What's the score, again?

Living large at River Oaks tennis tourney: Make way Beyonce, there's a man-bun

Once upon an afternoon, I found myself gifted with two tickets to the ATP Men's Clay Court Championships at the River Oaks Country Club. And not just any tickets — VIP, baby.

So I tooled down River Oaks Boulevard in my bird-poo-covered ride, passing all the luxury cars and the pedicabs parked along the way as I zoomed past the country club gates to the stadium-side lot.

I found my way to the Lexus Pavilion and up the stairs to an indoor/outdoor area of tables, bars and a sizable buffet at the top of the eastern bleachers. Showing up in the middle of the afternoon, the stands were somewhat deserted as I had just missed last year's winner, the much-maligned Aussie Lleyton Hewitt, make a comeback victory over Somdev Devvarmen. (And I also missed Beyoncé, dammit!)

Grabbing a bevvie in a giant plastic Lexus cup, I nabbed a seat in the traditional top row in front of the tent, and watched as super-hot American ace Sam Querrey manhandled Blaz Kavcic with 135 mph serves, winning in straight sets.

By the evening matches, the crowd had arrived in full force, and it was quite an accomplishment to nab a proper table in the tent (the outdoors by then being too chilly for my seersucker-heavy tennis viewing ensemble). Far from the sparse but focused crowd earlier in the day, this is when I realized I was attending a social event as much as a sporting event. Hellos and air kisses were exchanged, gossip was spread, and the de facto opening line for flirtation was "So, what's the score?"

Of course, nobody knew the score. Even if we wanted to know (which I did) the line judge spent half the match blocking the scoreboard, and the speaker announcements were too quiet to hear over the din.

Which is quite a shame, because the game in front of us between Xavier Malisse and John Isher was tight and hard fought from beginning to end, with all three sets going to a tie-break. We debated whether Malisse's BEL country signifier meant Belgium or Belize, after ruling out Belarus, Belgrade, Belfast and Bel Air. When in doubt, I always try to root for the American (in this case, Isher), but I kept being drawn to shorter, sexier Malisse, at least until my friend described his short ponytail as a man-bun.

Even the cutest tennis player cannot overcome such a description.

I spent enough time outdoors to hear the cheering section for top-seeded Chilean Fernando Gonzalez, in a game that didn't begin until after 9 p.m. While Gonzalez successfully faced off against up-and-coming South African Kevin Andersen, many migrated over to the pool area, where the world's No. 1 men's doubles team, Bob and Mike Bryan, used their night off to entertain as the Bryan Bros. Band.

While the guys were pretty good (they just released an album), the rum punch served might have had something to do with the crowd as well.

But the best part of the day was spying the tennis pros out and about. I actually had to look away from them to avoid a mad case of the schoolgirl giggles, but the women milling around them didn't seem to have the same problem. For a professional sporting event, I was amazed at how up close and personal all the action was.

Am I coming back next year? Hell to the yes.

The ATP Championships at River Oaks continues this afternoon with the men's semifinal matches at 1 p.m. (Tennis Channel starts its coverage at 3). The final takes place Sunday.

unspecified

Movie Review

Elizabeth Holmes' doc You Can See Everything is an audacious genre-bender

Photo courtesy of A24

Nathan Fielder and Elizabeth Holmes in You Can See Everything.

Elizabeth Holmes faced one of the most public downfalls in recent history after she was accused of defrauding investors in her health technology company, Theranos. Her subsequent indictment and conviction drew the interest of many, including, it seems, comedian/actor/filmmaker Nathan Fielder. Fielder somehow convinced Holmes and her husband, Billy Evans, to make a documentary about her final days of freedom, called You Can See Everything.

It’s not immediately clear why Fielder — who only has one previous feature-length documentary to his credit — is interested in profiling Holmes, but the approach that he and co-director Lance Oppenheim (Primetime) take is one that puts Fielder in the spotlight as much as her or Evans. Fielder looms over the couple — sometimes literally, sometimes from afar — as they care for their children, make meals, try to re-establish business relationships, and prepare for Holmes’ prison sentence, which is due to start about a month after the film begins in 2023.

Fielder quizzes Holmes and Evans about predictable subjects — such as how Theranos worked, her relationship with COO Sunny Balwani, and her conviction — and ones that are slightly off-kilter, including the miniseries The Dropout, which dramatized Holmes’ rise and fall. He is met with seeming openness by both of them — the title of the movie is uttered by Holmes at one point — but there are times where their idea of transparency doesn’t jibe with Fielder’s expectations.

Through it all, the quirky reputation that Fielder has from TV shows like Nathan for You, The Curse, and The Rehearsal colors his participation, as well. He appears sincere, if surprisingly intense, in his questioning, but there are more than a few moments where it’s fair to wonder if the whole thing is an act of performance art. That suspicion grows in the second half of the nearly three-hour film as Fielder and Oppenheim go down roads that stretch the definition of what a documentary is or can be.

The film is utterly fascinating as the filmmakers go on what seems to be a full-on exploration of the meaning of truth. Holmes and Evans, either intentionally or unintentionally, carry on conversations with Fielder with wide-open, unblinking eyes, something that conveys honesty and creepiness in equal measures. Fielder meets them with squinting expressions, looking like he’s trying to determine how candid they’re actually being.

One of the biggest things the film reveals (or does it?) is that — if she’s not a sociopath — Holmes might be someone who’s either oblivious or naive. As cryptic or strange as she can be in words and actions, Evans is even more so, and as the film progresses it’s him whose motives and ideas are called into question. Control over the narrative of the film wobbles back-and-forth between Fielder, Holmes, and Evans, and even at the end it’s unclear whose perspective has truly won out.

There is no way to accurately get across what it’s like to watch You Can See Everything for the first time. The motives of everyone involved are up in the air, resulting in a roller coaster ride that’s full of astonishment, laughs, and a number of surprises. It’s an audacious film that can’t be categorized, one that will challenge the thinking of voters when it comes time for awards season.

---

You Can See Everything opens in theaters on October 16.

movies film