The People vs. Larry Flynt (7/8) Movie CLIP - The Supreme Court (1996) HD
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- The People vs. Larry Flynt movie clips: j.mp/1JadoHy
BUY THE MOVIE: amzn.to/rRfQFj
Don't miss the HOTTEST NEW TRAILERS: bit.ly/1u2y6pr
CLIP DESCRIPTION:
Alan (Edward Norton) presents the case of free speech and libelous speech to the justices of the Supreme Court.
FILM DESCRIPTION:
"If the First Amendment will protect a scumbag like me, then it'll protect all of you -- 'cause I'm the worst," declares Hustler Magazine publisher Larry Flynt (as played by Woody Harrelson) in the midst of one of his many court cases. Milos Forman's film follows Flynt from his childhood in Kentucky, where he made extra money for his dirt-poor family by selling the moonshine his father brewed, into adulthood as he manages a strip club in Cincinnati. While the club does middling business, the experience changes Flynt's life in two ways: he meets Althea (Courtney Love), an exotic dancer who becomes the love of his life, and he gets the bright idea of starting a magazine to promote the club. Marketed as a crasser, less pretentious alternative to Playboy or Penthouse, Hustler becomes a huge success after Flynt runs a photo series of Jacqueline Onassis sunbathing nude. However, while plenty of people are buying Hustler, there are also plenty of people who don't care for it, including Charles Keating (James Cromwell), leader of a watchdog group called Citizens For Decent Literature. Keating spearheads the first of many legal attacks on the magazine, one of which reaches the Supreme Court as Alan Isaacman (Edward Norton), Flynt's lawyer, debates the finer legal points of bad taste with the justices of the highest court in the land. Meanwhile, Flynt makes a fortune, loses the use of his legs after an attack by a sniper, embraces and than abandons Christianity, and eventually loses Althea, who succumbs to AIDS after a long addiction to drugs. Woody Harrelson's brother Brett Harrelson is well cast as Larry Flynt's brother Jimmy; Larry Flynt appears briefly as a judge who hands down a judgment against Larry Flynt.
CREDITS:
TM & © Sony (1996)
Cast: James Cromwell, Charles M. Crump, Jim Grimshaw, Woody Harrelson, Rand Hopkins, Edward Norton, Richard Paul, James Smith
Director: Milos Forman
Producers: George Linardos, Oliver Stone, Janet Yang, Scott Ferguson, Michael Hausman
Screenwriters: Scott Alexander, Larry Karaszewski
WHO ARE WE?
The MOVIECLIPS channel is the largest collection of licensed movie clips on the web. Here you will find unforgettable moments, scenes and lines from all your favorite films. Made by movie fans, for movie fans.
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR MOVIE CHANNELS:
MOVIECLIPS: bit.ly/1u2yaWd
ComingSoon: bit.ly/1DVpgtR
Indie & Film Festivals: bit.ly/1wbkfYg
Hero Central: bit.ly/1AMUZwv
Extras: bit.ly/1u431fr
Classic Trailers: bit.ly/1u43jDe
Pop-Up Trailers: bit.ly/1z7EtZR
Movie News: bit.ly/1C3Ncd2
Movie Games: bit.ly/1ygDV13
Fandango: bit.ly/1Bl79ye
Fandango FrontRunners: bit.ly/1CggQfC
HIT US UP:
Facebook: on. 1y8M8ax
Twitter: bit.ly/1ghOWmt
Pinterest: bit.ly/14wL9De
Tumblr: bit.ly/1vUwhH7
![[ TEASER ] เงาะป่า - วงL.กฮ. | TMG RECORD](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/M4ObdFfcPww/mqdefault.jpg)
Norton is sublime! In character, he speaks in front of the court like the whole thing wasn't scripted, as authentic as a documentary!
Indeed, and his purposeful word stumbles really add to the genuine delivery. This scene has stuck with me over the years, and I always think of it when the topic of free speech comes up. The Chris Rock making fun of Will Smith's wife Jada made me think of it again.
