of all the 30 home teams when they announce It's between, probably between him and Brooklyn. I didn't see who got the hammer with Brooklyn, but whatever it was, probably not the greatest choice ever. They showed the wide shot and there's just nobody at this game, and that's just gonna be the Bucs. So congratulations to them.

They won the title in 2021 and it's been really, really grim ever since. Number 27, Chicago. Watched them last night. Caleb looks like he's gonna be an easy 22-7 guy this season. probably on bad teams. That's really all that matters for them this year. I will say there was one thing I liked. Of course, I watched the Celtic game to the bitter end. The Celtics were up by like 40 the entire game. With like a minute to go, they got a steal and they threw it at Hugo and Hugo, sorry, sorry, Hugo. They threw it ahead to my guy Hugo, who was about to go up for a dunk. Caleb Wilson with the hard foul behind. And there was like 45 seconds left and then he angrily stalked off to the bench and I liked it. You know what? He's trying to set the tone in a 40-point blowout. But I, I appreciated that. I appreciated the competitiveness. I think they're in good shape with that dude. Number 26, Phoenix, 1-2. This was the only other team Reddit I went to. Suns Reddit. The top post was, this is gonna be a very long season, was the written thing.

And it was a meme of sad Ben Affleck. sadly smoking but wearing different Suns jerseys. So that's where the Suns mindset is. Eddie Johnson heard some of the announcing for this one last night and he was pretty appalled by the defense, by Booker's— I don't know what Booker was doing that game. He— Booker had a, I don't care if I'm traded kind of performance where he just really didn't shoot. And center situation's bad. Miles Bridges, Jalen Green, you just have 2 guys you can attack all the time now. Last, last year there was— they were much better, I thought, defensively than what we're looking at this year. And Booker not shooting is weird, and the vibes are weird. And guess what? They don't have their pick. It's going to Houston. So this is grim. We knew it was going to be grim because Ishbia traded basically all their first-rounders, but did make me wonder is I know Booker's contract is appalling and just gets worse, but it did make me wonder if there's something there with Booker and Bam. Trade Machine Bill did kick it around and, and, and study it, but that is a really a classic good trade for both teams.

Now you have Bam who would never ever leave Miami, allegedly. You have Booker who would never ever leave Phoenix, allegedly. But are both teams better if you make a trade like that? I would argue yes. Number 25, last team in the dregs is the Utah Mustard Juice. They are 1-3, and you're not gonna believe this, but Jaren Jackson's hurt already. He has played 13,000 career minutes. This is season number 9 for him. He has played 1,800-plus minutes 3 times. And if you're a Jazz fan, you are now entering the, the think zone here of we traded some stuff away for Jaren Jackson Jr., and then we got some stuff back for, for Kessler. Would I rather have just kept Kessler and not traded anything for Jaren Jackson Jr.? That's where my head would be at as a Utah fan. Peterson looks okay. He doesn't look busty. He's not jumping out of my TV either. He looks fine. He's a playable starting guard. Doesn't look as good as Boozer has. Didn't look even close to as good as Yaxel looked last night against Denver. I You might take Wilson over him too. I wouldn't say he's the top, one of the top 3 rookies I've watched.

But again, and I'm gonna say this only 4 times during this segment, it's only been a week. I am not overreacting. I am just pointing out what I've watched for the first 4, for the first 7 days. And he has not jumped outta the TV to me yet, but I'm gonna give it some time. Okay, next category, panic time. Only one team here, number 24, Miami. They're 0-4, and every single possible Heat fear that you would've had heading into this season has happened already. You have Deionis Bamfit has looked horrible. Bam looks like he has no idea what to do on offense. They're playing too fast for what their talent is. They bet on Klay, who has looked washed. He looked washed even though the, the percentages were okay for him last year. I thought he looked kind of washed last year. He looks worse this year. 3-point shooting in general for Miami, 30.6. Not where you want to be on a team with Giannis, who is not the easiest guy to play with. Let's be honest. You have to build the right kind of team around him. He needs a head of steam. He needs the ball all the time.

And we have not seen this worked out for 5 years, which was one of many reasons. why I was worried about the Celtics trading for him. They paid Wiggins, who hasn't looked good this year either. I've watched a ton of Heat this year for some reason. Wiggins might be a, we should have only paid him year by year guy. They gave him an extension, but he has not looked good. The Jović extension from last year was one of the dumbest extensions anyone's given in the last 5 years. It's been a disaster. He's unplayable. They traded too much of the depth in the Giannis deal. They don't really have any moves now. And I think the bigger issue, forget about how they started, 'cause they easily could have been 2-2 if they had some crunch time luck. I just wonder, 10 years ago you could get away with Giannis, with Giannis and Bam as your 2 guys, and you could put around some league average guys around them and probably win 50 games. I think the league's too deep now. I don't think you can do it. I don't think you do it with Booker and Phoenix either.

I think everybody, the regular season, you need, Depth. You need a team that's almost built like how the Celtics or even the Thunder, who've just lost 4 guys, withstood 2 massive injuries that we'll talk about in a second, but still have enough talent to at least be able to put basketball players out there. I don't know a team like this. I, I went over on them before the season 'cause I thought defensively, I thought they'd be really good and they haven't been. And maybe that's how they get back in this. I think they're gonna have to play bigger. I think they're gonna have to play Portis more, and in general, maybe bully ball this a little bit versus play the style that they used last year. And I wouldn't bet against them figuring out, figuring this out. With that said, this is as bad as it could get. They are -110 to make the playoffs on FanDuel. So basically even odds. And when you think about how deep the East is and how Charlotte started out better than we thought, I think they're behind the 8-ball already. So we'll see how this, next 2 or 3 weeks goes.

But this might be one of those things, by, by December they might just decide this didn't work and their first-round picks go into Milwaukee. So, um, this, this is— this team's about as on the clock as we get for the non-playoff teams right now. Okay, next category, hot messes. I don't necessarily hate what I'm watching, but I also feel like it's a little messy. Number 23, the Clippers. Not a disaster. So that's a bonus. And Kawhi's already hurt. So if you're a Clipper fan, you feel good about that too. You got a Toronto swap that you got in that trade. Garland looks great. Garland looks great. Now we'll see if he stays healthy the whole year, but he looks great. They're hitting a bunch of 3s, which can go up and down. There's been a lot of Brook Lopez so far. That would be a red flag. for me. And Rui hasn't really shot the ball well. But in general, this, when you watch them, especially that when Niederhäuser will come back at some point, but it's a team that doesn't not make sense. So maybe they're not gonna be as bad as we thought.

Now they don't have their own first-round pick, but they do have that Toronto pick. So in a weird way they can, I don't know what the plan is with this team. The energy around the team, not great. The fact that Kawhi is not kicking ass on Toronto probably makes us feel a little bit better. But I have them in the hot mess category. I have New Orleans in there as well. Number 22, 0-3 on the season. They lost 3 games in the clutch. They blew an incredible game to Denver on Saturday night where they had the game, blew it 9 times. They're 0-3 in the clutch this year, headed probably for 0-70. They had the dopiest roster situation in the league. Just this, just threw some talent together with no rhyme or reason for how it might work. And then they hired Jamal Mosley to, to, to try to figure it out. I wrote down, it's like when the inventor of the bagel, egg, and cheese sandwich was like, what could make this better? What if I put some bacon in this? And then they took a bite and it was like, this is delicious.

This is the opposite with Jamal Mosley trying to figure out this New Orleans roster. He's buried Herb Jones already, which I don't understand at all because it's not like this team's getting stops defensively. The funniest thing to me though, Zion Williamson, who looks pretty explosive offensively, looks skinnier. I can't say he looks like a guy on the way out of the league, except he has 9 total rebounds this year. And Jeremiah Fears, who I think is like 6'1, who plays point guard, also has 9 rebounds. And I think this is gonna be a subplot for the season. Zion rebounds versus Fears rebounds, 9 to 9 right now. Not a good sign for the Pelicans. They are not a playoff team. Golden State, I was convinced before last night, I have them number 21, they're 1 and 3. I was convinced before last night that this was one of the 5 worst teams in the league and maybe one of the, one of the 3 worst. And the moment Steph got hurt, this was gonna be beyond grim. That leads me to my first overreaction after one week. Overreaction number one, Yaxel might have single-handedly saved the, saved the Steph era.

Like for real. And I can't tell you how good he was in this Denver game last night. I watched the entire game. Now I was watching 3 games at once, but I watched the entire game. Yaxel looked like mid-2010s LeBron in this game. I don't say that lightly cuz mid-2010s LeBron was awesome. He was doing it. They were running the offense through him. He was all over the place on defense. He was rebounding, he was initiating stuff. He was getting in the basket whenever he— it was unbelievable. I couldn't believe it. I couldn't believe how good he was. I don't know what this team does long-term because they have Draymond, $27 million expiring. They have whatever's going on with Porzingis at $20 million and could put those 2 together for something if they wanted. Yeah. And I keep looking at Sabonis and Sacramento and wondering if they flip those 2 for, uh, Sabonis and threw in some conditional pick and Sacramento got out of the last year of Sabonis's deal, could this team get really interesting when Butler comes back? I was done with them. Yaxel sucked me back in. So there you go. I have them 21.

And then 20 is Orlando. They're 1-2. Suggs is out. Paolo is out. I didn't feel great about this team to begin with from the way they started this season. And really the big takeaway is this team will not look the same in February. Something will happen. There will be some trade. I don't know who it is. I don't know if it's gonna be Paolo. I don't know if it's gonna be Suggs when he comes back. Franz. I, something's gonna happen with this team. Okay. Next category, possible panic time. Only one team in here, Denver, 1-2. Obviously my favorite Western Conference team, as you know, and they need Cam Johnson back. They can't shoot right now. They're 30% on 3 all season. If they're not making 3s, they're not gonna be a 50-win team. They have 2 realities here that are happening. And if you watch the first 3 games, they got killed in at least one half of all 3 games and really should have lost all 3. They should have lost the New Orleans game. that they, they won the New Orleans game because Brazil had an out-of-control game off the bench and because New Orleans is a stupid basketball team.

That's why they won. There's 2 realities though. Post-prime Aaron Gordon is here. 2023 champ, great career. I think he's moving into a different phase, which is fine. The bigger concern is post-prime Joker might be here. And there's a lot of chatter and there's social media stuff and all kinds of things about, is this guy 100% anymore physically? Is he the same since he had that injury last year? The game doesn't look as easy for him this season. And I don't know if he's nursing some sort of injury that he's not telling us about, or if this is just wear and tear from having to do everything. for basically a decade. It doesn't look as easy for him. It's, it seems like it's harder to get his position. It seems like it's, it's harder for him to get the plays and shots that he either wants for himself or somebody else. Everything is just a little bit more of a chore. It feels closer now. The worst version of Joker was always those Minnesota playoff series where they would just wear him down, but doesn't have his legs on his threes. And just in general seems like he's laboring a little bit and I'm concerned.

But again, it's week 1 and he might be fine a week from now. I'm just pointing out what I've watched this first week. Next category, proof of life. I got Washington at 2-2 as the 18th best team. Yeah, I have 'em ahead of Denver. No AJ yet. They've still been pretty fun. Trae Young just can't really shoot anymore. It doesn't matter. He gets his points, he gets to the free throw line, he gets assists. He, any, any, remember that there was that stretch where it was like, this guy's gonna be the next Steph. Steph actually made 3s, but he has been putting up stats. He's competitive. He gets hunted on defense and it's fine. AD has looked, I think, really good. And as long as he stays healthy, I think this is a 35 to 37 win team. I would trade him literally tomorrow. I would, I would trade him right now. I would be offering him to Golden State every day. Because as long as he's healthy and you watch how he's running around, how he's moving, how he's looking, you trade him now before he gets hurt. They have 2 future playoff guys, in my opinion, and I haven't seen AJ yet 'cause he hasn't played, but I think Kyshawn George could absolutely be a wing on a really good playoff team.

