Elvis: Why Baz Luhrmann Didn’t Tell The Whole Story
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 05. 2024
- With Elvis, we are hearing the King’s story through the voice of a classic unreliable narrator: Colonel Tom Parker, a self-proclaimed conman who built Elvis’ brand and bled him dry. So, what did Tom - and director Baz Lurhmann - leave out… and more importantly, why? When it comes to the truth, and the story, where should the responsibility of the biopic lie? And in this case, would a fuller picture of Elvis damage our empathy with the character?
If you like this video, subscribe to our channel and support us by becoming a Taker or joining our Patreon for amazing perks like early access and custom polls!
Become a Taker: bit.ly/jointhetake
Join our Patreon: / thetake
Watch our TikTok: / thisisthetake
Bonus Content and Articles: www.the-take.com
Follow our Socials: linktr.ee/thisisthetake
CHAPTERS
00:00 Luhrmann's Elvis doesn't tell the whole story
00:58 The controversies of Elvis' affairs
03:48 The reality of Elvis' true politics
06:48 How Elvis sold his soul to the industry
CREDITS
Executive Producers: Debra Minoff & Susannah Mccullough
Chief Creative Director: Susannah Mccullough
Associate Producer: Tyler Browner
Writer: Harry Harris
Video Editor: John Clark
Narrator: Kayah Franklin - Zábava
WATCH MORE: Austin Butler's transformative performance as Elvis was praised, largely for the extreme lengths he went to while method acting. So why can't a woman get away with this in Hollywood? Here's our Take on how method acting because a "mans business": czcams.com/video/gQk66BUfBgk/video.html
I'm still curious about him as Feyd Rautha.
Pricilla moved into Graceland around her 18th birthday in 1963. Not at 15. The actual date seems somewhat hard to find.
AUSTIN BUTLER SHOULD HAVE WON. ALSO BEST PICTURE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ELVIS. I AM DIGUSTED
@@grigoriorifielIt didn't happen overnight. She went to live with Vernon and his wife. After a while, she slowly moved a few clothes to Graceland. Over however many months, she finally had moved them all. She was NOT 15 when she moved in. Her first trip back was to LA to visit Elvis for 2 weeks. Then back to Germany. It was later she moved in with Vernon. It's places like this one that tell all the lies. I caught about 10 in the first few minutes.
@@ingeleitow7349 Oscar snubbed Elvis. BAFTA, Golden Globes and others did not. Elvis didn't like Hollywood. It was, and is phony. They snubbed all 8 nominations, snobs that they are. Merit didn't count. Austin was the clear winner, working harder than anyone I have ever known for a movie role. And, pulled it off beautifully.
I've heard that a lot of people feel exhausted after watching this movie, myself included. However, this reflects Elvis himself, who was emotionally drained after overworking himself under Parker's toxic influence. His wealth and success didn't make him happy, and you just want to give him a hug, and keep him away from Parker forever.
Yep. I felt the same way
Wooow great way to miss the point
I found this movie Disturbing and me making me want to vomit
Def agree - it was a way of visually and psychically communicating something very important to the viewer.
Felt like his "spirit" died by the end of the film.
Even though this movie has its issues, I do appreciate that it was still respectful towards Elvis. Unlike whatever Blonde was trying to do with Marilyn Monroe.
You could argue it’s incredible inaccuracy was disrespectful to Elvis and had he seen this movie he’d have probably shot out the screen.
I have thanked Baz all over social media at letting Elvis keep his dignity, (that was so important to Lisa Marie)as other places have not, and some bodyguard books are pure trash. Yes, he was respectful and I, and millions of others do appreciate that. And Elvis DESERVES that!
And according to Elvis's Cousin, he said that if Elvis was alive today, he wouldn't liked the Biopic movie.
(Still can't deny that Austin Butler did an amazing job as Elvis Presley though. If Elvis was alive today, I'm certain that he would probably be canceled by now with the amount of stuff he did in the past, ESPECIALLY when the Me Too movement was a thing.)