Lawyer (This movie) vs Criminal (Primal Fear). How can he played such a contrast role in the same year? And he can looks like teenager in other movie and a mature adult in this. What a magic! O.o
+doraluffy his tuxedo is awful tho. dunno who's the stylist was, lol
@@iva1993ful It's not a tuxedo, it's a dress suit. A tuxedo's jacket has a longer backside than a dress suit. For someone who claims (indirectly) to have superior fashion sense, you should know that. His suit looks just fine to me. Appropriate for a court setting anyway. What kind of colors/designs would you have him wear?
2 years later he played that muscular skinhead in American history x
remembering this scene in honor of the staff at Charlie Hebdo...
Yeah, a lot of religious nuts in USA would be happy to kill Larry Flynt.
+D'Ascoyne Apples and oranges.
Larry Claxton Flynt Jr. is an American publisher and the president of Larry Flynt Publications. LFP mainly produces sexually graphic videos and magazines, most notably Hustler
Funny, this is exactly where we ended up after 30 years. Right back at the beginning.
It's only gotten worse since your comment....
You obviously can't see the difference between legal and moral liability.
Boohoo, rapists and bigots get consequence for their actions.
@peglegjoe Exactly! And I'm sure there are many fragile individual's who will be thoroughly offend by your comment...
This is a fairly realistic recreation of the actual litigation except for a couple of points, most notably Edward Norton's hand gestures. When lawyers address a court, the hands stay firmly placed on the podium and very little movement occurs; the reason for this is you don't want to distract the Justices from the content of your argument; you want them to focus on your words not your hands.
How do you know what Larry Flynt's lawyer's hand motions (or lack thereof) were?
It is almost exact transcript of the original speech/dialogue in court. (I've checked myself.) Movie version's sounds a little bit more energetic, though (there is a sound recording available as well).
Mispeaks, editor leaves it in.
GENIUS !
"really all it does is allow us to punish unpopular speech and...and this country is founded at least in part on the firm belief that unpopular speech is absolutely vital to the health of our nation." - Edward Norton, "The People Vs. Larry Flint"
"Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires." - James Madison, "The Federalist #10"
I actually have used this case as a college report & got an A :)
squall600 .... That's what I'm getting ready to do. 😀
+Eileen LeValley lemme know how it turns out.
Doing that right now hopefully I get an A as well
@@victorymansions Case-law is imperative in the Common law system. Not so much in the Continental legal system.
one of the best scenes in the movie....Ed Norton is so frikn good here as he is giving the Supreme Court justices a very clear and concise explanation about free speech..and how its pretty much the backbone and definition of the "The people vs. Larry Flynt" case...whats cool also in this scene is ..Ed Norton is givin those ol' stuffy justices an excellent refresher course..Free Speech 101...and it def looks like all those justices ears are WIDE open too...
+gdub454 Frightening isn't it..that you have to explain something so trivial and clear thing as free speech to judges like those..
Depends on the lawyer. A lot of lawyers can pull it off to be persuasive, others can overdo it and self-destruct.
Fast forward 8 years and freedom of speech has disappeared in the USA…if you’re right of Chairman Mao
"Unpopular speech is vital to the survival of our nation": like criticizing the covid police state
Wow, some of those actors look EXACTLY like the Justices did in real life - especially Scalia and O'Connor.
i know, i have seen the film many times and the first time i wondered if it wasnt the real scalia and o conner.
I really went from hating Scalia to loving him after seeing this portrayal.
Scalia didn't have that much hair.
@@JonathanPoto They quoted Scalia verbatim, too.
If you listen to the oral argument, he was VERY skeptical of Jerry Falwell’s argument.
Larry Flynt passed away today. RIP.
These are two concepts I hold in my head when arguing against cancel culture.
"It's a matter of taste not law ... It's useless to argue about taste and even more useless to litigate it."
Emotional distress is the easiest thing in the world to claim and impossible to refute and that's what makes it a meaningless standard. Really what it does, is allow us to punish unpopular speech
How about death threats?
1. Cancel culture isn't purely about emotional distress or taste. It's an oversimplification. 2. Cancel culture is a way of expressing opinion, covered by the right of free speech. 3. The debate depicted in the video was about whether someone should be held legally liable only for causing emotional distress. So it has nothing to do with cancel culture, with moral liability.
@@25756881 The liability to unpopular speech is social public ridicule and people not wanting to be your friend.