And I think Trey Johnson, you could see it. He could be a heat check scorer on the right kind of contender. So they have those 2 spots. Whatever with Trae, I guess they keep AD. I don't know about Sar. Sar doesn't shoot or make 3s anymore, so we don't know what's going on there. And then we see what happens with AJ, but at least, at least we're moving in a positive direction. Congratulations, Joe House. Portland 2-0. They only have 2-game sample size. They beat Sacramento and Phoenix, so hard to say. They're playing the Lakers later tonight. 2 short takeaways. Dame looks great. Like, he really looks good offensively. He's shooting again. He has his lift and You know, once again, it goes back to Milwaukee doing that crazy Myles Turner move last year where they just could have had Dame as an expiring on a big deal this year and a lot more flexibility with that than how paying him $22 million a year for the rest of eternity. John Morant also looks fine. He's not John Morant anymore. He's not 2021 John Morant, but he's at least competitive. He's talking shit. He's got a little swagger to him.

$42 million this year, expiring next year. They didn't give up anything. It's fine. But, uh, need to see them more. But it's as weird of a team as we expected. All kinds of combinations. Jrue Holiday's still playing 23, 24 minutes a game for this team. Scoot's in there. You never kind of— it's like a hockey team. You never kind of know who's out there. But, uh, I'm intrigued by them. Number 17. Number 16, Dallas. 2-2. It's time for overreaction number 2 of my one week of watching basketball. Cooper Flagg looks absolutely spectacular. Absolutely spectacular. This is holy shit level. And my overreaction would be, I'm not sure it's possible for him to be on an under .500 team anymore. I actually think you have to recalibrate Dallas, I think their over-under was 33 wins, something like that. I can't remember if I went over-under, but it was a hard one. He's a top 15 to 20 guy in the league now. He does whatever he wants offensively. He can go full speed left or full speed right already, get to the rim and finish at age 19, which basically LeBron is the only other guy I've ever seen be able to do that at that age.

He's unstoppable, he's competitive, he does everything you'd want, and it feels like he went up a level from last year. Yeah. So you have that, you have Kyrie looks okay, and you have this weird crunch time swing group of— they gotta figure out somebody from Max Christie, Reese Shachay, Morenz Johnson, one of these guys. They need one of those guys to be able to make 3s. But there's pieces here, and if they're in a game in the last 5 minutes and they have Kyrie and Flag, they have 2 guys who can get whatever shot they want. Kyrie, again, like, need— hasn't looked totally like Kyrie yet, but Let's, let's see what it looks like a month from now. But this team's better than I thought it was gonna be, and it's 'cause of Fleck. Number 15, Charlotte, 3-1. You know who's really good? Naz Reid. Yeah. You know who else is really good? Brandon Miller had the best game of his, his probably NBA career yesterday and looked like a Paul Pierce, Jayson Tatum, Jaylen Brown level. Like, this is gonna be an All-NBA guy. I don't know if that's gonna last, but that's how we looked last night.

They're only shooting 30% from 3. They're 3-1. They've had no Con, no Kobe. Those guys don't come back for, I think, at least one more week. It's been a lot of Dennis Schroeder, like a lot, like a, like a lot of Dennis Schroeder, especially at the end of these games. And yet, my biggest fear with them and the reason I thought I, there were 11 possible playoff teams in the East. I thought they were gonna be the one to drop out 'cause I thought they were gonna get hammered. in this little stretch here, and they're 3-1. If they can stay .500 until White and Khan are playing, playing normal minutes again, combined with what Grayson Allen's been giving them, uh, Schroeder in there, and, you know, Naz Reid, Steinbach, I think it's a playoff team. They're +155 to make the playoffs on FanDuel, and from what I've seen, they look like a playoff team. So They're holding the fort. Last team on this list is Memphis. They're 4-0. This was one of the ones I felt the most passionate about in the month leading up to the season that I thought they were gonna be better than people thought.

And nothing has surprised me here. I'm not victory lapping 'cause I was wrong on some stuff too, but this was the one I really felt good about 'cause you knew Boozer was gonna be good right away. You knew Beef Stew was gonna be fun for them. You knew Cowherd was gonna be good. You knew when Eady plays, That's gonna be good. Nobody understood what was gonna happen with Ty Jerome here the first week of this season. So we'll see if it lasts with him, but just not surprised by this one. This team had the right look and vibe, and I thought one of my biggest bets was them to be a play-in team. They might even be a whiff better than that if they can get a full season from, season from E.D. and Boozer. Getting him 3rd was a miracle. It really was like, you shouldn't be able to get a guy like that 3rd. And the reason they did was because the top 4 in this draft was so good. But that's just incredible to get that guy 3rd. That guy is a real— he's initiating stuff, he's rebounding, he's competitive, he's got, he's got it all.

I love Cam Boozer. So there you go. That's the top 14. We're gonna take a break and then I'm gonna rip through the, the top 13 teams right after this. The Bill Simmons Podcast is brought to you by FanDuel. The NBA action just got even better with FanDuel because this Wednesday with Early Win, a fast start could be all you need to win big. Pick an eligible NBA game, apply the token, bet the money line. If your team jumps out to a 7-point lead at any point, you win instantly. That's right. You don't even have to wait till the final buzzer. Check out Early Win on eligible NBA games in the FanDuel app. Just another reason why this is your most rewarding season ever on FanDuel. 21+ select states or 18+ DC or Wyoming. Restrictions apply. See terms at sportsbook.fanduel.com. Game problem, call 1-800-GAMBLER or call 888-789- 1-800-829-7777 or visit ccpg.org/chat in Connecticut. This episode is brought to you by Uber Eats. This week, buy a 4-piece signature chicken from Popeyes, Joe Hass's favorite, get another one free on Uber Eats. When your watch party gets hungry, order in, keep everyone's attention where it matters, on the game.

Order a 4-piece signature chicken from Popeyes and get another one free. My Sunday football one, I always try to go a little healthier. Uh, on Sunday, I don't try to do this all the time because I got the podcast on Sunday night. I want to be live. I want my brain to be working. So I'm a big salad and soup, always trying to get like— maybe I'll get a little chicken nuggets or something. But for the most part, that's my Sunday. Other people are different. Other people get wings, pizza, whatever. But that's the thing about Uber Eats. You can get whatever you want. Basically whatever game day calls for. You can get almost, almost anything on Uber Eats with deals every week. Uber Eats, official on-demand food delivery partner. Of the NFL. Order now. For alcohol, you must be of legal drinking age. Please enjoy responsibly. Product availability varies by region. See app for details. All right, 13 teams left in the Power Poll. We are going to move to the next category, which is the Contender Crock-Pot. These teams aren't contenders, but they're on the crock pot, like when you're making a beef stew— sorry, Dabundo— and the stew is just percolating And you don't know how good it's gonna be yet.

And you keep tasting and it's like, nah, it doesn't— but it's just gonna, has to simmer for a lot longer. 13 is Atlanta, 2-2. I just need to watch them more. I, the rebounding seems to be the big question mark where they're, you know, they have Jacque Landale and, and obviously Okongwu as the centers. And are they gonna be able to rebound against good teams? What's somebody like Duran gonna do against them? Yeah. But athletically, you know, they look like they did last year. They're able to hang with all these different teams. The Houston game was interesting last night 'cause Houston just had a little too much for them, and it, it felt like there was a talent disparity between the 2 teams. The what-if with this team is if they had taken Yaxel instead of Flemings, what this team would've looked like and how he would've fit in with this. I was fine with the Flemings pick. I'm not, I'm not second-guessing it. It's just when you see how good Yaxel is. Yeah. Especially at age 24. That would've been a fun one. Number 12, Indiana, 2-2, feeling it out. Crunch time 5, hasn't had enough reps yet.

And Zubac got hurt in the first quarter of the third game against, I think it was Brooklyn. So this is a classic. Make no assumptions. Have no takes on this team for a month. Just wait. Let's see the crunch time 5. Let's see them get some reps. The one thing I will say, Ty looks great. Ty and Siakam, their pick and roll is still, I think, one of the 6 or 7 best plays in the league. And this team, I still think, is a 50-win team. Number 11, Toronto, 2-1, and Kawhi's already hurt with the knee swelling. He's made it 52 minutes. Will he get to 1,200 this year? 1,500? What would you If you had to bet your life, what would you bet? I'd, I don't think I would bet my life on any number of minutes with Kawhi's knee. I wish I could play Karma Police by Radiohead right now because, um, it just seems a little bit fitting that he destroyed the Clippers and went to Toronto and made it 2 games. But for them, the reason I have them 11th still, even with Kawhi out, is because I think this allows them to unleash Murray-Boyles and Graves.

And I mentioned Graves before the year. I just really like him, and I like Murray-Boyles even more. And I do feel like they can establish some sort of identity with the young guys while Kawhi's out. So we'll see what happens. Number 10, the Dennis Green division for they were who we thought they were. This is where I had the Lakers 3-0 playing tonight. We'll see if this is the best it ever gets for Laker fans because they have Kessler who's healthy. They have Luka and Reaves averaging 61 a game combined, which is even higher than, like, your highest Shaq and Kobe season. They have Luka with a 42.3% usage rate through 3 games, which would break the record. The record was 2017 Russ at 41.65, which was the biggest ball hog season of my lifetime, other than maybe 2006 Kobe. 2006 Kobe was more justified. But 42.3. And, uh, all the overs for Luka look great. He was 34 points a game, I think was around even. 36 points a game was like almost 3-to-1. I, I think he'd get to 36 points a game if this is how they're going to use him. Number 9, I have the Knicks of New York, who I saw in person on Friday night.

Sal and I talked about this a little on Sunday. I'm not gonna overreact. If they get killed by Detroit later tonight, then maybe it's time to start overreacting and wondering what's going on. But this is— you knew this was gonna happen. Everybody was so selfless last year. They win the title, they climb the mountain. Now it's the next year. Now, Guy, it's the disease of more, combined with the fact that the bullseye is on them night after night. Even when they played in Boston, the game I went to on Friday night, it was a close game down the stretch. I waited for Brunson to take over. Boston was able to take him out. The Knicks took a couple bad shots. Tatum made a couple really, really tough shots. Boston wins. I didn't think less of the Knicks. It's just kind of what happens. It was a way more important win for Boston because they need to get over the hump with that team. The only thing I would say with the Knicks that I think you have to flag, I do wonder about the Dolan stuff with this team, the behind-the-scenes stuff with the organization, the phishing email that came out last week, some of the stuff with the rings, just the fact that he actually got the title.

How is he gonna behave? What's the environment gonna be like? How long do Leon Rose and Worldwide West, how long do they wanna stay? Do they have extensions? Are you locking them down longer? And if this team shifts more to the Dolan side, is there gonna be collateral damage with that? So I'm just watching that one. Okay, the contenders. I have 5, and I'm putting them in alphabetical order because I couldn't decide what the order is. So alphabetical order, Boston, 2-1. I'm gonna give you one note on each of these 5 contenders. Boston, Paul George, 30 minutes a game, 50% from 3, and they're playing Brooklyn tonight, so those numbers will probably be even better if he plays. Can they get a full year of what I've watched in the preseason and the regular season from him? Because what I've seen is somebody who fits in absolutely perfect with the Mazzulla style, with Tatum. He doesn't care if he has the ball that much. He's just there to help out. He's at the perfect point in his career. Defensively, he is way better than I was expecting at age 36. Watching some of the stuff he did in the Knicks game in person, His ability to guard different guys, different heights.