@@thepunisherclub6442 i think that if Elvis was alive, he wouldn’t like much about modern world. Something tells me he would’ve become a grumpy old man with little connection to reality.
@@goldemen3297 A lot of this movie was accurate, but you would have to make sequels to truly tell the story of Elvis's 20 year career & tell the true to life story of Elvis as a human being.
What people need to realize about Baz Luhrmann's Elvis, is that it is a pure Character Study. Not a Biopic. So don't come away from this movie thinking that this is simply the rise and fall of Elvis. They specifically chose life-changing pivot points in Elvis's life. It's supposed to make the viewer ask... What would I do in that situation?
yep totally agree, it was not a biopic in any way, probably about 30% of accuracy if you look at it closely.
@@monikakreuzer-dq3yv well another thing is that there’s about an hour of footage that has been cut away for the theatrical release. There are many more scenes that have been leaked that kind of slow things down make the movie make more sense also more chunks of his life that were left out.
@@yamahaguy1732 All inaccurate depictions of Elvis.
You can’t explain any artist life within 2 hours without taking out major chunks of the artist’s life or career. I remember watching Straight Outta Compton and thinking the NWA story would have been more suitable as a series than a movie. I saw online that a Michael Jackson biopic will be released next year. Like most artists Michael Jackson’s life and 50 year career cannot be reduced to a 2-3 hour movie.
@@kadesmith3054
You don’t have to only show the bad parts. And exclude very important significant parts like spending 4-5 years with another woman besides PP.
Linda actually die t more time with Elvis and took care of him more then PP ever did!
Regardless of why that’s a fact!
For yet first year of LT s and Elvis’s relationship. she said they were literally together every single day, went everywhere together, she went on tour with him, to every singing engagement he had , they were together 365days tbd guest year! Never apart!
Traumatic Brain Injury and autoimmune disease is a compelling theory I’ve read recently that would explain Elvis’ rapid physical and mental decline, as described in a medical paper I read recently. Fascinating and heartbreaking.
Or just copius amounts of drugs and alcohol.
I thought that health problem should be secret....
@@JudeMarchisio yeah elvis didn't drink. Nice 1 to pull out of your ass though
@JudeMarchisio If you actually knew anything at all about this subject, you would know that he rarely drank alcohol and didn't like being around drunk people.
I read all the légals papers about his health and I was in shock
I am 85, elvis voice was phenomenal because at last we had music we could dance to. I don't care where it came from, had what we needed and later that voice became godly, his strong baritone going into tenor was heavenly, giving us almost opera, ballads gospel and country and the old rhythmic dance music he started with
Elvis started with rhythm but ended with a voice that could transport us to heaven and back. Don't you get it? It is the voice!
Realistically, all of the pretty and ugly truths of any person’s life cannot possibly be included in a 2hr movie. Only a documentary can do that because they are usually longer and pure facts. Biopics serve like historical fiction; some parts are true, some are added/changed/removed for entertainment purposes, more drama essentially. In other words, biopics can show parts of a person’s life, or focus on certain aspects, not the entire thing. In the case of Elvis, the focus was on the relationship between him and the Colonel, plus it was in his perspective, so it makes sense.
I wish people would stop calling Luhrmann's Elvis a Biopic. It is not. Its a journey through American society in the 50s, 60s, & 70s. Luhrmann and by extension Austin Butler, wanted to find the Soul of Elvis and convey that on screen. Their intent was not to depict every well know Elvis nuance. That would take a 20 hour film. Rather I believe Luhrmann's "ELVIS" takes the viewer on an emotional rollercoaster ride through the lens of time. And he has I think, achieved that.
