Well, of course Milo Forman is perfect to direct this study on the guy who came up with "Hustler", because the guy couldn't even make an epic-length dramatic study on Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart without getting vulgar, and plus, after "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's… More
Well, of course Milo Forman is perfect to direct this study on the guy who came up with "Hustler", because the guy couldn't even make an epic-length dramatic study on Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart without getting vulgar, and plus, after "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest", he clearly knows how to work with crazy people like Courtney Love. Oh, I had to stop myself there for a second before I questioned if Love's performance in this film is more impressive than the fact that Forman actually got her to quit drugs for, like, a couple of weeks while they shot this film, because it's so obvious that Love's all too brief clean-up session is more shocking, seeing as how she's hardly making all that much of a stretch in this film that features her as a spoiled, drug-mad smut peddler. Eh, whatever, it's still a surprisingly good performance, as opposed to the one by Woody Harrelson, because it is no way surprising that he is awesome in this, no matter how much he tries to catch you off-guard. First it's "Natural Born Killer", and now it's "Natural Born Hustlers", so you know that the delightful little ol' Woody Boyd was eager to show that he can do some dark stuff in the mid-'90s, though not entirely to where he got his skinny white behind out of the comedy genre, because this film gets to be pretty funny, and if "Natural Born Killers" isn't a comedy then, well, I wouldn't be surprised, because it's about as serious as I would expect an Oliver Stone film that follows a "story" concieved by Quinten Tarantino to be. Hey, Harrelson wasn't quite as emphatic about his range as Edward Norton, who, in 1996, his first year in feature films, was going to trial in "Primal Fear", armed with a wealth of acting material, then, in this film, became a lawyer with pretty much nothing for Norton to do. Shoot, he's still one of the greatest actors alive, but Woody Harrelson isn't exactly as shabby as he looks either, as this film will most definately tell. Still, as great as Harrelson is in this, and as darn good as the film itself is, its quality isn't too much less dirtied up than the magazine it tells the origin of.
In plenty of places, the film is reasonably tight, yet its biggest issue is unevenness in about as many other areas, one of which being atmosphere, in that the film will find itself following plenty of extended periods of liveliness and entertainment value, only to suddenly trip and slip into slow spells, few, if any of which are ever too bland, but bland, to one degree or another, nevertheless, as well as emphatic of actual plot that could use some tightening up. Believe it or not, Larry Flynt's story is a mighty layered one, and considering that the film is relatively short for an extensive biopic, it's not like the final product is entirely populated of expendable material, and yet, with that said, the film still outstays its welcome, being bloated with more material than it can handle, whether it be fat around the edges, or too much meat to do away with plotting repetition. The film is not but about 130 minutes, yet it feels quite a bit longer than that, because it is just so packed with material, and plotting dynamicity and pacing smoothness take some serious damage from this padding, yet isn't exactly helped by certain plotting structure aspects that are anything but tight. Immediate development in this film feels a bit too thin, and the progressive explosition that follows and takes up the body of the film, while not as slapdashed as the initial development segment, isn't too much tighter, and the culprit behind these development issues is certainly not padding, but hurrying, the product of the moments in which this film feels as though it's struggling to tighten things up, of which, there are plenty. The film will take its time to meditate upon its focus, often for a bit too long, then it will suddenly turn its pacing on a dime and slam-bang a few plotting notes together, thus inspiring pacing uneveness that, before too long, spawns aimlessness, something that a story this conceptually layered cannot afford to have. Needless to say, after a while, the story's dynamicity on paper and straightfowardness in execution fail to gel, and that's where focal unevenness comes in, yet another branch to the inconsistency that most certainly never drives the final product into underwhelmingness, but holds it back. Still, as flawed as this film is, what it does right, it nails, and rest assured that this film does a lot of things right, maybe not to where it's as engrossing as its concept, but certainly to where it rewards, and more than some might believe, considering who recieves the spotlight in this biographical "drama".
