Larry Flynt beat and divorced several wives. His daughter has accused him of sexual abuse. 'Hustler' is a sexist, often misogynistic magazine, that has published violent porn and romanticizes rape and violence against women.
Formans film however, portrays a man who is, in his own way, a loving and devoted person. An entrepreneur of sexual liberation, who publishes dirty, but quaint, nudie-pictures.
I think that Formans beautification of the life and deed of Larry Flynt does damage to the point he seems to be trying to make. The point is that freedom of speech is precisely for the views that we do not like. So why does Forman then go out of his way to make Flynt into a likable, albeit quirky, guy? This entirely misses the point.
Why couldn't Forman show Flynt as well as the Christian right, both, as the reactionaries that they are? Perhaps from the perspective of the lawyer - Nortons character? Is that really too much to ask? I know this is Hollywood but...
Formans own sexism may enter into this. The scenes at Flynts strip club shows a boss, Flynt, who has sex with his employees, the strippers, but the film never makes an inkling to reflect on the unequal power relations or exploitation. Instead all we get to see are always willing and happy women, eager to satisfy and serve men. In Formans 'Man on the Moon', prostitution is, in a smaller scene, also depicted as something harmless, quaint and fun.
'The People vs. Larry Flynt' is well-made though, and Harrelson, Norton and Courtney Love are entertaining to watch, though their characters sometimes tend to become caricatures. The story is told with a nice drive to it. And the film does make a certain, but as said above, quite shallow point about freedom of speech.
Formans film however, portrays a man who is, in his own way, a loving and devoted person. An entrepreneur of sexual liberation, who publishes dirty, but quaint, nudie-pictures.
I think that Formans beautification of the life and deed of Larry Flynt does damage to the point he seems to be trying to make. The point is that freedom of speech is precisely for the views that we do not like. So why does Forman then go out of his way to make Flynt into a likable, albeit quirky, guy? This entirely misses the point.
Why couldn't Forman show Flynt as well as the Christian right, both, as the reactionaries that they are? Perhaps from the perspective of the lawyer - Nortons character? Is that really too much to ask? I know this is Hollywood but...
Formans own sexism may enter into this. The scenes at Flynts strip club shows a boss, Flynt, who has sex with his employees, the strippers, but the film never makes an inkling to reflect on the unequal power relations or exploitation. Instead all we get to see are always willing and happy women, eager to satisfy and serve men. In Formans 'Man on the Moon', prostitution is, in a smaller scene, also depicted as something harmless, quaint and fun.
'The People vs. Larry Flynt' is well-made though, and Harrelson, Norton and Courtney Love are entertaining to watch, though their characters sometimes tend to become caricatures. The story is told with a nice drive to it. And the film does make a certain, but as said above, quite shallow point about freedom of speech.