It’s not a documentary. It’s mostly on Elvis and Parker relationship and how that shaped Elvis life first being good since he brought him the fame but then toxic. It showed respect to Elvis that his family liked it especially Lisa Marie who died which was sweet because she and Austin had a good friendship. I felt it was a good movie and made me wish Elvis had a better support system at the end
The immensely lovable Tom Hanks made you really love to hate the Colonel, since his greed, selfishness and manipulation ultimately destroy Elvis. It's especially heartbreaking since Elvis initially viewed Parker as a second father figure, and by the time he figured out his true nature, it was much too late.
Hanks did a HORRIBLE job of playing the colonel and actually the colonel may have not been a saint but he wasn’t TERRIBLE. No colonel and there never would have been an Elvis.
@@goldemen3297 With Elvis' looks and talent I imagine he would have done ok.
@@laurawilloughby4000 difference between doing okay and becoming the biggest act in the business. Oh how quickly people forget how from January-July of 1956 the colonels genius marketing and industry connections not only landed Elvis a major deal but also made Elvis 26 MILLION dollars in only SIX MONTHS. Elvis was obviously massively talented but for every talented person who makes it there’s 20 who never do.
He most likely had Issac Kappy killed. He is NOT a beloved person.
@@goldemen3297 I've never heard he made 26 million in 6 months, ever. Have to check that out.
I finally watched this movie after avoiding it for a few minor reasons, I am NOT ashamed to admit as a man, that I severely teared up near the end of the movie which seemed rushed. I've been a die-hard fan of Elvis for over 40 years & knew going in that no one even Baz Lurhmann could tell the 20 year once in a century career Elvis Presley had & Also tell the true to life story of a once in a century human being that Elvis Presley truly was. There was SO MUCH of Elvis's career & life that couldn't be told, not because it was bad per se, But Baz Lurhmann would have to make sequels to tell the true story of Elvis's 20 year career & life story because so much more than anyone can imagine happened. I personally loved the movie. Do I think certain things could've been done/told differently or included several more aspects & details? Of course, but I believe Baz, Austin & the entire cast & crew did an superb job representing Elvis Presley to the masses, primarily the younger generations to ensure Elvis Presley's legacy will never die. I believe the King would've been proud.
Truth of the matter Elvis shouldn't be blamed for having the talents and gifts and being at the right place and time of History... Fact is most of us would have done the same thing if given the opportunity and being enticed by capitalism's way of life👈🧐
I do think that Elvis would have benefitted a lot more if Luhrmann applied more of a critical lens to his legacy. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging the fact that Elvis changed music forever and influenced so many generations of artists, but I think that it would have been much better if it also asked questions about the many controversies surrounding him such as whether or not he's to blame for the fact that we missed out on decades of potentially great black rock music. Not to mention the fact that he met Priscilla when she was only 14. Instead, Luhrmann willingly chooses to ignore these flaws and present a much more idealised version of what he (and presumably the majority) think Elvis was like, and that is why I felt greatly disappointed by this film
Nah, didn't miss out on anything. The "If not for Elvis, blacks would have come into their own musically" is a bs myth.
I think what you’re describing would have been valid, but just didn’t have a place in the film that Luhrmann was trying to make. Going into a lot of these things probably would have muddled the narrative of the film, which focuses more on how art requires us to engage with the world around us, and how Elvis’s own indulgences had as much of a hand in his own downfall as the Colonel’s manipulation.
I think it’s all the opposite. If elvis didn’t break the rules while he played black music, he wouldn’t have opened the market like that. He would’ve been another washed up white dude playing black people music. Many of them were doing it and it was all too contained. When Elvis did it, people wanted more and thanks to that, black people got record deals.
Not that I totally agree with the direction Luhrmann took, but I acknowledge that you can't cover all the complicated question's about Elvis without turning your bio into a Ken Burns series and it's fine if you choose not to focus on the harsher realities.
What bugged me more was how the film was flat out dishonest about Elvis' Civil Rights history and made it seem like he cared about supporting Black artists a lot more than he actually did (Especially since what emphasizes the "losing your soul" component better than being besties with Nixon).
