It’s Netflix’s “summer of disaster,” with the streamer rolling out a new documentary each week under the Trainwreck anthology banner. Each of the eight films revisits a real-life event that spiraled out of control, from music festival tragedies to viral hoaxes and reality TV fiascos. These stories dominated headlines at the time, and now each of the installments give the ugly tales a deeper dive. At TV and City, we’re covering them all.
Trainwreck: The Cult of American Apparel hits Netflix on July 1.
By Elazar Abrahams
In the mid-2000s, American Apparel exploded from niche fashion label to household name. Known for its Made in USA manufacturing and provocative advertising, the brand cultivated a distinct aesthetic and a cult-like workplace culture. At the center of it all was founder and CEO Dov Charney, whose charisma and vision masked a deeply toxic environment. As the company grew, allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct began to mount against Charney, along with criticism of his erratic management. Though Charney denied wrongdoing and was never found guilty of a crime, the cumulative scandals ultimately led to his ouster and the company’s collapse.
Trainwreck: The Cult of American Apparel is an interesting addition to the anthology, if only because it covers a slightly older cultural moment. Unlike the previous installments, this is a story that younger viewers may only vaguely remember, or not at all. For those less familiar, the documentary serves as a decent primer on the brand’s rise and fall.
Unfortunately, it once again falls into the same pattern as earlier Trainwreck entries: broad recap, minimal new insight. The film leans heavily on former employee interviews, but stops short of fully interrogating how and why Charney was able to operate unchecked for so long. It captures the surface contradictions — the empowering feminist marketing versus the deeply problematic workplace culture — but does not probe much deeper.
While Cult of American Apparel is a passable watch, it left this viewer wanting more. The subject is undeniably compelling, but the documentary’s cautious tone and lack of sharp investigative edge hold it back.
