The People vs. Larry Flynt Movie Review

The People vs. Larry Flynt (1996)

Rent The People vs. Larry Flynt on Amazon Video (paid link)
Written by: Scott Alexander & Larry Karaszewski
Directed by: Milos Forman
Starring: Woody Harrelson, Courtney Love, Edward Norton, James Cromwell, Crispin Glover, James Carville, Norm Macdonald
Rated: R
Watch the trailer

Plot
The story of controversial pornography publisher Larry Flynt, and how he became a defender of free speech.

Verdict
It's a good primer for the history of and first amendment battles Flynt waged. The catch here is that Flynt is fighting for a fundamental right, but he isn't very likable and treats this bedrock of government as a publicity stunt. Should someone like Flynt have the right to say whatever he wants? Technically yes, but you won't like him for it.
It depends.

Review
Larry Flynt (Woody Harrelson) was out to make a dollar since he was a kid selling moonshine. Now he's running a strip club. When you're goal is to make a dollar, focusing on vices certainly works. He creates a newsletter to promote his clubs and the success of that prompts him to create his magazine, Hustler.

Woody Harrelson plays Larry Flynt

He was bold enough or rather foolish enough to embark and the endeavor, and it's sheer luck that an Italian photographer sent him pictures of the first lady when his magazine was on the brink of failure.

Larry is certainly a fan of spectacle. Everything he does is over the top. I'd guess at least part of that is he grew up poor and now he's buying everything he never had and only dreamed about. Because he's over the top, you never quite know when he's being sincere. His religious conversion seems like some kind of stunt, especially with his past exploits.

The thing about this movie is that Larry isn't likable, but his point is valid. How is a picture of a naked woman obscene and likely to get you arrested but a picture of a dead body will win you an award. Which one is more unsettling?

Ed Norton, Woody Harrelson play Alan Isaacman, Larry Flynt

He's an unlikely hero for the first amendment, but it really seems that his overall goal was to use his legal fight as a publicity stunt much to the chagrin of his lawyer Alan Isaacman (Ed Norton). Certainly his legal battles raised awareness for his magazine. His publishing business has made an incredible amount of money. His office is absolutely ridiculous and ostentatious. What makes this movie compelling is that he's not likable, but he's correct in this case.