I don't see how Elvis made you miss out on decades og great black rock music.
Looking at Elvis with a 2023 lense definitely shows the bad stuff there’s no arguing that. During his prime, if he sang your song it meant more sales and recognition for that artist too. He definitely enlightened a lot of white people to what the black community had been doing for a long time and without him serving those songs to the masses as he did during times of segregation they may not have listened. He also tried to give back to the community and help fellow artists out. I don’t think it was all completely lost on him.
Exactly. You have to look at it through the cultural lens of the time period- IMO
To be fair, I enjoyed the visuals of the movie, the concerts, and that little I could see of Austin Butler's performance as unfortunately it idn't get much screentime, how ironic since he's the titular character. But apart from that, I did get the sense the story was told in a very surfice level way. Too bad.
If you go into a movie looking for actual history, you've already screwed up.
Yeah. Take Togo for example.
🙄
Agreed, look at Bohemian Rhapsody, who took blatant creative liberties, just for the sake of more exciting storytelling.
You don't have to be looking for "actual history" to be given completely inaccurate impressions of how historical events occurred. Most people will just absorb things from a movie and then not know where they got them from, including small passive things, and most people will never go and fact check them either.
Truth of the matter Elvis shouldn't be blamed for having the talents and gifts and being at the right place and time of History... Fact is most of us would have done the same thing if given the opportunity and being enticed by capitalism's way of life👈🧐
Luhrmann is known for the slightly bonkers and more fantastical style of movie making with a kind of opulent aesthetic. Like legit the first time I watched Moulin Rouge I literally went "wtf did I just watch" because it was trippy as hell so I deffo see it as a case of Luhrmann changing the story and skewing from historical accuracy to fit with his opulent and fantastical style of making movies. I feel if the movie had been given to a different Director and if people linked to Elvis were involved the story would be better. We need something like Rocketman. While yes that does bend the truth in some areas and uses dramatic licence for movie purposes we know that Elton John was heavily involved in the making of the movie and signed off on it and everything so while yes it's a sleek and flashy movie with all the Hollywood magic you expect it also tells most of the truth of Elton's life including the darker aspects like his struggles with addiction and his strained relationship with his parents. We saw Elton as a fully rounded and imperfect person and we were able to understand that all those things don't take away from his exceptional musical talent.
People linked with Elvis were involved with the Baz Luhrmann "Elvis Project". Jerry Schilling who worked for Elvis from the mid 1960s through to the 70s was deeply involved, as was Luhrmann himself, spending 18 months on research mostly at Graceland. Luhrmann wasn't making a Biopic, nor a documentary as some have called this Elvis movie. As Luhrmann has said in many interviews...."its a journey through American society" encompassing the 50s, 60s & 70s America. And for me it is an experience through the lens of time.
If you ever do director breakdowns like you used to can you do Baz as a feature please
Baz is probably my favorite. I like the man's style, even back to Strictly Ballroom
If you look deep into the history of the south of USA when blues, jazz, country and bluegrass was created, and how the white rich guys in power of what media liked you see a totally different story. Elvis Presley was the only person who could tare the wall down. He still employed black people who was with him on stage up until the very last concert. He took most of his singing style from his ideal ways to make music. The American South in the 1950's was not a lot different from the apartheid system of South Africa. I'm amazed that Americans don't know this. The first black child who went to an all white school was escorted by bodyguards. The 1950's was truly a vile era. Elvis Presley didn't believe in rasism. But he lived in an era where the rasism was so bad that even the way he had to operate (and to the modern eyes looks rasist) was the least rasist one could be.
It's worth noting that, when it comes to cultural appropriation, the people making this video are making their own assumptions. They're not referring to known resentment, but only assuming that it must have been there. But if you find interviews with black artists at the time, many of them had great love and respect for Elvis, and even say that he helped promote and make their own music more popular.