He could guard Brunson. You know, he was defending Towns at one point. Like, if you're gonna just basically take last year's team, put Tatum in the Jaylen spot, and then add somebody who is just a selfless, I don't care, I'm just here to help type of guy, this is the type of guy you'd want. And it seems like he loves it there. The team loves him. The franchise loves him. So, The trade's been a home run. And I keep thinking back to when I came out of the Kolonoski and found out they got Paul George and how bummed out I was. I've really enjoyed watching him. Can they get 65 games out of him would be my question. Can they get— he's playing basically 30 minutes a game. Can they get 1,800 minutes from him? And can those 1,800 minutes look like what they've looked like in the preseason and this first week would be my question. FYI, the Tatum-Brown stuff is ridiculous and I hate it. And I just wish it would go away. I think it's stupid. I think it's beneath both of those guys. They won a title together. Just stop talking.

Cleveland is my next team. They're 2-1. I watched them play Minnesota last night, which was about as entertaining as you're gonna get in October for a basketball game on League Pass. It was just an absolute delight to watch. It was really, really fun. My big question for them, can Peyton Watson actually be their 5th guy? They paid him like it. They traded stuff for him. They're taking the tax hit for him. Offensively, he looks lost so far. And this is my fear. I mentioned this before the season. So you get somebody basically off this 19-game sample when Jokic wasn't out there, when he had the ball all the time for Denver and the offense is running through him and he looked really good. Okay. Now I'm on Cleveland. Mitchell and Harden have the ball all the time. How do I fit in over on the side? in this situation was my big question. And right now he looks lost. He's 2-for-14 from 3. And the defense has been good, the energy, all that stuff from what I've seen. But that's the thing to watch. Again, it's not an overreaction. It's just we've watched a week and this is not what they paid for so far.

Detroit, 3-0, playing the Knicks tonight. 15.7 made 3s a game, 42%. Is that real? Duncan Robinson's averaging almost 20 points a game. He's never come close to that his entire career. Javonte Green's banking 3s. John Collins is shooting 50% from 3s. Is any of this real, or is this just a hot week? We'll keep watching. Duren's out for 2 weeks. But yeah, I thought that was— I think I said this on the pod, did the over-unders with Zach and House, and like a week later, I think the ones I would've flipped were Detroit and Miami. And I didn't. I'm gonna live with my picks. But Detroit, the home court advantage they have, plus Cade, plus how hard they play every night, I think it's really hard for them not to be in the high 40s unless they have major injuries. So there's Detroit. Minnesota, 3-1. Big question for me. Is this Ant's MVP season? Are we looking at it? He's right now at 33.3 a game. He's shooting 26 times a game, 37.6 usage, all kinds of swagger, going toe-to-toe with everybody. And you could say it's partly because they made some chemistry moves and he's having fun playing with LaMelo.

LaMelo— LaMelo's playing 25 minutes a game. He has 25 turnovers and 25 assists. He's taken 32 3s and 17 2s. I can't say LaMelo's been even good for Minnesota so far, but Ant's been great and obviously loves playing with LaMelo. So maybe that, that's the win in that. But I thought LaMelo against the Cavs last night was really unimpressive, and he's just too sloppy with the ball soon. But that's kind of the vibe that they want, and Ant feeds into it. He's +650 for MVP right now, and I think he's the best bet. If his, if his, uh, if his knee holds up, which seems fine so far. But he's on a mission, and this team's gonna be probably a 4 or 5 seed, so he's in the range. I would say him and Luka would probably be the 2 bets. Luka's like +450 on FanDuel. I'm not allowed to bet on this, but from what I've seen in the first week, I feel like Ant went up a slight level, and it feels like we're headed for a career year with him. So, uh, more shots for him too. It's a team that makes more sense.

It was interesting down the stretch against Cleveland, especially in the OT. They basically played the 4 guards on swings with Gobert, which we were wondering, is that gonna be their destiny in these crunch-time games? And that's what they did. Gobert didn't end up making— getting the big rebound down the stretch and whatever. Philadelphia, 3-1. There's only one ques— well, there's 2 questions, 'cause one would be, can LeBron at age 42 hold up? What happens to this team when Embiid goes down? 'Cause he will go down, 'cause he goes down every year. They have Adam Bona at center, and they have LeBron at center, and that's basically what they're going with. So if Embiid's gone for a month, what happens to this team? How do they play? How small can they go? How much can they put on LeBron? How much can Maxey and Brown and BJ Edgecombe kind of carry? with Embiid not playing for a month or more, and then LeBron being unable to play 4 times in a week 'cause he's 42 years old in December? That would be my question. But we have so much time to talk about Philly. I— when Philly dials it up and plays their fast, fun lineup, when they're just like, we're running on every— on everything, it's about as fun of a team to watch in the league.

So there you go. Last group, the contenders. I put San Antonio 3rd. They're 1-2. I did not like how they started this season. I thought the 3-guard lineup is the kind of thing that makes me not trust their coach. It's just stupid. Like, the whole thing you had to do this year was get Harper to buy in for one more year to be in the 6th man, and instead they did this, uh, but we're only gonna play this 3-guard minutes for 3-guard lineup for 9 minutes a game, and it's not We're not really doing it, but it just looks like you caved because you wanted all 3 guys to start and you didn't want the locker room issues, and I didn't like it. Bring Harper off the bench. He's 20 years old. He's fine. He'll be fine. It's been good for Fox, who's looked good this year, and they don't have Tobias Harris yet, so you could say when Tobias comes back, maybe now you do the 2 guards with Tobias and bring Harper off the bench. It's fine. 32% from 3. Predictable. Wemby, 37% field goal. Not ideal, but we've only played 3 games.

The big question for me, the scrutiny over the course of the next couple months here, the spotlight. They're not the young and fun Spurs anymore. They're not coming out of nowhere. They're not on that rollercoaster ride up. Now we're going down a little bit. Now we have some twists and turns. Now you're the lead segment on different ESPN shows and different basketball podcasts. And you have just people picking you apart and wondering what's going on with you all the time. How are they gonna handle that? They're being treated like they won the Finals last year, even though they didn't. But with that kind of scrutiny, which they just never had until February, March last year. And in February, March last year, it was all about, oh my God, they're so much fun. Wow. This is the other side of it. How you deal with the backlash— and it's not just basketball, it's any other aspect of being a public figure— how you deal with the backlash after you've had some success determines the next phase of your success. And that's what I wanna see from this team. Thompson blocking Wemby at the buzzer on Friday night was a moment.

It really was. It was a moment for Houston, which we'll get to in a second. And it was also an interesting moment for San Antonio. It was— people were rooting for Thompson to stuff Wemby in that moment. Last year, they would've rooted for Wemby to stuff it On Thompson. And this is the kind of shit that happens when you've had real scrutiny and you've had some failure. So how are they gonna deal with it? And is Mitch Johnson the right guy to deal with it? That would be my overreaction number 2 after 1 week and 3 games. Is Mitch Johnson the right guy for everything that's about to happen with this team and the scrutiny that they're gonna be under for the next 8 months? Number 2, Oklahoma City. They're 4-0, and on Saturday, I was looking at the odds for them for 65 wins, 70 wins. 70 wins was down to, I think, like +130 on FanDuel at one point. That's how good they looked. They were just killing everybody and they had the look. It looked like everything that happened to them last year, which was bad, culminating in them not winning Game 7, was the best thing that could happen to them this season.

J Dub looked incredible. The team, Maura looked like so much better than you ever could have expected from the 12th pick in the draft. And then they had the most devastating, I think, 24 hours in recent NBA history where they have, not only did they lose J Dub to just a brutal, awful Gordon Hayward type injury, but then we learned that they lose Wallace too. And Wallace, this, Torn labrum happened early enough in the season that maybe you could see him in April, May. But this was somebody that with, with J-Dub out, you would've assumed, oh, well, Kayson Wallace will play more. So he's gone too. So you lose 2 of your best 5. They're not gonna win 70 games now. And it's the kind of adversity that you just feel the whole season. It, it just changes. Watched it happen with the Hayward season with Boston. It just changes the complexion of this season. It adds like this sadness to it that just, it's like this little black cloud that follows you everywhere you go. Not to mention, this is now 2 straight major injuries for Williams. This one's way more major than last year, but, you know, now he's basically lost 2 years of his career here.

He's only 25 years old. At least like there's some fibula tibia stuff that he has, the better version of that leg fracture. Hayward had the worst version. Maybe he could come back in April, May, I don't know. It was about as fluky of an injury as you can get. And for this team, this is the bigger point here. Something I wrote about in my book, something we talk about on this podcast a bunch of times. It's just really hard to win the title. And I say this as simplistically as I could possibly say it. You need so many things to go right. You really do. Look at the Knicks last year. Everybody stayed healthy the whole stretch when they had to stay healthy, right? Everything came together. And that's part of winning, winning the title is things come together. Guys lift each other up. You need good luck with injuries. You need guys at the right points of their career. And it felt like OKC had that this year. And now it's flipped the other way where this is now a what-if team. I don't think they have enough now. And what's harder for them is there's not really a trade.

You know, when Sal and I talked about this on Sunday night right after it happened, and I mentioned how it was hard because they have big salaries and small salaries and nothing in between. There's tax stuff with them. They have a trade exception. You know, could they give up one of the— they still have some good picks left. Could they give up one of them for somebody like Herb Jones? Sure. Could they get a little more aggressive and maybe use the Hartenstein contract and some other stuff to go get a bigger one? Maybe. But my guess is they're probably gonna bet on their young guys and bet on all these guys, all these picks they've stockpiled, guys who barely played. Let's throw them out once and for all. Let's give everybody minutes. Let's try to tread water and still be a top 3 team in the West and see where we are early February, right before trade deadline, and then make a decision then. and not before then. But maybe they just decide, we're gonna get at least Wallace back in April, May, and nobody's probably gonna pull away from us. And that's how they handle it.

Presti is not a panic guy. The only time I ever remember him really kind of panicking was that last KD season before KD went to the Warriors, when they made that— it was like the Dion Waiters trade. They went over the tax for the first time and they just seemed like, oh shit, we gotta do stuff. How can we add to this? And that was the only time he wasn't patient and careful and calculated. So I think he's gonna be patient, careful, calculated. Big question for me with this team. Hey, Chet Holmgren, you're on a max on your second contract. You've made an All-NBA team. And right now you are clearly the second best guy on this team. You are going to have to go up a level. SJ, I'm not worried about, but we're gonna need Chet to be, I think, like a, at least a 20 and 8 or 20 and 9 guy, right? To take up some of this. But really a bummer. I loved watching OKC that first week. This was, this was really sucked. And then everybody comes on the pods and the TV shows and they're just like, oh man, prayers up for J Dub.