Now, in all honesty, in plenty of places, this biopic is fairly formulaic, and on top of that, come on, we're talking about Larry "The Filthy Rich Sleazeball Who Came Up With the Just Plane Filthy 'Hustler'" Flynt (Jeez, I wonder why that nickname never stuck), so no matter how surprisingly potent this drama is in a lot of places, it was never to take itself too seriously, and yet, as familiar and slightly thin as this character piece is, it's not without plenty of layers, quite a few of which don't quite gel as much as they probably should, but many more of which hit with just enough slickness to breathe life into the engagement value of this intriguing opus, and for this, credit is due to screenwriters Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski, who are certainly flawed in their plotting on many occasions, but, on the whole, quite commendable, livening things up with clever dialogue and a fair bit of comic relief that ranges from amusing to hilarious (Kids, don't make a fool of yourself in the courtroom, unless of course you're as charming as Woody Harrelson), when not driving engagement value with colorful characterization that bonds you with this story and its characters as compellingly layered. Sure, some layers devolve into mere inconsistencies, but on the whole, Alexander's and Karaszewski's efforts are worthwhile in their wittily punching up entertainment value, while colorfully bringing most the potential of this genuinely fascinating character drama to life, at least on paper. When it comes to bringing the accomplishments of the screenwriters to the final product, well, that's in the hands of director Milo Forman, whose efforts, while flawed, deliver, doing justice to this story's color through style - particularly fine tastes in editing that is itself brought to life by Christopher Tellefsen - and entertainment value, when not powering the relatively deeper regions of this tale through genuine emotional resonance that bonds you within the depths of our humanly flawed characters, and the reasonably rich story behind them. The film is rarely as strong as it should be, but it is consistently engaging, and gradually grows to be more so as it progresses, until, by the final act, we're treated to unexpectedly subtle touches of dramatic power, thus making for a relatively successful drama that Forman carries with about as much confidence as he had in something like "Man on the Moon", or "Amadeus", or, shoot, maybe even "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest", but not without the help of quite the talented cast. It's the more key roles in this film that are the most well-portrayed, yet most everyone in this star-studded cast of charmers earns your attention at some point, and when it comes to the leads, like I said, they deliver the most, with then-newcomer and future-champion of the art of acting Edward Norton being definately not as revelatory as he was in the underwhelming, but, at least on his behalf, incredibly well-acted "Primal Fear" (Cuba Gooding, Jr. won that Oscar because he's black, and don't you dare tell me otherwise, you naive liberals), but charming and sometimes even effectively genuine as a man of justice who must defend a man he hardly agrees with as much as he would probably like to, while Courtney Love truly surprises in her fearless, chillingly convincing and all around outstanding portrayal of a smooth lady with quetionable morals who grows into a self-destructive mess of a woman threatened by her own power (Jeez, I wonder how she got to know this part so well). Love steals the show, but only when the spotlight hits her, because at the end of the day, this is the show of Woody Harrelson, one of today's great actors, and boy, does he command it, being initially every bit as charming as he usually is before he comes in from out of the left wing and blows you away in his powerul and profoundly layered portrayal of a man of ambition who becomes a corrupt man of dirty business (So to speak), then, eventually, an unpredictable man who will grow to face many a regret and be left with nothing more than his near-hollow ambitions. It takes a second for Harrelson's material to pick up, but once it does, our lead soars, turning in what may very well be his best performance, one that is never less than engaging enough to make Harrelson a worthwhile leading force who stands as one of the biggest of many factors who powers this film, maybe not as the biopic that it should have been, but a rewarding biopic regardless.
To close the case, blanding slow spells are components of awkward atmospheric unevenness, as well as emphatic of considerable padding that is itself a component of structural unevenness, the other side of which is moments of hurrying that thin out expository kick and joins the bloated areas of plotting in igniting aimlessness over a layered story concept that comes off as too inconsistent for the final product to be what it could have been, but not fall flat as underwhelming, being built on an intriguing story concept that is brought to life by the clever and colorful writing, engaging and sometimes resonant direction, and talented cast - headed by a charming Edward Norton, gripping Courtney Love and powerful Woody Harrelson - that make "The People vs. Larry Flynt" a generally entertaining, often compelling and ultimately reasonably worthwhile study on the life and times of one of the magazine industries most controversial figures.
3/5 - Good
