User reviews

Has it been much more focused on media ignoring minorities, instead of bashing a cartoon character which, in the end, seems just like PR a thing quite a lot (at least to me), this movie would have much more impact and obviously, much less views. Blaming Azaria for trying to talk on his own matters is a bit out of line. But besides, it does bring a lot questions and views and,fortunately so, even some answers but for me, this was definitely not the way to focus on the problem, even though yes, in the better version of the document, Apu would have every right to be mentioned.

Hari's stand-up is second-rate and contrived, which did not garner him the fame he desired despite having access to the media apparatus through connections and wealthy parentage. So he went the route of feigned offense and propelled the zeitgeist of "cancel culture" along its unfortunate trajectory.

As we can see after the release of the film and its brief discussion in the press, Hari has again disappeared into obscurity, no doubt wondering what famous piece of entertainment he can latch onto next. Perhaps he will next cover issues which actually affect Indians and Indian-Americans instead of being critical when cartoon voice actors are not the same ethnicity as their characters (for very specific instances). That, however, is doubtful because it would not get him very much attention and would require considerable effort.

I understand the concept. I would be annoyed too if I was spoken to in the voice of a Simpsons character in the 90's, but that's where the problem is, in the 90's. I love the Simpsons but the show doesn't have the same cultural pull it did in the 90's. The shared experiences of those interviewed all seem to have taken place a couple decades ago when the Simpson's was in it's prime. That aside the documentary was poorly pieced together and was more about stroking to ego of Hari Kondabolu than actually attacking the problems with Apu. Bottom line find something else to watch.

After watching this film, I think Hari Kondabalu is reaching with a lot of these arguments. For example, "'Thank you come again' has haunted Indian children for over a century." I am of Pakistani and Indian descent, and not once was I "haunted" or compared to Apu growing up in the United States during the 90's. I have talked with many of my South Asian friends/family about this film, and most of them also have never experienced such a comparison.

Look I appreciate these actors sharing their stories and creating a dialogue about the lack South Asian representation in Hollywood, but using Apu and the Simpsons as a scapegoat is completely misguided. Like many others have mentioned, the film seems to miss the point that the Simpsons is a light-hearted satire, and the show pokes fun at SO many different stereotypes. That's one of the many reasons why we love the Simpsons! Overall, I really don't think there's a strong argument here, and I wouldn't recommend this film...

Well Indians stereotype foreigners in their movies with an awfully hinglish accent from dacades! Show them as sluts and bar dancers, drug dealers, and what not, but that's alright but apu is a problem, hmm. Hypocrisy? I'm an Indian an I love Simpsons! Apu doesn't represent every indian guy.. get a life! It's a comedy show.

I can't help but notice the ratings of this film have been assaulted by ignorant trolls who haven't even seen the film, because it only just came out a few hours ago.

The Problem With Apu follows comedian Hari Kondabolu as he talks to major names in Indian American society from Aziz Ansari to the surgeon general. It asks a lot of tough questions and also really informs those who don't know, what it's like to have such limited representation in media. This film is not an assault on The Simpsons or anybody who likes them. Hell, Hari even says he has always loved The Simpsons and he owes the show for being one of the many things that inspired him to be a comedian.

It merely points out the dangers of having the only person representing an entire race in media for years being a stereotype.

I invite anybody who wants to learn more about representation in media or anyone who thinks this film will just be a brown guy whining for an hour to watch this film. It is very educational, funny, and insightful. I highly recommend this film. For my friends it was a great and new perspective they weren't used to seeing. For me, it was empowering to have my thoughts, as an Indian American working in the American film industry, finally given a voice.

Someone made an full throated ad hominem attack on Hari the Kondo for making this documentary to voice his displeasure over the way Southeast Asians are generally depicted. I read it carefully to see where he begins to explain where Hari is wrong. That in point of fact, movies and tv go to great lengths to be accurate about depictions SE Asians. Never happened. Not a paragraph. Not a sentence. Not a phrase. Not a word. Not a syllable. It's ad hominem all the way down, with a dash of him counter accusing Hari of being racist. Which he may or may not be. But when you trot out several paragraphs, vitriolic, vituperative paragraphs, unloading on the docu maker yet entirely fail to repel or neutralize the central point of the documentary, then your "review" fails the smell test bigly. Not just fail, but it might even be an irony boomerang, flying back at the flinger in that it seems to give weight to Hari's premise about our outlook on SE Asians. Not saying that Hari is flawless or that his documentary is golden. Not even saying his premise is right. I'm saying people should completely ignore peevish irrational drivel and see the movie for themselves and come to their own sensible conclusion and perhaps write a review expressing what they think and feel about the movie and here are the reasons why. Being rational takes more effort than gambolling in fallacy, but it's easier with practice and more fun in the long run.

This video is not a documentary, it's just a bunch of snowflakes with weak arguments clinging to a thick accent but APU is so much more than his accent. To watter down such a complex character to the way he speaks is doing all Indians a great disfavor. The character of APU has so many wonderful qualities that i think all humans should have. Anyone who is a true fan of the show will agree that the APU presented in this "documentary" is very different from the APU in the series.

