Louis C.K.: Perdón (o no)

This documentary reveals that Louies' "apology" was a sham, given that his story now is that the women he accosted were, well, just confused. But with the additional details this film surfaces, it's clear CK knew from the very beginning his conduct was abusive. What he calls just his "kink" or his "thing" ("All of you have a thing too!" -- aw shucks!) is a physiological disorder he should have known to get therapeutic treatment for as a grown-*ss man. But because he was shielded by the industry at large, this abuse went on for the better part of two decades. Now he thrives with his new audience of dopey bros, while the women he demeaned are being re-victimized. The film leaves the audience to contemplate what this all means for our society, especially 7 years after Weinstein.

This documentary is pushing an agenda that Louis CK's behavior was an open industry secret. This is entirely one sided and at ignores any evidence that this may not be the case.

Instead it spends the first hour talking about what Louis CK did and attempts to cast it as an open secret in the industry. I was actually more convinced before watching this than after.

There are multiple times where scenes are shown where others are asked about Louis CK's behavior and are confused by the question, denying any knowledge.

The documentary presents this as all part of the cover up. This is the first hour of the documentary.

The last half hour is then how he's clearly not sorry enough. How they don't approve of his act and how he doesn't bring sexual misconduct into their act.

It feels like they are demanding he make their trauma part of his comedy routine and it's hard to imagine they wouldn't be complaining if he had.

The only interviews that the documentary crew produced are unabashedly aligned with the agenda of documentary. They didn't attempt to present any counter opinion by anyone in the industry, just various footage clips that were narrated around.

"Sorry/Not Sorry" covers legendary comedian Louis CK's downfall to his return in recent years. This rating sits in the middle because the documentary does well in how it presents the narrative, great soundtrack, great filmography and organization of the story in parts.

Unfortunately, it does bother me how the Louis CK's gatekeeping of the female comedians into the industry somehow transfers to "all men are evil" narrative. The documentary poses great philosophical questions like "where do we draw the line?", "is there no room for redemption?" but unfortunately leads the audience towards the more pessimistic conclusions about Louis CK. It even goes as far as picking out 10 to 15 second clips of him in various out-of-context podcasts and stand-up specials to portray him in an irredeemable light.

What Louis CK did was bad, and we must forever feel for the victims, but to pair it up with a life-traumatizing event like the actual Weinstein cases is weird. As for these female comedians being "gate-kept", the market makes the industry, not your feelings. It's clear as day how Louis CK's continued success even after these accusations, that his art is valued by the world. Altogether, this was an unfair documentary made by people with a clear agenda against Louis CK, but at-least it was thought provoking.

I have been a huge Louis CK fan for several years. He's the only comic that never fails to make me laugh. When I first heard that Louie was "cancelled" back in 2017, I was of the opinion that #MeToo went way too far. I continued to watch his specials & movies, and I hoped that this "awkward mishap" would be forgotten.

I'm still inclined to agree with that sentiment. Yet now that I hear the testimonies of the women, his special "Sorry" seems so messed up. I agree that he 100% should have used that special to say something truthful & meaningful. Yet instead, Louie just briefly joked about it, grossly mischaracterized what actually happened (assuming the women never consented), and then he moved on to make millions.

I only give 7/10 because, while the documentary was incredibly thought provoking, it doesn't seem to put Louie on the hook to give an actual apology. I would have given this documentary 10 stars if it pleaded Louie to do precisely that. What Louie did can & should be forgiven, in my opinion. I think many of the victims could forgive him too if he properly apologized. But Louie may never actually apologize if people continue to relentlessly attack him.

Don't get me wrong; I feel sorry for all the women that were also attacked for trying to talk about Louie's behavior. The women got it SO much worse, and I'm glad that the documentary gives recognition to that. This documentary seemed like it was just about to bridge the gap; to allow a proper discussion on this polarizing issue. But sadly, it seemed to end on a persecution campaign instead... And yet, I suppose that's Louie's fault because he refused to participate in this documentary... and yet I understand why he may be hesitant to do so because if he says the wrong thing, it could forever end the career that he has left.

The most frustrating thing of all of this is that I KNOW Louie is genius enough to find a way to talk about these difficult issues AND make us cry laughing while doing it. I hope that Louie watched this documentary and doesn't take it the wrong way. I believe that if he knew how the women feel, that he can find a way to properly make amends while making us cry laughing about it. If nothing else, this documentary showed me what a lousy job Louie did on making amends. Louie could be a legend if he would use his craft to navigate this cultural divide instead of hiding behind his jokes & trying to forget it happened. I was glad that he was back, but he can do better than his lousy special. Now, I don't know what to think of Louie if he won't use his comedic genius to make properly make amends.

This is a technically-competent documentary but its problem is thematic, in that it doesn't know what it's trying to achieve.

First of all, Louis CK is someone who did appalling, inexcusable things but he's not Harvey Weinstein. Invoking such an iconic monster as Weinstein detracts from CK's lesser, albeit vile, behaviour. But that's not the main flaw in this film. The main flaw is that it doesn't know what question it's asking.

If it's asking why Louis CK still has a great career, we already know the answer - because he's a great comedian. That raises the question; should someone who did something reprehensible be allowed to make a living? And if so, should they only be allowed to make a living in certain professions? (And if so, why? Etc etc) If it's asking whether or not Louis CK is genuinely sorry, the only valid answer is: 'We don't know.' We can't possibly know anyone's genuine emotions - as opposed to what they choose to tell us - unless we've known that person very well and for long enough that we can trust them to be honest with us. We certainly can't know the private thoughts of a person whom most of us have never even met.

Rightly or wrongly, Louis CK's not required to be sorry; he's only required to abide by the law and not repeat his past behaviour. He could of course make it obvious that he's really sorry, but that might be performative, so would it mean anything, anyway?

A much more insightful question would have been; Can you separate the art from the artist? That's up to the individual - there's no generic response but it's a fascinating question that could have driven a much more interesting film.

Personally I love Louis CK's comedy - he's one my favourites. Do I love the man himself? Definitely not - I don't even know him and I have zero desire to meet him. Having met a few of my creative heroes, I have no problem separating art from artist. Whether anyone else feels the same is entirely up to them. That's the subjective nature of any art and how individuals respond to it.