Cancel culture has nothing to do with someone's ability to litigate a matter because their feelings get hurt. Cancel culture has to do with society shunning someone because they said something that people don't like. Whether you like that idea or not, the point of the matter is that there is nothing illegal about a movie studio refusing to contract with someone who has been vilified by the public.
@@dautolover Yep, this has nothing to do with what a lot of people are trying to shoe horn it into.
One of the best films of the 90s. Period. And Arguably the best Woody Harrelson performance!
1998 Movie: "Unpopular speech in absolutely vital to the health of our nation."
Enter: Cancel Culture.
@@mikepawntee2425 You are both correct and incorrect. Constitutional provisions protecting free speech and free expression preclude governmental penalties against such. While people are allowed to distance themselves from unpopular speech, they should keep in mind their own *commitment* to the free flow of ideas. If you don't like what you see or hear, build a thicker skin and put in the work to persuade others of its wrongfulness. I respect those people far more than the intellectual sloths who try to cancel what they don't like. Be careful about firing employees, ending friendships, and cancelling shows so flagrantly. Given how quickly societal thinking changes, doing so encourages a society to stagnate in groupthink. It distracts us from the truth.
at 0:45, the girl towards the right winks at Larry Flynt. Why?
They don't make movies with this message any longer, that would encourage too many people to think
"and this country is founded at least in part on the firm belief that unpopular speech is absolutely vital to the health of our nation."
Yup, freedom of speech is so important its the first thing they remembered to add :D
"At the heart of the First Amendment is the recognition of the fundamental importance of the free flow of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest and concern. The freedom to speak one's mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty - and thus a good unto itself - but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole. We have therefore been particularly vigilant to ensure that individual expressions of ideas remain free from governmentally imposed sanctions."
Somebody needs to show this to Brian Stelter.
Was there an original audio for this? (Like an original Oral argument somewhere archived for the actual case?)
Oyez, Hustler v Falwell, click on Oral Argument
We are still leading asses to Washington! Thank you Larry Flynt for pursuing this lawsuit! And Alan Isaacman for such a brilliant speech!!
sometimes when i eat an orange i think about this video
Watch The Godfather.
0:12 that’s the real Larry Flynt.
Saw this in the theater and still remember how kick butt I thought Ed Norton was
This movie has become one of my top 10 ever.
Some people should listen to this even today.
I would go a step further. I don't think there is even a need for a publication to have a "public purpose" other than pure entertainment, funny or not. No threats, violations of intellectual property, incitement of violence, or libel from Flynt or Hustler. Doesn't matter if it's in bad taste - if it fails to violate the established exceptions, it is protected by the first amendment.
If only the liberals of today agreed with this entire monologue.
look at the crazy sjw people. they are against freedom of speech
republicans are just as guilty of repressing free speech specifically by trying to outlaw flag burning
@@planobest8120 or bitching about football players kneeling down to protest police brutality.
We don’t? Speak for yourself.
@@commissarkitty3553 Or calling news they don't like fake.
Norton is out of line but he was right.
Офигенный фильм. Мы в России просрали этот момент свободы.
Typical Scalia. Getting right in there lol
this is literally jimmy, its insane. the speech mannerisms, the hair, everything lol
RIP Larry Flynt!
This message will never get old. Now, more than ever, this is Required for Public Health. This is Freedom and the definition of Personal Tyranny. Sticks and Stones. Red, White and Blue.
The main thing is that free speech and free thought makes an well you guys know people normal
those were very different times lol
The grey 2011 blockbuster dangerous risk movie 9.9 star ⭐🌟⭐🌟⭐🌟⭐🌟⭐
That speech was iconic Im going to search who wrote it may have been the actor I don't know but it's amazing I know that
What step in the litigation process is in this clip? I know someone knows.
This movie was surprisingly very good. The performances of Woody Harrelson, Edward Norton and Courtney Love were also very good.