To be Indian and offended by the way APU speaks is to be ashamed of your heritage.

So what if a white guy does his accent? Phil Lamar did Samurai Jack and he got only praise for it.

I've been watching The Simpsons for over 20 years, Apu is one of my favorite characters. It's his thick accent that i love so much, but that's not to say that it's his only quality.

Do not listen to the bad reviews on this site. Their arguments are addressed and refuted in the documentary itself. This is a nuanced documentary about the representation of South Asian people in the US media. It presents the character of Apu in a bigger context of lack of representation and stereotyping. Yet, it does not condemn the show as a whole. The author himself, a fan of The Simpsons, is not even sure how to solve the problem with Apu. The film is entertaining, has great interviews, and is really funny.

I'm not sure how this got past any editors or test screeners. it is an awful over reaching mess with many arguments falling short after thinking on them for a few minutes. using Apu as a scapegoat seems like just a way for this m,an to make his money. would not recommend

SPOILER: Before anyone says 'You probably didn't even watch it!', I did. Not once, but twice. Not only did I watch this 'documentary' twice, I also watched the interviews with this guy beating a dead horse.

The guy cries about how in his otherwise perfect life, Apu is the problem. And when he doesn't get his way (for example, having a sit-down interview with Hank Azaria, the voice of Apu and many other Simpsons' characters), in the usual SJW leftist manner, he calls Hank 'Privileged'.

This guy wants nothing more than to become famous by using his 'outrage' of 'being offended' and making a cheap, poor excuse for a documentary, while hanging off Matt Groening's creation.

Here's a good example of that too: At about 46 minutes, he says, in quote, 'I certainly deserve a show'. See, I downloaded a torrent because I didn't want to give this guy any ratings by watching his cheap documentary on TruTV, although I could have, I made sure to skip it when it aired.

Don't give this guy the opportunity. If you ignore him, he will go away. I had no idea who this guy was until these ridiculous accusations of 'offended outrage' started to surface from mainly leftist posts (coming mostly from CNN and HuffPost, that should say everything right there).

Also, during the documentary, at about 4 minutes in, he says 'Now before you call me a Social Justice Warrior who's being very sensitive, let it go snowflake. Well I have let it go, for 28 years.' Yes, you've let it go so well that you felt the need to make a documentary about it. Usually when someone says 'Now before you call me a -Input statement of what they clearly are here-, they're really trying to deflect and say 'Well... I am, but still'.

He also refers to Hank as 'A White Dude' several times. I think this guy is the real racist. He is a lousy stand-up comedian who mainly uses racial jokes during his stand-up, so he has already limited himself to that (and we all know you can't go very far on just that).

This dude is just screaming 'I want to be famous SO BAD!!! Please every leftist, help make me famous, because my lousy racial stand-up routine isn't cutting it'. If you watch during the documentary, the small bars and clubs where he's on the stage barley have anyone in the audience. That's a pretty good indication that this guy sucks. You can even see a woman WALK OUT during one of his routines, which made me laugh so hard. I had to watch it twice just to see that, and I had to tell myself 'Why would this guy leave this in?'.

It's so clear what this guy wants. He wants to hang off the success of The Simpsons by appealing to the 'Safe Space' generation. It's sort of working, because leftists will buy anything that fits into their agenda. But to every logical thinking individual: Ignore this guy. Don't make him famous.

I tend to not judge a movie by it's reception, especially when it's divisive as this one, even with an open mind I found the documentary to just be downright boring. What is suppose to be presented as a fair critique on lack of representation in south eastern Asian culture in Hollywood instead comes off as a failed attempt to properly create a debate which leaves the whole documentary feeling like it's being contrarian for contrarian sake.

Truthfully it's closer to a 3/10 than a 1/10, but it loses 2 points for all the people overrating it in an attempt to push an agenda.

Hank Azaria is the villain in this tale. He rightly refused to take part in this auto da fe and instead is burned in effigy. Actually, it's much worse: cry baby Hari Kondabolu beats Hank Azaria in effigy, or in animation because he obviously doesn't have the guts to confront anyone face-to-face. So tell me, what is so politically correct about advocating violence against a guy who did a voice over on a cartoon?

The world's unfunniest man is going to lecture the rest of us about how to be American. Got it. Let me get a pen and paper to take notes...or I can just turn this off.

While this guy has every right to do this in our wonderful country, this doesn't mean that anyone has to be entertained by it, and I can't imagine anyone enjoyed this.

I'm not defending the show (they don't need me to do that), but the whole point of The Simpsons was to make fun of white, middle class America. Get over it, or change the channel. This guy should have gone outside to play as a kid.

Be honest: Who ever heard of this "comedian" before this documentary? And also...Is there anybody who thinks his comedy routine is genuinelly funny? I mean, even those who give positive reviews to this doesn't seem to care too much about the work of Hari Kondabolu.

The Simpsons haven't been relevant since the early 2000s, and by this point almost everyone has given up on the series. Beating a dead horse won't do anything to help minorities in any way, and honestly at moments this whole "controversy" about the ethnicity of voice actors from cartoons seems like one big publicity stunt.