Like, I just hate all of it. I hate injuries. Fuck injuries. I don't understand why we're having more of them. The J Dub was more of a fluke. I do feel like there's stuff to look at with the sneakers for some of these other injuries we're having. And the fact that we have all these low tops and now we're having all these injuries below the knee. And I, something's fishy about all of it. It can't just be the wear and tear on basketball being harder. I wonder if the technology, because guys love the ability to do Eurosteps and do all these other things. I wonder if the technology is actually working against them in some cases. I'd love to read a huge study on this. Anyway, I have OKC number 2, and then Houston, a team that I tweeted about during the weekend saying they had the look. It was an old Mike Lombardi phrase about when teams have the look, when you're just like, man, that team looks like they could, they think they can win the title. Houston has the look. Sengun went up a tiny level. He's basically 25, 9, and 7.

The team chemistry seems way better. I don't think we can overstate the weird burner scandal with KD last year, combined with the fact that they lost VanVleet, and it just seemed like a rudderless team. Like, you look at VanVleet and Smart, it's not even like they're playing that well. Like, they're certainly not shooting well. They're shooting 27% combined from 3, but the vibe When you watch it, this seems like a connected team. Thompson went up a level. Jabari Smith definitely went up a level. And it's a team that's played with each other for a while now. They've had a little adversity. VanVleet's hugely important to them. And it feels like a team to me that thinks they can win the title. That's what I've seen so far. So what's their move would be my big question. Because they have— they can swap a first with Brooklyn after this season. So that's gonna be a really good pick. They have the Phoenix first in 2027, next year. If you know, Phoenix has been bad. Those are 2 pretty juicy assets. So what would the move be? And what does this team need? Because if you're trading either of those things, I want somebody who can play at the end of games, right?

Yeah. So right now I'm looking at VanVleet, I'm looking at Jabari, KD, Sengun, and either Easton or Smart. as my 5. So if I'm trading one of those assets, I want somebody basically who's either a better point guard than VanVleet, who I think's the leader of this team and I wouldn't trade him, or somebody who could be in that Eason smart spot. And maybe Eason is the answer. Maybe it's Eason and a pick. But what they do with that, that'll be what determines their destiny. They are 19-to-1 to win the title. They had the 8th best odds on FanDuel. And I think they're absolutely, I have this group, I called this group the contenders too, but I guess this is the favorites, I should have said. San Antonio, OKC, and Houston. I think right now these are the 3 best bets to win the title. Now, this could change in a week, in a month. I'm just saying right now. Houston, 8th best odds on FanDuel. I don't agree with that at all. I think this team is as good as anybody else in the league. And it's a really interesting moment for KD. Yeah.

who comes in the league in '07, who really hasn't had a relevant playoff moment since the 2019 playoffs when he was, I thought, the best player in the world until he got hurt. He went to a— that was apex KD. He went to another level, really, that down the stretch and then that first playoff series before he got hurt. And really hasn't gotten back there since. since. And now he's, you know, headed toward his 20th season. Is this his 20th season? Jesus. And still looks really good and still can get shots, you know, in the spot— gets his shots in the spots that he wants them. And, uh, I don't know, this team has the look. I don't know what to tell you, but this is what we get after, after only watching a week of basketball. This is the team that's jumped out to me the most. I think they're a legitimate contender. So there you go. That's my power poll. 30 through 1. It'll be interesting to see when we do this in a couple weeks how different some of these, uh, some of these rankings will be. So that's it for the Power Poll.

We're gonna take a break and come back and talk to Wesley Morris about You Can See Everything after this. FanDuel has a new NBA promo called Hardwood Hero this Friday. I like these goofy names they're giving out. All you have to do is opt in, use a 50% PBT— that's a Profit Boost Token— On any NBA bet, -200 or longer, if anyone that evening scores 40+ points, you win your PBT. We've had Edwards, Ty Jerome, Luka, Jaylen Brown scored 40. Luka's playing Golden State that night. That is the easy one. Just do Luka. Go Luka against any not elite defensive team. I would go 40 for him. Remember, you don't have to bet a 40-piece. All you have to do is place a -200 or longer wager. on the NBA slate, and any player who scores 40+, everyone wins. Check it out this Friday. FanDuel, your most rewarding season ever. I think October, November 1994, I saw Hoop Dreams at the Coolidge Corner Theater in Brookline, Massachusetts, and it was the best documentary I'd ever seen in person. Last Friday, Took the T because I was visiting my, my daughter. What? Took the T to the Coolidge Corner Theater and saw it at 11:30 AM.

You can see everything. Uh, first time I deliberately avoided everything written and said about the movie. I didn't know what was going to happen. I had a great time. So I've seen 2 of the best documentaries of my life in the same theater. I'll just start there. I knew you would enjoy that.

Oh my God, you did double Coolidge for the great documentary experiences of your life. I, I'm very touched by that. I'm sure the Coolidge people are very touched by that.

Great theater. It's a nonprofit theater. They rely on funds from everybody. Uh, Wesley Morris is here. He used to work for the Boston Globe and probably saw some movies in that theater. Now he's at the New York Times.

Any movie at the Coolidge. You know what I saw at the Coolidge Corner? Like Like memorably, unmemorably. Um, I believe that is where I got shown, um, The Human Centipede.

Oh no.

Now the Coolidge is probably gonna send me an email saying there was no way you saw that there, but I feel like that's where I saw it. Like they— it was, it was just like a critic screening. Like I think I was the only person in the theater.

Well, listen, I'm there Friday, 11:30, and it's, it's pretty nice out. You know, for Boston, it's 60 in October, the sun's out, and the place was half full. I was impressed for this documentary that got very little promotion. It's become a phenomenon. It's become— for a documentary to hit the point where everybody in my life has been like, have you seen it yet? What are your thoughts? I'm sure it's been the same for you. It's pretty rare to get these.

It's the only thing anybody wants to talk about. I mean, it's funny, there's the midterms,

right?

And it's funny, the other thing, if you live in New York, I mean, this is a pretty national thing, and I'm going to try to figure out a way to make it relate to— so you can see everything. But in New York, the big thing, did you read this-wise, was this piece that Nikole Hannah-Jones had written about sending her daughter Like her daughter asking her why she sent her to the schools that she went to. That was like a— that felt like a national firestorm.

Jesus.

And then, uh, but then this documentary opens, and I just feel like this is a very interesting moment for reading, reading and reading comprehension, or like watching and watching comprehension, um, because we really I don't know about the people in your life, but everybody wants to talk about what is going on in this movie and what it means. And did you— how do you feel about the people in the movie? And I don't know, that feels exciting too, where you're like, we're really trying to get to the bottom of what this movie was trying to get to the bottom of.

So you have one of the great liars of the last 20 years, Elizabeth Holmes. just a pathological liar. Let's start there.

Wow, Bill. Okay.

She is. No,

I mean, I'm not arguing that.

I'm amazed that people fell for her act in this movie because we have all this evidence from the past that this is an act.

This is great. This is great.

And she is clearly trying to steer the narrative a different way so people feel bad for her and use words like neurodivergent to explain how she processes stuff. And she's a pathological liar. And this is how she got the Theranos thing. I watched the Amanda Seyfried show. I saw the Gibney documentary. I followed all this stuff when it happens 'cause I thought it was really interesting. And I, and I thought she was so manipulative and so good at lying that she was one of the great liars we've ever had. And now you have Nathan Fielder, who is a performance guy first and foremost, who just wants weirdos with a canvas that he can just paint on. basically on his weirdo canvas. And he obviously becomes fascinated by this lady. It's like, how can somebody to the bitter end be this much of a liar? I wonder if I could just spend time with her and see if she's actually lying or if there's more there. And then it becomes this cat and mouse game and turns into heat. This is Pacino and De Niro. They're at the fucking diner table for 3 hours, 2 hours.

Months at a time.

She's like, I was having coffee with Elizabeth Holmes half an hour ago. This becomes heat. He's just trying to figure out what her next score is going to be, and she's trying to figure out, oh, shit, this guy's on to every move I have. It was like watching 2 boxers circle each other in the ring, and Holmes is like, oh, God, he knows my jab's coming. Oh, he's ready for my hook. I'm just going to be dumber and dumber in this movie and hope maybe that's my move. And then, by the way, it didn't work.

Okay. It just didn't work. I love this read of this movie. I love the impossible to get around. She has all the control. And, well, obviously Lance Oppenheim, the director, and Nathan Fielder, the co-director and ostensible subject, co-subject. There is this sort of fight for control. And what I have been, like, made to understand is that the way that she controls is to pretend that she doesn't have any.

Yeah. It's like, oh, my controlling, domineering boyfriend/husband, whatever. He's doing everything. Come on.

Yeah.

Are people really buying this?

I did. I bought it. I fell for that. I think this movie is operating in stages, right? I think that you see it a couple of times and your mind begins to change. I feel like—

Well, you know why? Because she has a very trusting face and she keeps eye contact for abnormally long times. And usually when people do that, you assume that they're truthful. Her human cues match somebody who is truthful. And it's like this complete fucking magician act.

Mm-hmm. I think that, you know, as a, you know, bringing somebody in— so, you know, there's a world in which, like, she knows everything about Nathan Fielder, right? Um, you know, she and Billy Evans, her— it's funny that you don't want to say husband either, because I don't feel comfortable with that word. I think legally, I think they're married, but he just is like perpetually— he seems like a boyfriend, right?

He's like the guy in a TV show that it's like the rich sister in the dynasty family ends up with the Billy Evans. They're like, I don't trust this guy. What's he up to?

He's the Kardashians the Kardashians don't trust.

Yeah,

right. Like, he's that boyfriend. Anyway, There's a world in which, like, she knows everything about Nathan's project.

Oh, no. I'm worried you got sucked in by her.

No, I think that I'm— well, I mean, I did. Okay, here's the thing.

Because my wife got sucked in. That's why I'm concerned. My wife was like, I feel bad for her. And I'm like, you've got to read some of the 2014, '15, '16 stuff. This is a person who knows what she's doing.

And, you know, it's funny because at some point Nathan does present to her like a partial list of the things that she has said and done over the course of the life of this, of this, um, right, this Theranos project. And you're like, oh yeah, that's right, she did do— she is reported to have done and has been convicted of doing several of these things. Um, I think what I got tricked by is good filmmaking, right? I, I think that one of the, one of the excitements of this movie is a person that I, I, Wesley, had no feelings about at all. Like, I didn't care about this case. I did not care about this woman. She was yet another one of these Silicon Valley fraudsters.

Yeah.

She arrives at the same time as the WeWork guy, um, Sam Bankman-Fried. Uh, there's another guy that I'm not even remembering. And like,

you could throw in Zuckerberg too, as, as people who twist the truth.

Yes. But there, with those other 3 people, there is a legal dimension, right? These were 3 guys. These are 3 people who wound up being revolted against, um, because of their, because of the fraud that they tried to perpetuate. And I just kind of got a little sickened by the cultural interest in these people as main characters. And I think, you know, I listened to the podcast, uh, the, the, um, and I list— I, I did not watch the Alex Gibney documentary, um, because I just was full at that point. But then this movie shows up and my, my feelings about it I don't know, they don't change. But I'm like, okay, Nathan Fielder has found this woman. There'll be something— something interesting is going to happen here because somehow he managed to get into her life.

So you cared less about the Theranos stuff than the cat-and-mouse game of the documentary was the thing that got you?

Oh yeah, for sure, for sure. But I mean, I think I went in knowing How important— I mean, she's going to prison already. We know this.

For 11 years.

Right. This is not— this is not an attempt to, like, exonerate her. But what's interesting is, and this is the— this is the sort of tug of war of the— I don't know, the sort of ethical tension in this movie is you find out at some point that she and Billy are at it again. Like, they're going to do Theranos 2: Electric Boogaloo.

