Elvis Movie review (saw it today)

Toto'sDad

Tele Axpert
Ad Free Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Posts
57,771
Location
Bakersfield
I posted on an earlier version of the metaphor as a comment on friend's Facebook post about the movie. I added the clapping monkey toy for the TDPRI.
I feel like a clapping monkey award should be given to most movies that are based on an entertainment character from real life. Once in a while they get it right, most times it misses the mark. I still remember a movie made about Humphrey Bogart. It missed the mark by a mile! Bogart was really big in his day, in a different time. When they made the movie about him, he looked like Kirby Vacuum salesman out making calls.
 

Skully

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Jun 12, 2003
Posts
13,950
Location
Glamorous NoHo
I feel like a clapping monkey award should be given to most movies that are based on an entertainment character from real life. Once in a while they get it right, most times it misses the mark. I still remember a movie made about Humphrey Bogart. It missed the mark by a mile! Bogart was really big in his day, in a different time. When they made the movie about him, he looked like Kirby Vacuum salesman out making calls.

I usually have a problem with any biopic made about a figure from the modern media era, simply because we've seen too much of them to buy into the illusion. On top of that, the movies usually suck.
 
Last edited:

tele pickin'

TDPRI Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2011
Posts
40
Location
france
I thought it was a Fender Coronado at first glance and then didn't pay any attention to it. But you're right, it's a Hagstrom Viking II.

Don't forget the paisley Tele played by the James Burton character in the Vegas years. It wasn't prominent, but I was happy to see it there.
James Burton played his old red Telecaster for the very first Vegas shows
He started using his Paisley a couple of weeks later
 

Toto'sDad

Tele Axpert
Ad Free Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Posts
57,771
Location
Bakersfield
I usually have a problem with any biopic made about a figure from the modern media era, simply because we've seen too much of them to buy into the illusion. On top of that, the movies usually suck.

Here we go, they should make a movie about Tommy Emmanuel, and have Jimmy Fallon play Tommy. That ought to be absolutely reeking with realism.
 

11 Gauge

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Mar 21, 2003
Posts
12,810
Location
Near BWI Int'l
You can glean a lot from a trailer. Have you ever noticed that a lot of trailers basically give you the whole story? I was listening to a podcast about that. The studio marketers did a lot of tests and data analysis and found that when a trailer telegraphs exactly what's going to be in the movie, more people go to see it. People think they like to be surprised, but in fact they want to know just what they're getting into before they lay down cold, hard cash on a ticket.
I actually hate a lot of trailers for this very reason.

As much as I liked the new Batman movie, I hate that they pretty much synthesized/summarized many of the biggest scenes in the trailers. Same thing for the new Dune movie. No, there was no way they could encapsulate everything in the trailer, but IMO they included too many of the big/pivotal scenes.

I really prefer to being seduced into seeing a movie, and that requires a clever degree of teasing. Maybe I'm just not part of the focus group that the studio marketers think is significant.

But as bad as a trailer is that gives the whole story away, even worse is one where IDK what in the world a given movie is about. I watch Nothing But Trailers every week (which is kind of funny, given my semi-disdain for some of them), and there's two new movies coming out that have me scratching my head...
 

Toto'sDad

Tele Axpert
Ad Free Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Posts
57,771
Location
Bakersfield
I actually hate a lot of trailers for this very reason.

As much as I liked the new Batman movie, I hate that they pretty much synthesized/summarized many of the biggest scenes in the trailers. Same thing for the new Dune movie. No, there was no way they could encapsulate everything in the trailer, but IMO they included too many of the big/pivotal scenes.

I really prefer to being seduced into seeing a movie, and that requires a clever degree of teasing. Maybe I'm just not part of the focus group that the studio marketers think is significant.

But as bad as a trailer is that gives the whole story away, even worse is one where IDK what in the world a given movie is about. I watch Nothing But Trailers every week (which is kind of funny, given my semi-disdain for some of them), and there's two new movies coming out that have me scratching my head...
My son and I read the Dune books many years ago, we both saw the first Dune movie and pretty much hated it. We looked forward to the new one, and when we saw it, we wondered why they bothered with making it. For me, I fear watching yet another Elvis movie would fall into the same category as I thought about the Dune movie; Why did they bother making it?
 

Maguchi

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Jun 16, 2019
Posts
2,528
Location
Lalaland
Some of the film is not historically accurate and some scenes are amalgams of different events. It also glosses over or doesn’t touch over many of the more sordid aspects of his life. So it disappoints in some aspects...It’s not my generation’s music...I don’t think any movie could show the overall cultural impact Elvis made. He took rock n roll mainstream from much of the pablum of the day. He broke through in a stifling period of conventional and puritanical pervasiveness.
^^^Agree. Saw it yesterday. Meh...it was OK. Liked the early rockabilly stuff, the later phase of his recordings and performances were more of a crooner "showbiz" style and didn't do it for me.
 
Last edited:

KokoTele

Doctor of Teleocity
Vendor Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2003
Posts
14,801
Age
47
Location
albany, ny [not chicago]
I don’t think Elvis rewarded Scotty Moore, DJ Fontana and Bill Black for their contributions but he spent a lot on his sycophantic buddies.

It sucks, but sidemen in the studio and on the road generally get scale. They knew what they were going to be paid, and I've never seen anything that they weren't paid. There's a different discussion to be had about whether or not it's a good deal, but it's the deal they made.

Crudup was due royalties for writing the song, but according to his wiki, was never paid.

This came up in my youtube feed yesterday. Most of the differences between biopic and reality don't bother me, but the fact that Hanks gave Parker a kind of generic germanic accent seems like a weird choice, given the fact that he actually had a lispy drawl.

 

chris m.