One more thing: Dora the Explorer was created back then as a form of response to the lack of positive representation of Latin American people in media, especially in cartoons for kids. And it worked! It was a succesful series for toddlers, and served to normalize Latin American characters in cartoons and series, instead of having to rely in stereotypes, like, say, Speedy Gonzales.

Creating new characters, instead of complaining about other existing characters, is a better way to get rid of old and tired stereotypes. It is a much more effective way to get changes done than just demanding everything on a silver plate, like a spoiled brat.

I never heard of the guy who starred in this documentary. The.main reason.this guy created the documentary in the first place is that nobody ever heard of the idiot. He only created the show because he does not have a career and he is trying desperately to get a career. His standup routine shown in the documentary is terrible and completely amateurish.

Picking on Hank Azaria will NOT get this unknown loser a career. The loser should get a bookkeeping.certificate from a junior college and get a real job. This untalented idiot is an immature kid who will NEVER have a career in showbiz.

This film is NOT saying you should feel bad for liking The Simpsons or the character of Apu. It is merely explaining how stereotypes like Apu can have real, negative effects in the context of our culture and society.

Hari's arguments are very intellectually honest, and are presented with plenty of humor. He has reasonable responses to all the defenses of the Apu stereotype.

Essentially, the biggest problem with Apu is that, because he the only Indian character on American TV for many years, many Americans came to only view Indians through the Apu stereotype. Imagine if Homer Simpson was the only depiction of white Americans on TV? It wouldn't be a fair portrayal. Neither is Apu, but because the character was created in an environment detached from actual Indians, perhaps it was easier to miss the problematic nature of defining a billion-plus people with a single character who sells expired junk food and has eight kids with his arranged-marriage wife.

The Problem with Apu introduces viewers to a situation that will likely be foreign to many of them: if you look like you or your family came from South Asia and live in the States, at some point in your life you'll probably be compared to the Simpson's character Apu. Comedian Hari Kondabolu is a big fan of the Simpsons, but not a big fan of being compared to Apu, so he sets out to find Abu's origins, to talk with others about being bullied with Apu, and to interview Hank Azaria, who voices Apu. The documentary is an expansion of a bit from Kondabolu's stand-up routine and although it has its moments, it doesn't really grapple with the interesting questions it raises. The attempt to talk with Azaria, for example, provides much of the structure and tension of the film--will he or won't he?--but what would such an interview really tell us? The real problem with Apu is that he's the only South-Asian character many non-South Asian people may know, so he's the go-to reference for interactions with South-Asian acquaintances that range from teasing to bullying, On the other hand, if you're of South-Asian heritage, as the film points out, Apu stands for the inability of people to see who you are. To send Apu down the memory hole wouldn't solve any of these problems because Apu is the symbol of a bigger problem, not the problem itself.

The people who made this trash should be ashamed of themselves for thinking their corny woke ideology could hold a candle to The Simpsons, especially the show's early years. Simpson's, when it premiered, was the pinnacle of writing excellence. The show trashed everyone equally. It was also lightyears ahead with progressive politics on stuff such as nuclear power. Ironic that Aziz thought he could take a shot at this show and then got taken out with his own dirty sex scandal.

This is a ridiculous attempt at stirring racism and hate towards a topic that does not exist. PC world gone mad. You would expect this person to now create another film called "The problem with Homer" imagine how that would go down with the White Americans. Get a grip.

Hari Kondabolu's documentary dives into the title character from the Simpsons. He attacks the stereotype of Apu, yet, he makes his argument more about emotions than about fact. The people he interviews is clearly biased in how he interviews mainly Indian-Americans and people who support his case.

He attempts to get Hank Azaria, who plays Apu, to be interviewed for the documentary. When Azaria turns him down, he gets furious with Azaria. He talks about privilege, which is important to talk about, but he doesn't dive in with logic and his complaints are based too much on emotion and not enough on facts.

It is always important to talk about racism and stereotyping. However, "The Problem with Apu" and Kondabolu don't realize that the Simpsons sees these stereotypes as satire. Not to make fun of these people, but to simply make a joke. Kondabolu takes it too personal when the Simpsons isn't intentionally being racist, but just trying to get laughs.

The issue the documentary brings up is that Apu was the *only* indian character represented on TV at the time. If there were other TV shows with indian characters, this movie wouldn't have been made.

The problem wasn't with Apu, it was the fact that Apu was the ONLY indian/south asian tv portrayal.

But here's the truth: Apu is literally portrayed as the most successful guy in Springfield. Apu is university educated with a PHD, he is always portrayed as extremely intelligent, knows american history better than the US-born characters, Apu owns his own business (which he chooses to work at because he enjoys it and the people he meets, not because it's his only option or whatever other drivel people say), drives a flashy expensive car (pontiac firebird) with a nice huge house, and was the most eligible bachelor wanted by all the women in town. There was nothing racist in the portrayal of Apu.

Tries to bring down the very thing he's making money on. Silly.