Yeah.

And so I'm like, wait, so what lesson got—

It's going to work, though.

Well, I mean, okay, so this is what I'm really dying to ask you, like, like, related to what I'm thinking about and the journey that I've been on and the thing that I was interested in, which is, you know, the thing that this— that we're all kind of sitting with is like, how much are we thinking about what's true and what's real?

Who's sitting with that? What do you mean? How does somebody know anything about the past and then go into this going, I don't know, maybe— like, to me, here, here's my take. To me, this is Nathan Fielder, whose whole career is built to some— has been building to something like this, right?

Yes.

This is somebody that first he took a real interest in weirdo people that he threw himself into and created weird business things with. Then he does the rehearsal, the first episode of the rehearsal, which was unbelievable, where he just completely goes over the top to throw into this whole teaching somebody how to be, like, part of this bar trivia thing, right?

Yeah.

It's all leading for him to try to figure out, is this person a liar or not? I think she is, but I want to dive into it. Dives into it. She has already decided to the bitter end, I'm going to pretend I'm a dope who doesn't know any better, and I'm being controlled by whoever I was with. And I just don't know how this happened. And I'm just not that smart of a person. And I don't get what Who's on First is. I don't— what was funny about that? I don't get. And she's committed to the bit to the bitter end. Nathan Fielder's whole comedy bit is I commit to the bit till the bitter end. Committing to the bit. So now it's a fucking death match between these two to see who can win until she goes away. And by the time she goes away, I feel like she won. I felt like he was kind of— I don't know how much she played up for the documentary or not, but I felt like he was kind of in love with her, that she was a victim.

Okay.

That there might have been— she might have been taken advantage of, that she might not be a liar. And then he, in the second part of the documentary, when Amanda Seyfried comes in, And he starts fixating on, did she know or not that they were getting paid? When the answer is clearly, obviously, yes.

Yes.

She knew she was getting paid. And that becomes it. And then he slowly eventually realizes that she's a liar at the end. And that's the end of the movie. But then he shows them at the end on the beach when he's— we never know if he's on the beach with her. It's mentioned. He's like, I can't do that. And then at the end, he shows them on the beach, which I think is his way of saying, Even I got a little duped by this lady. I went in the water with her, but now I know what she's about.

But again, like, I think that the genius of this movie is that it works on the level that you're coming at it from, right? It works as a—

Which is a comedy.

A com— well, also, but, but a kind of, um, I'm gonna use this term and I'm sorry that I'm doing it, but it's the thing that came to mind first. It's almost like a dialectic between people who's special, like a person who specializes in lying and another person who specializes in the performance of lying, right?

Yeah.

And what happens when these 2 people come together to spend time trying to— he's trying to figure her out, and she is kind of enjoying the game that he's trying to play with her. And she knows that there's no way that she's going to crack. I don't even know what cracking looks like for her at this point.

She knows the whole time, I will never, ever admit anything. I am going to play dumb until I go to jail.

But this movie is also— it's a movie, right? And it's a movie that, like, the way we're talking about it, just describing her not cracking, you know who I thought of? Catherine Tramell.

And I mean, honestly, that's the perfect analogy. We still don't know if she was going to murder Michael Douglas at the end of the movie.

We don't know. We don't know.

Would I be dumb enough to, if I was going to kill my boyfriend, to write about it in a book and say I was going to kill him before I killed him? Nobody would be that crazy.

Kathryn Trammell. So I think that that's what came up. And I think that, you know, you think about Hitchcock with this movie, you think about, you know, an entire history of vérité moviemaking. You think about the priorities of improv comedy here. I mean, there's just so much to think about. But then there is just the fact that the thing works as a movie.

Well, so that's my question. Big picture, is this a movie or a documentary? And

this documentary is a movie. You mean like a feature? Is it like, how do we think about where to put this on the video shelf?

I'm going to sidetrack us. So mark where you are and we'll come back to it because this is going to be a sidetrack. To me, the more fascinating, the most fascinating thing out of all this with this movie, to me, was that it flipped what has happened with documentaries for the last 15 years, which I've made a few in my day. Something that was happening behind the scenes with documentaries that I don't even think the average person realized what was happening, which is they weren't authentic anymore. And most of the people, especially like in the sports ones or movies, or if you had sliced alone doc on Netflix, whatever it is, the subjects are getting paid to be in them. Yeah. or they're getting an EP fee, or their production company is getting—

Their name is somewhere in the credits.

They are somehow getting a check from it. And it forever changed how we made documentaries, because once these became things that could establish production companies and give them value, once they became things that could make money and get awards, this wasn't Hoop Dreams anymore. You know, if you did Hoop Dreams now in 2026,

those guys,

Arthur Agee and Henry Gates— what was the— no, Henry I can't remember. William Gates.

Yeah.

William Gates, Arthur Agee, they would've probably gotten 10% of the profits each, right? There's the only way they're participating. So when my wife is talking like, I saw this documentary and like, do you think she got paid or not? And I'm like, the way people do documentaries now, she absolutely should have gotten paid. So A24 is just gonna make all the money from this? The only reason they were able to make the movie was because these people give them the time. And it was interesting that this became one of the cruxes of the movie. It's like, oh my God, they wanted money out of this? Like, look the fuck around. This is the documentary business now. This is the world everyone has chosen. People get paid to be in these things, and I don't think they're documentaries anymore. I think we need a new name for them. They're like docufilms or something. They're not documentaries.

They're selfies. I mean, they're selfies.

They're selfie-mentaries.

I think— but, you know, that— well, I love that you're identifying this, and I don't know if we're going to get back to wherever I was trying to go.

No, we will. I'm going to steer you back.

But, but I— but what I love— I want to sit here for a second because I think that what you've got here is a kind of serious old-school relationship to nonfiction filmmaking, which is gone. New industrial model, which is Fuck you, pay me. And I want control over the depiction of myself. I want to be a stakeholder financially and editorially in the direction of this project,

or

you don't get

to make it. I remember when this changed for 30 for 30, and I think I've talked about this before. I had this Orlando Magic idea I wanted to do about how Shaq and Penny fell apart in Orlando. Had this huge pitch. The NBA didn't wanna do it because, you know, and they had to greenlight all the NBA stuff. They didn't wanna do it because it was basically a small market team that blew up and the star went to a big market. They didn't wanna do it. I was pushing for it. I was like, this is a great idea. We gotta do this. This is the best what-if team of the '90s. Finally convinced them to do it. And what happens? Shaq and Penny don't wanna be in it unless they're EPs.

Hmm.

And we're going, well, we don't, These are documentaries. That's not normally how we do stuff like this. It wasn't gonna happen. Guess what happens? Shaq and Penny become EPs. The first shot of the documentary is them getting together with this inauthentic, oh, we're still buddies. And it's like, I don't know if they were still buddies, but they're pointing the camera. And I remember thinking to myself, this feels like a moment. I feel like documentaries are shifting right now into something different. Yeah. Where I'm not sure what we're capturing is actually what is the right thing to be capturing. And it's been the case with documentaries ever since.

Well, I think it's the thing that makes— I mean, what you're identifying is what— I mean, I've been calling this movie a culturally destabilizing event. And part of its cultural— part of what's destabilizing about it is that there was a before, and everything— feels like so much that is happening in the wake of this movie is going to change because of it. I think it's going to feel strange for subjects to even broach the conversation that Billy is kind of performing, having with Nathan and the A24 team.

Yeah.

Behind Elizabeth, out of earshot, of Elizabeth Holmes,

who clearly went away and it was planned and she went upstairs. And the way they reenacted it was absolutely what happened.

Yes. And I think that the movie's cynicism about the selfie— the selfification of, of, you know, nonfiction portrait filmmaking is kind of— I mean, it's a little bit what, what killed— what got Ezra Edelman's Prince documentary killed.

A little bit. It's what got Ezra Edelman's Prince documentary killed, point blank.

I think that there's a real fear of complicated storytelling about people. And I think when you ask whether or not I— like, how could I fall for this? Or like, did I fall for this? I fell for it because What I'm really interested in here is the questions that it raises about— and I think this is true for all of us— I think there's a real desperation to kind of understand each other. And no matter where on the video store shelf you wind up putting this movie, what you are watching is one of the great works I've ever seen about relationships. And,

well, and one of the great— whether we call it a documentary or whatever it is, it's on the shortlist of all time now, I think.

Yeah.

Because what's really great about it, I knew— again, I knew nothing. The movie just could have ended when she went to jail.

I agree.

And it would have been awesome.

I agree.

I've been like, wow.

So wait, sorry, you— it— she goes to prison and you're like, what? You know there's 90 more minutes?

Yeah, I'm like, I honestly didn't know. When I say that I avoided everything, I avoided everything. So she goes to prison, and I'm like, where are we going? And then I was like, wow, this movie doesn't get out for another hour and 20 minutes. What's happening? And then Amanda shows up, and it becomes a completely different movie. And it's one of the most riveting First of all, when does somebody just come into a movie with more than half of the movie done and completely take it over? It's like the all-time Dion Waiters.

I was going to say, this is the heat check of all time.

It's unbelievable. And by the end of the movie, I'm like, I have, like every other guy watches this film, has a huge crush on her. I have to completely reevaluate every movie she's ever been in that I've seen. This is one of the most fascinating celebrities we have.

That is a really interesting phenomenon that's going to happen as a result of this movie.

And she fits into the rest of the movie. It's like she's another one. I don't know what's real and what's not real because we have Nathan talking about, I just went through a breakup, and it's clearly like he's putting himself into this. And he doesn't really put himself into a lot of stuff that way, but he's putting his stuff in the movie. And then she comes in and it's like, is she acting? Is she really that interested in this? Does she feel bad about being in the TV movie? Then when she gets mad at Billy Evans, which is the best scene in the movie, when all of a sudden it just starts escalating and it's like an actual real argument that you never get, I just could not have been more compelled.

Yeah. I mean, I will say I knew this was going to happen going into it the first time I saw it. And I still— like, nothing can prepare you for the depths, because I thought she just was in it to reenact, right, some stuff, right? I just, I just assumed she'd be doing some cute Nathan Fielder-oriented things. But this is much, uh, you know, she's a therapist, she is a BFF, she is like the, the, the per— the best of the person in a romantic comedy who is like, this girl is bad news.

But then you're also rooting for them. Maybe it's like, maybe these two have a chance,

right?

Maybe Nathan— maybe Nathan's a little sweet on Amanda. Maybe this is how it's gonna end, with them together. I was prepared for anything at the 2-hour mark.

And Amanda Seyfried is also the— The best example of what acting is good for. And I don't mean because her acting is so great, but I mean, I just— you rarely get to watch a movie about an actor, a good actor, where you're thinking about, like, what the value of the art form even— like, what the value of the art form, why we love acting, why we love going to the movies, what it is that an actor is doing for us when they play these real-life people.

But beyond that, the skill of sliding into a person.

Yes.

And becoming a different person. And this is somebody who was a child actress who is just clearly good at it. And she's like sliding in between, oh, I think that's what the real Amanda is like. And then she's acting, and then she becomes Elizabeth Holmes in the reenactment, and then she's back to being Amanda again. I'm like, this is fucking incredible. watching what Meryl Streep's process is or something.

But I mean, again, like, like the process of, of acting, but also the sort of morality of playing a living person, of playing a, like, a problematic living person, a living person who's been convicted of crimes.