They need to watch this in Canada where multiple comedians have been sued and fined because of jokes made on stage.
it is also important to be culturally sensitive. america is not the arbitrator of speech regs. canadians are vastly more non-violent than americans, tolerant, civil and polite, and believe this is what in part gives them their peaceful reputation. the us as well as other countries could learn alot from canada. look at the level and intensity of civil unrest and conflict in the us, v canada. it' a very different culture. let us not be what people accuse us ...chauvanists, pushing american agendas when we have so many systemic on the ground problems about inequity. what free speech means tto muslims, for example is completely different, we should honor that.
@@jschuler53 I'm curious, do you still agree with everything you wrote 2 years ago or are there some alterations you would add?
@@davedavidson8892 I stand my my statement. What has changed regarding this topic? Values should always be context specific; otherwise they only serve a small portion of the population. Policy is based on the values of that society or group of people. the only thing I can think of I would amend would be saying free speech for Muslims. We need to leave these people completely alone. It's terrible they violate the UN human rights standards, but some people you just can't save...you risk too much and I believe it is that way in commited Muslim countries. If the people want to change great but I really don't hear a lot about that. I guess that says something important too, that you don't hear about the discontent. But it is no longer the job of the US to right all the wrongs when our country is such a mess. It's like the neighbor lady who can't help feed all the hungry kids in the neighborhood then there is no food left for her own kids. Just because you see a problem doesn't mean we have to fix it. Pointing it out is fine.
@@jschuler53 I agree with leaving a country to their own devices if they don't want assistance from a foreign superpower. Casting pearls upon a swine is a pretty good idiom to describe the last decade of Western influence on the middle east.
Do you still hold up Canada as a bastion of principle that other countries should learn from? As a Canadian I feel this is facade we like to perpetuate which only recently has been challenged.
@@davedavidson8892 I agree completely about the pearls before swine comment. IDK, now you keep asking me and if you're a Canadian telling me it's a facade then no, I have to believe someone who knows more about it than I do. Why is it not the image it portrays, as polite and very civilized? I realize there is corruption with Trudeau. And quebec wants to seceed, is that right? And there is prejudice around Quebec?
This rationale didn't age well, with the current way things are with social justice.
I'm glad I no longer live in the USA.
Taylor Swift AI memes are “humor” too
Amazing the 30 year turn around where now the president is arrested for speech. Crazy times
Very well scripted.
Does only one man in Hollywood play George Prescott Bush? The stock actor.
Rip Foreman we love your movies
RIP The Supreme Court
RIP Larry Flynt
Why are there only Korean subtitles available? lol
Can someone send this scene to Gavin Newsom?
R.I.P. Justice Scalia, he was 79
+krogdog
It is hard to predict how many decades it will take America to undo the damage done by this man. One of his last daggers into the heart of his fellow man, was to block the global warming policies that came out of the Paris summit, while preserving profits for the rich - like he has always done.
We execute people ... for less
+neo theskepticarena What you advocate is the genocide of the third world.
+erentheca
Go back to sleep Bubbles
It's not the UN's job to dictate what we do, it's ours. It's people like you that make me question the state of man to base what he does on the hivemind of those who he follows and not his own wit. Global warming is highly controversial and no one seems to come even close to what it is, so he blocked those policies because we don't know if it's true or not and either way it'll cut open the stomach of many businesses, an economic choice we can't afford.
He was a saint [in the lega/political sense]. If they can pull gay marriage out of the 14A then they can do anything. The ROOL-OV-LAWW means nothing.
see also; football players take a knee during national anthem.
I find that in theory and with the Constitution, the USA is the best country in the world for free speech. But it is one of the worse for free speech in practice in the developed world.
What a lot of people in the comments seem to be missing is this applies to both sides
Flint would love your strawberries!
There is no line.
Can someone tell me which justice is which?
is this criminal law
What do u mean it is constitutional law is my geuss since there arguing about free press
Nope civil suit appealed to the Supreme Court if I remember correctly.
Bruce Banner is tiny in this movie
Take a bow Ed
The levels of irony in this movie given what is happening today is enormous. The Left loves free speech when they no power, but loathes it when they do. Very rich.
The answer is - of course Free Speech should apply to Holocaust deniers. I applies to all, regardless of what view is being advocated - that is the point.
At 2:07---is that supposed to be Rehnquist?
Rehnquist the racist. That's the one.
He's so cute here =)
Abolish The supreme Court
Shut your mouth
The best part ofthe movie