As for the example of Big Mama Thornton's "Hound Dog," she was the first to perform it, but it wasn't hers. It was written by two Jewish composers who sold her the rights first, but then went on to sell it to multiple artists later, which was just how the business worked at that time. There were 8 other versions before Elvis did it, and his version came out several years after hers, so it's unlikely that his had any negative impact on the sales or reach of hers. The fact that it was more popular didn't take anything from her. I'm sure racism played a part in it, and in a fair world hers would have reached a wider audience. But that wasn't Elvis' doing.
Elvis was NOT a paragon of virtue. Pretty much everything else she covered in this video is true. But people tend to be quick to assume racism and appropriation when there's very little data to back it up. I'm not denying that that shit happened A LOT. It just didn't seem to be the case with Elvis.
Elvis is my favourite singer. The world is unfair and there probably was some cultural appropriation. But people have been borrowing and stealing for centuries. The King was gifted, talented and hard working. He deserved all the fame he got. Sadly he became a prisoner of his own fame.
Elvis was a giving person. If someone was in need he helped them. He came from nothing so he understood had it was to be in need. He was a good man a spiritual man. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
I dont think Elvis cheated any black stars out of any attention. I was alive then, and there were many big stars who were black. Everyone loved Little Richard and Chuck Berry. Fats Domino--my little brother used to love to sing his songs. And I never thought that Elvis sounded black at all.
Okay cool, now go out and find people under the age of thirty see who the recognize on sight, Elvis or Chuck Berry
Most of the doo wop groups were black in the 50s. I bought most all Fats Domino hit songs, some Sam Cooke and other black singers. Anyone can check out Billboard top 100 hits, and see that there were more black singers charting in 56-60, than there were before Elvis. He did not steal anyone’s voice or moves. He’s called the King, not because he was the 1st to sing R&R because he wasn’t, but because he was the whole package.
Bravo. Finally the voice of reason. Truth at last!
@@jameslevan3792 Well that's not Elvis' fault.
Elvis was a country artist too and fused it with R&B at Sun Records which is what changed music. He was raised in southern culture with blacks and whites. You can't appropriate your own poor southern culture. People wrongly view Elvis as a white person someone used to present black music, when it's the opposite. He wasn't Pat Boone or Bill Haley. Black music and culture, along with white music and culture were both in his DNA from his childhood in Tupelo and Memphis. When he entered Sun Studios, Sam Phillips receptionist asked Elvis what he sang and Elvis replied "All kinds" she then asked who do you sound like and he said "I don't sound like nobody" He was being honest that he had his own delivery and style which was a combination of all his influences of Blue Grass, Honky Tonk, Blues, R&B and Gospel. Elvis charted on the R&B charts for years because black DJs played his records due to blacks requesting him.
Early Wright played Elvis on his all black station until he retired and Elvis not only attended black Pentacostal churches with Sam Bell, he also attended the Memphis all black East Trigg Baptist Church and was in Rev. Brewster's choir.
The film covers the racial issues of the day thoroughly by showing how they wanted to ban Elvis because of his association with black friends and artists and him dancing like black performers do, but not as copying, but him too having rhythm and musical expression. It talks about him breaking the segregation laws by going to the all negro night at the fairgrounds and hanging out at Club Handy. It shows his friendships with blacks B.B. King, Sister Rosetta, Fats Domino, Mahalia Jackson, as well as Sam Bell's black gang as kids in Shake Rag, and his black girl group the Sweet Inspirations, but without looking like pandering they couldn't go into showing what overall great friendships he had with James Brown, Jackie Wilson, Little Richard, Calvin Newborn, Brook Benton, Ernest Withers, Dionne Warwick, Cissy Houston, Billy Ward,
Muhammad Ali, John Lee Hooker, Sammy Davis Jr. ect.
