Seeing a lot of talk about the Elvis movie

1955

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Posts
11,507
Location
.
The movie seems to be a re-adjustment of the Elvis myth for modern times, is all.
Like war, the truth is the first casualty of these films.
The genre seems to be "historical fantasy", which is OK if you're upfront about it.
But the movie is called "ELVIS".
It should be called "FANTASY ELVIS"
Just saying. 🍔
This post is the most accurate assessment I’ve read so far concerning this film. What is surprising, given the industry right now, is that the soup de jour is used as a unifying vehicle.

Even if they chose not to show just how deep and wide that unification rippled, or why it was inevitable, the fact that the hit piece was on greed is about as close as Hollywood will get at self reflection.

The film barely brushed the surface of just how complex this story really was, yet the director chose not to be lazy about certain things. Celebrity, and the illusion of success, how the consumer destroys what it would worship, how unfair the end is for us all perhaps, these are untimely meditations.

Elvis is ripped apart in the Dionysian forest, which was true, except it was in Jacksonville.
 

JeffroJones

Tele-Meister
Joined
May 2, 2022
Posts
139
Location
Melbourne
Elvis is ripped apart in the Dionysian forest, which was true, except it was in Jacksonville.
Gotta love the internet, when you can read this in a guitar forum :)
I had to look up Dionysus (the god of fun, wine and dance), so yeah, I get it.
My first experience with "historical fantasy" was the movie Amadeus, with Tom Hulce as Amadeus Mozart.
I thought it was fabulous, the music, the costumes, the humor, a terrific production.
My friend, a classical music buff, was not so forgiving.
He was outraged that the court composer - Antonio Salieri - was portrayed as a buffoonish villain and schemer against Mozart.
He pointed out that historically, Salieri was both a gifted and respected composer, and an admirer of the young Mozart.
So these movies don't let facts stand in the way of the "Hollywood Story Arc".

:::
 

1955

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Posts
11,507
Location
.
Gotta love the internet, when you can read this in a guitar forum :)
I had to look up Dionysus (the god of fun, wine and dance), so yeah, I get it.
My first experience with "historical fantasy" was the movie Amadeus, with Tom Hulce as Amadeus Mozart.
I thought it was fabulous, the music, the costumes, the humor, a terrific production.
My friend, a classical music buff, was not so forgiving.
He was outraged that the court composer - Antonio Salieri - was portrayed as a buffoonish villain and schemer against Mozart.
He pointed out that historically, Salieri was both a gifted and respected composer, and an admirer of the young Mozart.
So these movies don't let facts stand in the way of the "Hollywood Story Arc".

:::
https://www.jacksonvillemag.com/2019/10/21/elvis-jacksonville/

Above is an example of how the maenads tore the hinges off the old door, so to speak. Euripides had a play called “The Bacchae,” the moral of the story is “Don’t be Elvis at the Olympia in Miami.”

I saw Amadeus in the theatre and loved it, btw.
 

burntfrijoles

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Posts
9,808
Location
Somewhere Over The Rainbow
The movie seems to be a re-adjustment of the Elvis myth for modern times, is all.
Like war, the truth is the first casualty of these films.
The genre seems to be "historical fantasy", which is OK if you're upfront about it.
But the movie is called "ELVIS".
It should be called "FANTASY ELVIS"
Just saying. 🍔
Did you see the movie? Are/were you an Elvis fan?
 

Toto'sDad

Tele Axpert
Ad Free Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Posts
57,796
Location
Bakersfield
This post is the most accurate assessment I’ve read so far concerning this film. What is surprising, given the industry right now, is that the soup de jour is used as a unifying vehicle.

Even if they chose not to show just how deep and wide that unification rippled, or why it was inevitable, the fact that the hit piece was on greed is about as close as Hollywood will get at self reflection.

The film barely brushed the surface of just how complex this story really was, yet the director chose not to be lazy about certain things. Celebrity, and the illusion of success, how the consumer destroys what it would worship, how unfair the end is for us all perhaps, these are untimely meditations.