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Mar 25, 2003
Posts
10,421
Location
Santa Barbara, California
My son and I read the Dune books many years ago, we both saw the first Dune movie and pretty much hated it. We looked forward to the new one, and when we saw it, we wondered why they bothered with making it. For me, I fear watching yet another Elvis movie would fall into the same category as I thought about the Dune movie; Why did they bother making it?
I thought the new Dune movie was actually pretty good, and I was a rabid fan of the original Dune series. Way better than what David Lynch did, anyway.

I think the studio, producers, and director love Dune and had a vision for making it pretty true to the book. I'm sure they were also hoping it would resonate with the public and become a big, multi-movie, money-maker. The studios have seen how everybody mostly streams now, and that the best way to get folks to actually go to a theater is to have big budget, big special effects, bubble gum movies like Marvel, DC, Top Gun, Jurassic Park, Fast and Furious, and Star Wars. They were hoping Dune could be a similar big-screen attraction.
 

11 Gauge

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Mar 21, 2003
Posts
12,810
Location
Near BWI Int'l
I thought the new Dune movie was actually pretty good, and I was a rabid fan of the original Dune series. Way better than what David Lynch did, anyway.

I think the studio, producers, and director love Dune and had a vision for making it pretty true to the book. I'm sure they were also hoping it would resonate with the public and become a big, multi-movie, money-maker. The studios have seen how everybody mostly streams now, and that the best way to get folks to actually go to a theater is to have big budget, big special effects, bubble gum movies like Marvel, DC, Top Gun, Jurassic Park, Fast and Furious, and Star Wars. They were hoping Dune could be a similar big-screen attraction.
In all fairness, tackling a Dune movie with any degree of success is really tough. Just adapting it from the book to the big screen is tricky.

Special effects being what they are now really helps, but even that won't serve as a guarantee of getting it right, at least not with something like Dune.

I think David Lynch got his take on Dune about as wrong one could do, and I'm not even criticizing the effects of the time. I think he got Baron Harkonnen especially wrong, just as one example. Other than that, the narration/explanation and hearing inside the characters' heads was especially dreadful, too.

So having said all of that, I think the new Dune movie is probably as close to hypothetical perfection as we might see. I certainly appreciate that some things were left as being implicit, too. It was also the absolute right call to split things up into multiple movies, and drop some parts of the book out entirely.

But I still stand behind what I said about the Dune trailers - IMO, they put too many of the biggest scenes in them. I felt like I'd already seen a big portion of the movie when I finally saw it in the theater (one of the first ones I've seen there, post-pandemic, and also in 3-D). Same thing with the new Batman movie, only even worse than Dune. In all fairness, I don't think it was as bad with the latest Spider-Man movie trailer, but it was kind of the exception to the rule, unless I'm just not remembering the trailer accurately for that one.
 

chris m.

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Mar 25, 2003
Posts
10,421
Location
Santa Barbara, California
In all fairness, tackling a Dune movie with any degree of success is really tough. Just adapting it from the book to the big screen is tricky.

Special effects being what they are now really helps, but even that won't serve as a guarantee of getting it right, at least not with something like Dune.

I think David Lynch got his take on Dune about as wrong one could do, and I'm not even criticizing the effects of the time. I think he got Baron Harkonnen especially wrong, just as one example. Other than that, the narration/explanation and hearing inside the characters' heads was especially dreadful, too.

So having said all of that, I think the new Dune movie is probably as close to hypothetical perfection as we might see. I certainly appreciate that some things were left as being implicit, too. It was also the absolute right call to split things up into multiple movies, and drop some parts of the book out entirely.

But I still stand behind what I said about the Dune trailers - IMO, they put too many of the biggest scenes in them. I felt like I'd already seen a big portion of the movie when I finally saw it in the theater (one of the first ones I've seen there, post-pandemic, and also in 3-D). Same thing with the new Batman movie, only even worse than Dune. In all fairness, I don't think it was as bad with the latest Spider-Man movie trailer, but it was kind of the exception to the rule, unless I'm just not remembering the trailer accurately for that one.
Given the current trend of trailers being filled with spoilers it's probably best to avoid watching them before seeing a movie if you want to be surprised. Look up the Rotten Tomatoes rating, read the written review by your trusted film critic (they usually have spoiler alerts), but don't watch the trailer.
 

Mary Gemmill

TDPRI Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2022
Posts
16
Age
27
Location
ontario
Thanks for the nice small details. I don't love much the biopic, because the biopic is copy-paste. In my opinion, it is just good.
 

effzee

Tele-Holic
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Posts
916
Age
58
Location
Germany
Finally got to see this, in a tiny historic 16-seater movie house with my daughter, and I just want to say that the film, taken as a film in itself, is outstanding. The cinematography and editing and all the things that go into making a good movie are in top form here. I was expecting a good movie, based on glowing reviews I'd read, but this really blew me away. My daughter loved it, too. When it was over, she asked me what time it was and thought I was reading my watch wrong when I told her. She had been totally taken in by the movie and thought it was half as long as it was. I might just go back for a second viewing.
IMG_20220727_172250.jpg
 

ChazFromCali

Tele-Meister
Joined
Jun 24, 2022
Posts
219
Age
60
Location
Tijuana / Rosarito
The accusation is made

I believe Elvis did play in Canada, but no Command Performance for the Queen, no Japan, no Aus, no European tour(s) etc.

Not sure if the Col. accompanied E to Canada. But he was scared to leave to USA for fear of not being able to get back in. Also they overpaid the IRS every year to avoid scrutiny of the Colonel's immigration status, lol.

The thing that I think is interesting is: Elvis and the Col. did have their showdown moment and he could have "got free" of him, but Elvis opted to stay with "The Devil he knew" as opposed to the Devil he didn't know, in a new manager.
 
Last edited:




Top