Which she didn't feel like she had really 100% come to grips with. It was like, yeah, you, you, you took advantage of this situation like everybody else did. You were able to get an Emmy out of playing this disgraced character. And don't act like there's not a little blood on your hands.

I mean, and I think that she was willing to be punished for that. Right. I think that we don't know where the truth begins and ends in so many areas of this film, but at some point, I think Amanda Amanda Seyfried shows up to— agrees because I think that she feels— I think she might feel like there was both more to say and something to atone for somehow. I don't know. I don't know.

Well, by the way, she's an actress, and she realizes it's smart for her to be in this.

Does she? I mean—

I think she does. I think she obviously knew what Nathan's work was, and she was like, this is going to be good.

Do you think that she knew that this was going to be the movie of the year?

She got to watch the first half of it.

That's fair.

That's how they got her to do it. That's how they got her to do it.

I mean, we watch the first half, we see her watching the footage.

So she's like, I'm in, how can I help? Because she, she's smart enough to realize, like, holy shit, this story is still going.

I mean, I love the cynics on this movie. This— I mean, this is the most cynicism-proof but cynicism-absorbent movie I've ever seen. It can handle all your skepticism and, like, just real, real industry, your industrial real talk. Um, I don't know, I just love how indestructible and elastic and, and, um, absorbent this thing is.

Well, and also the tricks that it plays on you and I and every other person who's watching this, where you're on the roller coaster ride of understanding how people could have gotten snookered by this lady. It makes After 2 and a half hours of it, it makes sense to me. It's like, I get it. I get it. She bats her eyelashes. She seems super smart.

Does she? She doesn't even blink.

Oh, yeah. She does the opposite of batting her eyelashes. Just stares you down, has that low voice. There's something that you want to protect about her as you spend time with her. You're like, oh, man, I feel bad. You don't even know why you feel bad for her. And she can cry on command and make it seem like it's the first time something's gotten to her, but she can basically do it whenever she wants.

She's the actor. She's as good an actor as Amanda Seyfried.

100%.

100%.

And then she has this Billy Evans who she knows is kind of a scumbag.

We got to talk about Billy.

Well, the one thing I did know was that I was going to see his crank at some point in the movie because My wife came home and was like, there's a penis in this movie. I was like, what's going on? Don't tell me more. But yeah, but he's—

There's a very important penis in this movie. It's important.

So I read a lot of the news kind of stuff about this after, and somebody wrote a whole piece about the penis and how he's like, they kept coming home from the gym, him and Lance, the director, and he's like, I had a shower. He's like, you can film me showering, and leaves the door open. And you'd be like, film you naked showering? He's like, yeah, I don't care. For some reason, he wanted to do it, which fits into the premise of you can see everything, I guess. But just to do that is so bizarre.

Yeah, yeah.

Like, bizarre.

I think that— but in the world of the movie, it really works because what we see, we're not looking at Lance Oppenheim officially looking at Billy Evans showering. We're seeing Nathan see Billy showering, right?

Right.

And so there is this— there is the creation of a tension, of a jealousy from Nathan to Billy.

The throuple dynamic is looming.

Yeah, but I mean, I also think that there's a world in which we're watching a Blank from Hell movie. Right.

Well, it starts with that one shot early on when Nathan's just watching through the window with that crazy look. It does seem like Rebecca De Mornay in Hand That Rocks the Cradle standing outside the house deciding whether she wants to go in.

I do think that, like, the part— like, he clearly— I think that it's interesting to me that you are— I mean, you can correct me if I'm wrong— you're sincerely wondering if Nathan got took by Elizabeth Holmes?

No, because that's the point of Nathan. I am wondering, but with Nathan, everything's on the table at all times. You'll never know. He's basically a magician with this shit. So he's putting in there stuff that he wants me to either think or question at all times. This is what he does. This is why he's the best. But the whole time I'm like, is he falling in love with this lady? And they have that long scene near the end when they're on the couch. And they're just staring at each other about as long as you can possibly stare at somebody without starting to make out. And same thing at the end when they say goodbye in the car, when they're standing like this. And at that point, like, if I had to bet—

Oh, they're, they're up there almost. They're— I mean, that's—

Yeah, that's like 2 people that are about to fuck.

Yeah.

So yeah, if I had to bet, was Nathan sweet on this woman by the end of the first half of the filming, yes or no? I would bet yes. I think he got taken by her.

And you

knew the whole time that she was a liar.

Yeah, but is it like, you're my people?

But this is Basic Instinct. This goes back to your Basic Instinct thing. This is like Michael Douglas's character going, I should fucking run in the opposite direction of this lady, but there's a fucking magic to this. I'm alive. My blood's boiling. I'm ready for this.

In Basic Instinct, She knows, right? Catherine Tramell understands. What does she say? You like the heat, Nikki? You like the fire or something like that?

Yeah.

I mean, it's—

Well, she says at the end, I'm almost done with my book. That means you have to go. Which is basically what Elizabeth Holmes— I'm almost about to go to jail, which means you have to go. It's not like she's going to see this guy

again. But he does Not give up.

No.

And I feel like this is— I mean, you know, Bill, this is like a film noir. You know, the femme fatale goes to prison and the dupe is trying to, like, if not get her out, then at least— This is Body Heat.

Yeah.

Oh, there we go. Yeah.

Yeah.

This is like— this is— this is like just film noir territory. There is. But there's also something about him as a character that I think is really compelling because he wants to get to the bottom of her, but he also— he kind of can't believe that what is happening is happening. He knows every single thing that she did. He is fully prepared with the legal case against this woman, the moral case against this woman. Yeah. And yet, I think that the effectiveness of the project for us as viewers who had our questions about whether it was possible that Elizabeth Holmes really seduced all these old white men to give her all this money and to help this company, what he does, the performance art dimension of this, is he becomes one of those guys. And the money, the potential for money here, Because if you think of what— how many days till prison when this money conversation comes up? Like, not many. Like, we're talking days, right?

Because they start filming

34

days, 34 days left. When did the money conversation happen?

Because I thought that happened before that, which, uh, before she goes— well, it's definitely before she goes to prison.

Yeah,

but I mean, how many more days? I don't remember, but it's like such a clear Like, his value and the value of the proposition, I think, changes when the money goes out of the picture. Like—

So, I guess my question with that, they make that, like, the big fulcrum of the last part of the movie, right? This becomes the big litmus test of whether you think she was a liar all along or not. And he has some real hesitation to— well, it's a documentary. You can't pay somebody for a documentary if she knew this is all a lie. And I think they— this is the one thing I'm pretty convinced they played up for the movie.

Sure. Oh, you mean— wait, the filmmakers?

Fielder, his character in the movie being this discombobulated about the possibility that she might have been in on asking for money to be in the movie. I just feel like any rational person is gonna assume that they're gonna wanna get paid. This is Billy Evans who's making an AI Elizabeth Holmes thing that people can jerk off to. I'm pretty sure he's gonna ask for a cut of the documentary.

We haven't even talked about that.

This guy will try to make money from anything. He's not gonna try to get paid to be in the documentary? These people care about the ethics of old-school documentaries the way we did them in the 1970s?

Like, no fucking way. But I think that playing it up is really brilliant because—

100%.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I mean, because it makes, it makes, it makes the documentary a kind of Theranos.

It does. But it also, it also plays on people that don't really know how documentaries actually work. Like, my mom was like—

Oh, no, that's—

My wife was like, oh my God, I can't believe if she really wanted to get paid for that. And I was like, I hate to break it to you, but this is what happens in documentaries.

Yeah.

It's like, if you see like Fleetwood Mac, which they're finally doing the Fleetwood Mac documentary, which has been the best music documentary idea out there for 20 years, right? Um, it's gonna be on Apple. I'm pretty sure probably some checks were cut to get Stevie and Lindsey Buckingham and all these people, you know, to talk. Now, I don't know that for a fact, but this is just how it goes now. If you're watching, you know, an Adele documentary, Billie Eilish, whoever, they're getting paid. So does that change how you watch it when you know that going in? To me it does. Like when I watch stuff like Quarterbacks or, you know, whatever LeBron's documentary is gonna be, this is, it's not gonna be like this authentic slice of whatever. Like when we were kings, which is probably the best sports documentary of all time. That's a documentary. That's just footage and some interviews. And this guy is just embedded in this crazy circumstance of a fight, and it's awesome. That's a documentary.

I also think that it's a useful thing. And one of the things that I think that is going to make this movie infinitely teachable is that one of the things you learn when you start studying nonfiction filmmaking And really any kind of nonfiction endeavor is that you're really still, as much journalism goes into the making of the nuts and bolts and skeleton of the story being told and the arguments being made in a documentary or a piece of nonfiction writing, it's still an art form. And the thing that you learn—

I agree with that.

Right. The thing that you're learning—

So one of the hardest things to do, you're basically writing a magazine feature as a video, and you're putting everything together. It has to be edited perfectly. You have to walk the viewer through stuff. You have to decide what you're leaving in, cutting out. They're really fucking hard to make.

And so much of what we're talking about is the choice, our choices, but also the sort of existential question, or maybe it's more than existential. It's not inherently true because it's not scripted, quote, scripted, unquote. There are forms of truth, and there are ways of performing in a documentary. I mean, Errol Morris's Thin Blue Line is a classic example of that. Yeah. of where these questions are thriving with respect to reenactments and the way in which Errol Morris is bending the truth, bending one truth to get to this larger truth. I think this movie is doing a version of that. No matter what happens in terms of who knew what and agreed to do what and maybe even took something over again, however that operates— The larger truths here and the larger questions here about the relationship of this woman to this man and Billy, you know, this marriage...

Yeah.

...the filmmaker, the subject to his— to the filmmakers. I mean, these are still questions that are worth talking about because, in many ways, they're unanswerable. And they're classic nonfiction filmmaking, nonfiction art questions.

Well, there's 2 things with the documentary. There's 2 questions fundamentally. It doesn't matter what the documentary is. First question is, what am I trying to answer with this documentary?

Okay. Yeah, yeah.

The second question is, if I'm a viewer, how much of this do I believe? How much of this is 100% authentic? And if it's less than authentic, now it's on my brain to figure out how to decipher how authentic this is or not. Which brings me to my favorite music documentary ever, the Eagles, History of the Eagles Part 1, which I wrote about for Grantland, which I just watched twice recently.

One of my favorite bills. One of my favorite bills.

I just love it so much. And one of the reasons I love it, well, it answers the basic question is, why did the Eagles break up? This was the biggest band in the world. Why'd they break up? All right, so that's the premise of Part 1. But then the underlying premise is, are they telling us everything here? Because the Eagles are being run at that time by Don Henley and Glenn Frey. They're coming up with all these different reasons why the band didn't break up, but they're ignoring the elephant in the room, which is like, they clearly broke up because these 2 guys couldn't coexist in a band anymore because Henley had ascended a little higher than Glenn Frey. Right? Mm-hmm. So they're kind of saying it in roundabout ways, but nobody's saying it. And it's like, it's Don Felder's fault. He was at the Alan Cranston speech and he made a face. And so we stopped the band. It's like, I don't think that's what happened.

Hmm.

I think you guys flew too close to the sun and you had 2 alphas that wanted to run the band and bands flame out after 7 years, but nobody will say it. So it's on me as the viewer to be like, all right, I'm a smart person. I can— I'm gonna take all the stuff you give me, but I'm also gonna draw my own conclusions. This documentary, the Fielder one, the big question is, is this person a liar or not?

Yeah.