Elvis is ripped apart in the Dionysian forest, which was true, except it was in Jacksonville.
The doctor who performed the autopsy on Elvis said it was his conclusion that Elvis was constipated for four months before his death. I think that strongly supports your theory of him being ripped apart.
 

trev333

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Posts
30,661
Location
Coolum Beach,Australia
I watched a doco yesterday about Elvis doing a concert at Bloch stadium to help raise money for the USS Arizona memorial...

and the back story about people that were there and saw the show..

He was over in Hawaii to film Blue Hawaii, was asked if he would put on a show to help raise funds and he was all for it. :cool:
 

trev333

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Posts
30,661
Location
Coolum Beach,Australia
they had hoped for 50 grand from the show ticket sales/donations, they ended up with 60 grand...
they only had about 300G by then....
eventually more funds came from gov to finish the part built monument, the finished one we see today... for 500 grand total.
Every time Elvis went to Hawaii he visited the memorial..
 
Last edited:

suthol

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Posts
3,397
Location
The Gong - Australia
they had hoped for 50 grand from the show ticket sales/donations, they ended up with 60 grand...
they only had about 300G by then....
eventually more funds came from gov to finish the part built monument we see today... for 500 grand total.
Every time Elvis went to Hawaii he visited the memorial..
I saw the concert on TV live and have the DVD.

He announced during the show they had raised $75K

Must watch again to hear the magnificent harmonies and the soaring voice of Kathy Westmoreland (and to make sure I got the figure right)
 

bcorig

Friend of Leo's
Gold Supporter
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Posts
4,141
Location
Lost in the 909 trying to find my way home
I guess it’s just me.. but I’m not a big fan. I get he “paved” the way for rock. But blatantly stole a lot of his stuff. I get “influences” but Hound Dog? That’s alright momma? He and Sun Records stole those from old black blues singers (not to mention his “hound dog” sucks in comparison)

He got a lot of his playing style from Sister Rosetta Tharpe.

I get he was one of the first in the TV scene and his provocative imagery took him a long way. But anyway I digress. Maybe I’m missing something?

So what’s your appeal to him? What do you like and not like about him?
Always an admirer of Elvis’ work. Then at age 71 went to Graceland and then Nashville Country Music Hall of Fame. In both venues there were many videos of Elvis performance, from 1955 in Memphis to 1969 comeback. Perhaps it’s just me. Elvis is magnetic. can’t take my eyes off him. He could sing ANYTHING.
Its hilarious to read people in accusation of him “stealing“ his style, form, music. Nonsense. He is the largest part of In The Beginning There Was The Word.
 

bottlenecker

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Posts
5,997
Location
Wisconsin
I guess it’s just me.. but I’m not a big fan. I get he “paved” the way for rock. But blatantly stole a lot of his stuff. I get “influences” but Hound Dog? That’s alright momma? He and Sun Records stole those from old black blues singers (not to mention his “hound dog” sucks in comparison)

He got a lot of his playing style from Sister Rosetta Tharpe.

I get he was one of the first in the TV scene and his provocative imagery took him a long way. But anyway I digress. Maybe I’m missing something?

So what’s your appeal to him? What do you like and not like about him?

I'm not a huge elvis fan, but I don't give a gosh darn about "rock". I'll take the kind of rock and roll he played over some square boring headbanging undanceable crap any day. But let me tell you what you're really missing.

He covered songs. That is not stealing. He did not do what led zeppelin did. He covered songs written by professional songwriters for black artists, and he ended up overshadowing the artist who recorded it first. That is bad for the artist in some cases because they didn't write the song, and so they didn't get any cut of elvis' sales. And then their sales were hurt by elvis' sales. Covers can help or hurt original artists, and it all depends how the suits handled the business. It's always the suits that do the stealing. Except for led zeppelin, of course.

As for Sister Rosetta Tharpe, her playing is well beyond elvis' skill level and sounds nothing like him. She was a gospel performer who had a big influence on rock and roll in general, but now suddenly people who haven't spent time listening to her read on the internet that she "invented rock and roll". No one invented a dang thing, but she invented Sister Rosetta and that's enough. Go listen to her for real. She was great. Spend some time with her. And listen to some bo diddley, little richard, chuck berry, and link wray. If that doesn't do it for you, don't worry about getting elvis.

Also, I don't listen to any elvis after sun records. I think his sun records were great, but so were almost all those sun records back then.
 