And then the sub-question is where it gets really interesting, because the Eagles one is like, eh, what was going on with Frye and Henley? What was actually happening there? This documentary, there's 5 things I'm wondering about.

Yeah.

Did Nathan fall in love with her? How big of a scumbag is the husband? Was the father afraid of Billy? Because it seemed like he kind of was. And

he definitely doesn't like Billy, that's clear.

And was the father the only actual sympathetic character in this whole thing? Because he clearly loved his daughter and felt like she was led astray by a couple people and that she had some trauma in her past. And it seemed authentic to me as I watched it.

Bill, you're leaving out a major character detail here.

What is it?

About the dad.

Yeah.

And, you know, like, like, like, daughter like daddy. This guy worked for Enron.

Right.

I don't know what he did at Enron, but like, I mean, I don't know. I mean, Elizabeth can read.

Right, right, right.

She could read as a little girl.

Wasn't— wasn't great. So then you have on the other sub-questions this whole paying them for the documentary or not. How real was this? what actually happened when he went to visit her at the end. Because the, the, the thing, the reenactment we're seeing is just his memory of being in a room where he couldn't have notes or a recorder, which is really hard, especially as you get older, to remember every detail. And then you have the whole Amanda Seyfried thing. I said it right that time. Um, of how authentic is she in this or not? Is she an actress or is this really her? Mm-hmm. So you walk outta the theater and you're like, my fucking head is doing 360s. I have 40 questions and I can't really answer any of them. It's time for a new segment, Greatest Plays of All Time. It is brought to you by State Farm. We've witnessed some truly legendary plays throughout football history, plays that can never be recreated because they're designed for that precise moment on the field. It's the same reason why State Farm helps personalize coverage. You need a plan designed to suit your unique situation.

But back to those iconic plays, some people talk about Dwight Clark with the catch, Joe Montana, San Francisco-Dallas, there's the Music City Miracle, Beast Quake. I still think the 2 most famous plays ever are Super Bowl plays. It was Malcolm Butler with the, with the pick against Seattle to save the Patriots Super Bowl in the Seahawks-Patriots the first time they played. And then the helmet catch with David Tyree. which swung the Giants' pass things. I think those are the 2 most famous plays of all time because of the impact of when they happened. When it comes to coverage, you need a game plan that fits your unique situation. State Farm takes the time to get to know you so they can help personalize coverage for your life and budget. Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.

I have other questions.

Yeah, I'm sure I left some out.

And I mean, but I don't think you're gonna like my questions. Because they're about the world of the movie itself.

Okay.

And I really did think a lot about what it must have been like to be Elizabeth Holmes in a relationship with a man. I mean, at the end of the day, no matter what kind of liar she is, I don't think liars are born. I think liars, like certain liars, pathological liars, circumstances create those people.

Yeah.

And I think that the thing that you're— I actually tried to watch it the way you were watching it, and I think for the most part I did. But at the end of the day, I'm still aware, and I think one of the movie's achievements is that it's still aware that we are watching a person, like a human being. And the thing that I love about that moment, that disturbing moment with the dad where he's like, just blurts out that she was raped and that explains everything— I think there's a world where it does kind of explain everything. We know nothing about this incident, including whether it's true.

It's by far her most sympathetic as a viewer, where you actually like, oh shit.

Yeah, yeah. But I think it's a thing that you keep thinking about because we learned that before Who's on First. And I mean, do we have to explain Who's on First? Like, I mean, not as a comedy routine, but as a, like, a moment.

So I thought, I thought that was her biggest mistake in the entire film.

Hmm. How do you mean?

Because that's when it became clear that she was committed to the bit to the bitter end. Because I have 2 kids now that are older. Either of my kids at age 5 would've understood who's on first. Like you're talking, you need an IQ like 80 and above to understand who's on first. And she's like, I don't get it. I don't understand why it was funny. It's like to not be, for her to claim that she didn't have any opinion on why somebody would've thought that was funny, to me was disingenuous. Mm-hmm. 'Cause you could be like, Even if she's committing to the bit and being like, I don't get it, she could be— she could at least have asked him, is it funny because of the delivery that they have back and forth or their chemistry? Like, help me understand. But she's just like, I'm stupid. I don't understand what— I don't, I don't get it. I don't know. How does somebody not understand who's on first? Come on.

God, no, no, no. I'm with you. Except she's— this conversation is— this moment is happening With Nathan on one side of her on this sofa, and Billy on the other, at the other end of the sofa.

Who's like rubbing her head to keep contact with her as it's happening, to keep her little control on her.

Yeah, and Nathan, on the one hand, Nathan's explaining comedy to her, right? Like she says, I don't get it. And it's interesting what she doesn't get, right? What she doesn't get is that this is like, this is a form of human relationship. These are 2 guys who love each other. And the way Abbott and Costello express love is by fighting, right? Like, it's by arguing with each other.

Right.

I think that, you know, Nathan's explaining comedy to her, and Billy is explaining her to her. And I think to the extent that, like, you feel sympathy for this— if you don't feel sympathy for this one woman, I think there's been many a woman who's been in this situation where you're being dumped double mansplained. And I just— the paralysis of being accused of being humorless, not understanding a major form of communication in comedy, and then having your entire personality kind of reframed as being too special to be normal, to even deign to get the joke of who's on first. It's like, what am I supposed to do? I just don't believe it. I won't believe it.

This was the only scene I didn't believe it. I thought she was like, I got to keep the ruse to the bitter end. We have decided before these documentary crews came here that I'm just going to play dumb and defer to Billy at all times, and I'm never going to admit ever in any way that I tried to deceive these people with Theranos. I'm never going to admit it. I don't know why people— it did work. She's just committed to the bit forever. It's like watching somebody. It's like one of those Twitter videos where somebody walks in on their wife with another guy and she's like, I don't know what you mean. And it's like, but we just saw the guy climb out the window. Why are you still lying about this? That's what she's doing for 3 hours.

Well, I mean, this is interesting because But the other— there are a few things the movie gets hung up— a few very important and interesting things the movie gets hung up on. One, the sort of ethical questions about whether or not to pay Elizabeth and Billy.

Yeah.

But the other thing is that New York Times profile that Amy Chozick wrote of Elizabeth Holmes, in which she is quoted as saying that, that's not me, that's a character that I created. Right.

And then they have the big battle about— by the way, did that Times reporter ever come up with the quote?

No. We just ran a piece where the Times calls Amy Chosik to explain what happened. And her explanation was perfectly logical. She had the notebook and then she tossed it. We throw out notebooks all the time. It's just not— you can't keep all the notebooks. Although I, I do keep all my notebooks, and I'm not even a reporter. But her explanation to me made sense. It did not seem strange at all.

Right.

Um, what's strange is that they claim they recorded every conversation that happened and couldn't find it, but can't produce the conversation in which this alleged not quote took place.

Right.

Um,

but that's the point, is I think she was playing characters really this whole time.

Yes.

Dating back to— she played the Theranos character. Now she's playing the, I don't know how all this happened to me, I'm sympathetic. And they thought— so the bigger question to me, tying into what you just said, why would they want to do this film? A, why would they want to do this film with Nathan Fielder? B.

Well, this is the part where—

And I have not heard an adequate explanation. It takes 5 minutes to Google Nathan Fielder. Billy Evans, clearly online. It's not like he's—

I don't know if they know what it means. I actually don't know. I mean, maybe Lance Oppenheim was the way that this movie got started, right? And Nathan came attached.

So Lance— but this is where they've been very tight-lipped about how much did they know about Nathan? And did Lance do the documentary and be like, I'm going to use Nathan as like my host for the documentary and somehow convinced them this was a good idea?

I, I do think that Nathan was probably just kind of around, and I, I don't know. I mean, I don't even want to venture a guess about like the, the, the sort of the, the how the form of the documentary came to— came.

But this is the classic, but I'm gonna let the coyote into my, my chicken cage.

Yeah.

What can go wrong? He seems nice.

But I also think that that is how blind to hubris they are, right? I actually think that the Theranos to Electric Boogaloo part is huge to this movie. Like, it isn't just—

Can I offer a different idea for why they did it?

Okay.

I think he's a really well-liked, respected, award-winning comic who's good at making stuff. I think they felt like, if we can convince this guy—

Oh, interesting. Oh no.

That you're actually a victim.

Oh God, we went 4D. Okay.

If we can win this guy over, everyone will think that you're the victim, that you didn't realize what you did, and you're gonna be a sympathetic figure. So they basically, they were like, let's go to the NBA Finals with this. We're not just doing a documentary. We're going to try to win over Nathan Fielder to make it seem like he believes in us. And guess what? It backfired.

Well, I think that last shot is extraordinary. I think that last shot—

The ocean shot or the shot of them in the prison?

I think the ocean shot.

Yeah.

Having Amanda Seyfried say it's complicated, you know, like, her not having this person, you know, Amanda Seyfried, who, like, really is just so game to do all the exploratory sidekicking, co-hosting, you know, passenger seat ruminating that you just want in a homie.

She's out of an '80s movie. It's like Ally Sheedy in WarGames. Like, hey, Mary Sue. You guys going to see where the WarGames guy is? Yeah, I'll go with you. Yeah.

Uh, yeah, she's Mary Stuart Masterson and Martha Plimpton and, you know, like, yeah, so many other—

somebody hit the Mathis and pump up the volume.

Halle Berry in Boomerang. Like, this— she's just ready for—

I'm gonna help our hero for the last half of the movie.

Let me just figure out how I can be of service. Yeah, I'm— I, I want to be of service. I also— but I do think that her— the stake that she holds in this film has everything to do with the fact that she was a previous interpreter of this same information, the same story. And I think she's as curious as we are about what Nathan Fielder and Lance Oppenheim have learned in the years since we last saw a fictional Elizabeth Holmes.

By the way, it goes to—

As played by Amanda Seyfried.

It goes Billy Evans saying, yeah, we should have it up and running in a year. And then the next thing is 2 years later. Uh, there's some really great editing in this movie like that that are just really funny. They did such a good job. I had a bigger question with you about Amanda.

Okay, I know what your question is.

Can she be Best Supporting Actress for this?

Yes, I think she can. I mean, if the actors want to go there, let them go there.

Because she does reenact stuff for— you know, she's on screen reenacting Elizabeth Holmes for at least 10 minutes. But this bleeds into this weird— we've never had this for an Oscars category before, where she's real her but also pretending to be Elizabeth Holmes her. I think she should be eligible. And I also think this is going to be eligible for Best Movie. I don't think there's any question.

I think it can be.

But Nathan can't be Best Actor, I don't think.

Oh, my God. Well, he does. I mean, if Amanda Seyfried is acting in those prison sequences, isn't Nathan also? I mean, doesn't it then sort of open— isn't that the mouthful?

There's only 5 spots.

Right.

But he wins. He wins. If the film gets nominated and the directors get nominated,

I don't— nobody— we're not talking about Nathan Fielder. We're talking about Amanda Seyfried. Because that is the revelation. And I think that the—

Well, wait, when you say that that's a revelation, because I think we feel the same way on this, is this like when an athlete— when you're like, wow, there was a little more in there than I thought?

Yeah. Yeah.

Like when, like, Jaylen Brown carried the Celtics to 56 wins last year. I was like, wow, didn't know he had that in him. And it was the same thing with her in this movie where I'm like, I didn't

know. I think a really important part of this whole Amanda Seyfried journey is The Testament of Anne, that Shaker movie that came out last year. Did you ever see that?

No.

I don't like it. I don't think it works. Mona Fassbender, who is also co-responsible for The Brutalist, that Brady Corbett movie that came out 2 years ago with Adrien Brody. Won him his second Oscar. Amanda Seyfried plays— she stars in that film.

Okay.

And I think it's a strange movie. A lot of it is just— a lot of it is her character being— it's about the sort of creation of the Shaker, of Shakerism as a religion. And a lot of what Amanda Seyfried is doing is singing a kind of, like, arrhythmic choral songs that the Shakers sang and doing a lot of Holy Spirit, Caught the Spirit dancing. And I think that it's the boldest performance she's ever tried to give. And I think she put it over

the housemaid.

Yeah. Oh, but Bill,

I liked her in The Housemaid.

Those 2 films happened at the same time.

Yeah,

those 2 films came out within like weeks of each other. And I think that she— you know, you and I talk a lot about what happens when actors ripen, you know, when they get a certain—

late bloomers.

Yeah, yeah, they just— I mean, she's always been good. I've— I mean, I've always loved her, but I think that now There's a maturity and a wisdom and a down-for-anything aspect to her that makes her, as a performer, really exciting. And so the thing that's the other revelation here is not just the kind of actor she is, but the way that her acting is used here is almost philosophical. Like, she herself is Making a case for the importance of acting. And it isn't in a James Lipton sort of way. It is by doing. Her mere presence—

She's not hitting you over the head with it.

Right.

Yeah, she's just doing it and showing it.

And in that sense, I don't know, does an actor playing themselves playing someone else playing that they've already played— I don't know what kind of bylaws this is gonna run up against. But I think she should be eligible. And to the extent that it matters, I think she should be nominated.

We agree. Well, then you had this other piece of Nathan Fielder, who by the end of the first part of the movie, you feel like he might be in love with Elizabeth Holmes. But then you also feel like he's falling for Amanda Seyfried a little bit in the second part, culminating in the rehearsing of the things where she's now Basically, the 2 people he— we might think he might be sweet on have now blended into this super person that he just seems so delighted. So for him, as somebody who followed him for 13 years, basically—

This is vertigo, baby. This is it, man. He fucking—

he climbed the mountain with this one. This is everything his career was leading to. I did the first podcast with him, I think, at Grantland in 2013. Yeah, he came in because, because, uh, Lewis sent me like the first 6 Nathan for You's. And even before it came out, I had him on. I was like, I just love this show. He was a Canadian guy. He was probably a little nervous to even do media for something he did.

Hmm.

And now, 13 years later, has a chance to win the Oscar. And I think this is one of the best documentaries, for lack of a better word, we've ever had. This, to me, goes into all the greats that I've seen in my lifetime. This has to be mentioned on the shortlist with with any of them, I think.

Oh yeah. I mean, I think that— I mean, just in terms of it's being a, a meta text, right? Like, I love a documentary that is also about itself in some way. Um,

well, it's also really well framed and well edited. Like, could it be 15 minutes shorter? Like, sure.

But I don't know where— what would you cut? I was never— there's never a dull moment. I mean, I'm sure a professional could find ways to do it, but I didn't have that feeling where it was too long. But you know, you, you're, you, it's, it's like almost 3

hours. But no, I mean, I, I certainly didn't get bored. It wasn't like I was like, oh man, hour to go. As soon as Amanda Seyfried showed up, it was like, it, it was like, uh, it was like a trade deadline trade. It's like, oh, they have Rasheed Wallace now. Oh my God, here come the Pistons. But,

but

yeah, I wonder Is this going to rejuvenate the form itself, which I think has desperately, desperately needed rejuvenation for a whole bunch of different reasons? Are we going to get back to our roots of, yeah, these are big swings, um, you know, or, or is this just a one-on-one? I don't know.

I don't— well, nobody else— who else could do this?

Nobody else could do this.

I mean, I think that every time I try to draw some conclusion from some major cultural crater that gets left in the earth. I mean, I can conclude— I can talk about its meaning culturally, but industrially, I don't know. I don't know. I mean, it's funny, this same director made Prime Time, the To Catch a Predator movie with Robert Pattinson. Yeah. That came out and did pretty well earlier this year. And I feel like there's a project here. Right? There is a project about— that has something to do with the confusion of what's real and what's fictional and the sort of moral stakes of reenactment. Right? The idea that somebody else is going to take this cause up seems rare. I think you just let Lance Alcott—

I don't think it's that. To me, it's more—

You mean you're talking about the performance of— Young filmmakers being like, oh, wow.

I'm going to start thinking outside the box. Maybe this is a way I could have my own version of this.

Well, I will say then to that, to your larger point, sorry to get myopic there, this is a really interesting year for young white filmmakers because no Negroes have come up yet, or women for that matter. But I feel like this is a— the Curry Barker story, the Backrooms guy, Lance Oppenheim,

Um, yeah,

these are all

people 30 and under. There's, there's an easy-to-understand reason though.

You're gonna say what, the internet? The— what do you—

I think people under 30 have been filming stuff for most of their lives.

I think that is—

I think they—

A huge part of it.

They see things through a camera really from the time they're in 6th grade on. Like, my daughter can do social media editing that I don't understand how she never went to a class. And I look at the stuff she can do, and it's like she's just a different human being than me. She's grown up with all these tools that I don't really understand how to use. But I think you have now everyone under 30 looking through something which is basically filmmaking. So they're seeing things differently. And also, like, you can, you can film When I was 40 years ago, I'm lugging around, you know, I had the video camera that had the side pack on it, and I'm lugging around and we're filming stuff and making fake movies in high school. And it was a fucking pain in the ass. You had to come home, you had the VHS out, you'd have to like have 2 VHSs just to edit anything. And now you can, you know, anybody can make anything now. And I think we're starting to see it. I really do. I think, I think you can see it drifting into the under 30.

I also think to your point about— I mean, the way we're thinking about generations and what you're asking about what happens to nonfiction filmmaking now, I think that at the same time, because of the flattening of the way we— or the diversification, but also the flattening of the way we experience a lot of television movies, I think people don't think about documentary versus, you know, some other form, right?

No, it's, it's an hour and a half or 2 hours of content to kill time on a Tuesday night.

People watch documentaries all the time now.

You know what's telling? You know what happened to Netflix this year? When you look at those top 10 trends and you look at like top 10 movies, what were over and over again the top 10 movies? They were these fucking Lifetime movies that they were licensing. And it was like the podcaster who killed his boyfriend.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

And it was like, what's that? Click, you start watching. It's like, this is a fucking Lifetime movie they made in Canada and it's number 2 over the Affleck movie they just paid $100 million for. Like, that's, that means something that people are clicking on titles and thumbnails over filmmakers and stars and ideas. To me is, is something and probably a little bit alarming.

I just learned over the weekend that MrBeast employs about 15 people, possibly more, to just do thumbnails for MrBeast. Just the thumbnails.

Listen, I know from my son, like, he, he did MrBeast Games or Beast Games, whatever he called it. My son, like, that's for his generation is Survivor. Which is funny because Beast Games did a collaboration with Survivor where Jeff Probst came in. It was like, it was like a passing of the torch almost.

I just think that the way that we think about the— I mean, clearly the models have changed, right? The old models are broken. The new models are here with us and they are active.

Well, then you have those other weird models like the microdramas and the stuff like that that I'm not a personal believer in, but we'll see.

But I don't think— but that's like a, that's like a bad version of an old model, right?

It's, it's basically new wave Quibi.

Yeah. I think that MrBeast is like, like, you know, a show like MrBeast or an experience like MrBeast. That's a new expression of something. I mean, it might have some tendrils that, that reach, that connect to the past, obviously, but the way that show is put out into the world and, and assembled and, you know, a bunch of shows like it. I think that there's a real understanding that streaming platforms are just a completely different medium and, and, and they need a language that makes sense there.

Or I could be super cynical and say it's all about what's in the thumbnail and that's really all that matters.

But maybe that is, Bill. That's part of the new—

I've watched 4 episodes of War. First of all, great thumbnail, and McNulty's in it, right? I don't really like it.

I was gonna say, is it good?

Not really. It's just dressed up British people kind of arguing in, in, uh, like disciplined settings, like big group settings of people being just British, and nothing's really happened yet. And I've watched all 4 episodes, but I, I always joke about the iPad test where I'm looking down, up, down, up. I'm probably at like 37% for war where I'm just going through basketball box scores. I'm like, oh, somebody's yelling at somebody, back down. And I think that's just a lot of shows now. And it's really tough to cut through with something where it's like, oh, and that, I think that's a real conundrum for these streamers. It's, it's—

Yeah, but that's why you can't really game it. And it's also probably why you don't need to spend $150 or $250 million on something when you just don't know what's gonna happen.

Yeah, when you can spend $3 million on, oh, this, this dude went in and, and, uh, killed this, killed this mailman outside his house. Did he do it or not? Next, the Mailman Murders. I feel like I'm clicking on that. What is that?

I'm gonna—

I just made that up right now. You would watch the mailman?

You just made that up? I made that up. Oh God. Well, you just— somebody needs to mail you a check because—

Mailman Murders.

You need to like, like copyright that real quick.

November 3rd on Netflix.

Before we go, uh, I want to tell you, because I don't know if I emailed this to you, but my favorite radio station, WXPN in Philadelphia, you know, they do this annual poll every year of the, you know, 885— 88.5 is their number. Yeah. They do like these countdowns, and this year the countdown is the 885 greatest songs from television and the movies. And, you know, you go to, you know, wxpn.org and you just go— you can go and vote in this poll. I just feel like this is the you-est thing of all time.

So is it like theme songs or songs?

Anything you want. It could be Jaws. It could be the, you know, Don't You Forget About Me. Um, you know, my number one on my list is Fight the Power from Do the Right Thing. I mean, I just— I don't know. I just feel like this is a very fun thing. It's a great idea. And I don't know, this is such a— I'm gonna check that out.

When are you coming to LA?

I don't know, soon.

Gotta do a Rewatchables at some point soon.

Sometime in the next year or so.

Sometime in the next year or so?

No, I mean before the end of the year. Sorry, that came out wrong.

I couldn't think of anybody I wanted to talk about this movie with more than you. Great to see you as always, my friend.

Nice to see you.

Pleasure. Talk to you soon. All right, that's it for the podcast. Thanks to Wesley Morris. Thanks to Gahau and Eduardo and Jack and Chris from the Spotify side as well. Don't forget, new rewatchables went up. We did A Nightmare on Elm Street. Horror Movie Month is officially over, so go check that out. I'm gonna be back on Thursday with a bunch of NFL stuff. Hopefully there are more trades. We had a trade today, maybe some World Series stuff if it's still going. And I'm try— I'm gonna try not to record during Game 6 of the WNBA Finals, which would be happening at 9:30. Pacific time. Hilarious. Great job, WNBA, you killed it. Uh, I'll see you on Thursday. Must be 21+ and present in select states for Kansas, in affiliation with Kansas Star Casino. Or 18+ and present in DC or Wyoming. Opt-in required bonus issued as non-withdrawable Profit Boost tokens. Restrictions apply, including any token expiration, max wager amount. See terms at sportsbook.fanduel.com. Gambling problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER or 1-800-MY-RESET. Call 888-789-7777 or visit ccpg.org/chat in Connecticut or mdgamblinghelp.org in Maryland. Hope is here. Visit gamblinghelplineMA.org or call 800-327-5050 for 24/7 support in Massachusetts. Or call 877-8-HOPE-NY or text HOPE-NY in New York.

For Louisiana, call 877-770-7867.