Tall-Fir

Tele-Meister
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Posts
388
Age
70
Location
Redondo Beach, CA
My wife Peg and I saw the movie yesterday. Our opinion was that the movie was good, fun and entertaining; but not anything great.

1). I didn’t like negative characteristics placed on country music.
2). I didn’t like the movie’s denigrating portrayal of Hank Snow one bit, which, to me would include Hank’s band and therefore Kayton Roberts, who was one of the world’s great slide steel players for 60 years or ss, and Chubby Wise, one of the great country fiddlers of all time.
3). Heck, Van Morrison did an entire album based on this era of country music which, basically was made fun of and stomped on as corny. That album is my favorite Van Morrison album and is called Pay the Devil. I just don’t get that kind of attitude that the movie carries.
4). The movie had huge chances to showcase the musicianship of players like Scotty More and James Burton, but fell way short.
5). I thought the portrayal of Elvis’s father was also negative and poorly done.

Above are just things which if had been more positively defined, the movie would have been much better.

1). Liked the music.
2). The movie had plenty of glitziness which was enjoyable.
3). The cinematography of the ways and means of people in the 1950s was great. Cool cars, cool costumes were great to see. Appeared that nothing was spared in that department.
4). The acting was real good in the movie.
5). Would see it again if the opportunity presented itself.

Just MHOs!
 

Cosmic Cowboy

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Posts
1,265
Location
New Mexico
Saw the movie. It is long. It is well done...and it is depressing. What they did to Elvis in the interest of riding his coat tails was sad.

The musical scenes are good JD Simo plays most of the guitar parts...the acting is convincing...

You get a sense of what an entertainer he was. The last unchained melody he played at his final show in '77 caused a lot of tears in the theatre...and man did he crush it....

The movie got a standing ovation in the theatre when the screen went dark.
 

bgmacaw

Doctor of Teleocity
Joined
Feb 11, 2006
Posts
10,048
Location
Near Athens GA USA
gettheweiners500.gif
 

JeffroJones

Tele-Meister
Joined
May 2, 2022
Posts
139
Location
Melbourne
Did you see the movie? Are/were you an Elvis fan?
Hey, burntfrijoles.
Yes and yes, big fan of the early Elvis, not so much the sixties/movie star Elvis, but gotta say, "Suspicous Minds", the compilation of his American Studio recordings is a highlight of Twentieth Century American Culture.
But I'm not a real big Baz Luhrmann fan, to tell the truth, its style over substance IMHO, that's just me. I went with friends to see the movie, and politely kept my cynical thoughts to myself, and DID NOT burst into laughter while a ten year old Elvis was transported by a fit of the raptures inside a gospel revival show. So no, I didn't rate the movie highly in terms of a realistic view of Elvis's life, but again, THAT'S JUST ME and if you have a different view, that's fine in my book :)

:::
 

BobWithOneO

TDPRI Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2021
Posts
62
Age
44
Location
Best Carolina
I guess it’s just me.. but I’m not a big fan. I get he “paved” the way for rock. But blatantly stole a lot of his stuff. I get “influences” but Hound Dog? That’s alright momma? He and Sun Records stole those from old black blues singers (not to mention his “hound dog” sucks in comparison)

He got a lot of his playing style from Sister Rosetta Tharpe.

I get he was one of the first in the TV scene and his provocative imagery took him a long way. But anyway I digress. Maybe I’m missing something?

So what’s your appeal to him? What do you like and not like about him?
I get it. You don't recognize huge, incredible talent and persona. You're preoccupied with things that don't matter, instead of appreciating one of the great vocalists of all time. You're not an artist and never will be. Learn to sell cars or something.
 

johnny k

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Jan 15, 2011
Posts
9,687
Location
France
That is what musicians do. They steal without any shame, put their names on the records and declare i wrote it. nothing new.
 

Si G X

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Posts
2,876
Location
England
He's obviously very significant and influential and I always feel like I should appreciate his music more.. but I don't really listen to him.

I don't really have strong feelings about his music either way, I'll enjoy one of his early rockers if I happen to hear it on the radio or in a bar but I wouldn't seek it out to listen to.
 




Top