Elvis was recognized by the black peers of his day as essential. Little Richard said Elvis was an integrator and a messiah, B.B. King said Elvis had a unique way of looking at a song and that he was inventive, James Brown said Elvis was an American Original and they'll never be another like that Soul Brother, Jackie Wilson said black solo entertainers copied Elvis stage mannerisms and that he took as much from Elvis as he took from him, Stevie Wonder said Elvis did a lot to end racism, Al Green said Elvis broke the ice for all of us with his approach, Isaac Hayes said Elvis influenced everyone in the business, Ernest Withers said Elvis did more for Civil Rights than people realize and Chuck D had to recant his comments about Elvis and said Elvis was real and gave props to his roots. And Elvis was a far better singer than just country and R&B. He was a world class vocalist of of ballads of Italian, Spanish and Hawaiian heritage, as well as standards. His greatest selling point was his vocal talent and range. As for those claiming racism: James Brown also said Elvis wasn't just my friend but my brother and they'd sing gospel at Graceland, Fats Domino said he loved Elvis, B.B. King said he and Elvis were the original Blues Brothers, Ernest Withers said Elvis invited his sons to his house and defended him when a reporter asked Elvis why he called Withers "Sir" when he's a tar boy and Elvis said cause he's a person. Elvis would sneak into the segregated theaters and climb the segregation barrier to sit with his black friends in Tupelo.
Muhammad Ali said that he doesn't admire anyone but Elvis was the sweetest the most humble person you'd ever want to meet. Little Richard said Elvis was his boy and he loved him. The Sweet Inspirations tell the story of how the Houston Astrome asked him not to bring them to the shows and Elvis threatened to cancel the engagement. Sam Bell's grandparents couldn't believe a white kid in the 1940s called them sir and ma'am.
Name me one morally perfect artist?
Art is born in controversy, passion, and dedication to the craft. You have to stand out to be great and the qualities to do so are not what the average person possesses. We have to have room for grace or we will loose truly great geniuses to fear of scrutiny.
You have the right to your person, just as others have the right to critique these controversial artists.
Get On Up did a really good job of portraying (at least some of) the very ugly sides of James Brown (beating his wife, pulling a gun on someone for using his bathroom, his high speed chase & arrest, firing the only person who stuck by him, etc) without trying to add empathetic context immediately after. In fact there’s a jarring ugliness to all of those scenes.
Sure empathetic scenes exist, like the poverty, parental abandoning, dehumanizing racism especially as a child, but they’re spaced out far enough, so instead of those excusing his problematic behavior, a broader picture of him is painted, and as an audience, you’re more conflicted than inspired.
Yes I know that movie still left a lot out, as all biopics do, and disclaimer, I haven’t yet seen Elvis
He's black. It's funny how they treat them differently
Cool video! My grandparents were around for Elvis, but never listened to him much. It was all Jazz, Classical, R&B and Gospel for them. I doubt it was resentment (4:40), they just wanted to support our Black artists. I don't recall either of them ignoring Elvis, they just preferred other genres of music. I'd like to see this biopic after watching this Take tbh.
I think she is referring to the artists themselves and not the listeners
@@wisdomsnap8695 that's possible! But who specifically? I like hearing from the artists and the audience because those were the people directly affected by Elvis' rise. It's like how rap started in the '70s-- the audience was there even though they weren't the creators.
There's a good vanity fair article talking specifically about it but here's a relevant excerpt that gives you at least one specific artists takes....
"But while Tharpe’s opinion is more of a mystery, Big Mama Thornton’s is less so. In 1953 the singer (portrayed by Shonka Dukureh in Elvis) released “Hound Dog,” written specifically for her by Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, who wanted to showcase Thornton’s booming voice and bawdy personality. Her definitive version of the song was a hit, quickly selling half a million records. A few years later, Presley recorded a cover and sold millions, overshadowing Thornton. To make matters worse, Thornton barely made any money off the song. “I got one check for $500 and never saw another,” she once said.
She soon became embittered by Presley’s success, according to biographer Michael Spörke, who wrote Big Mama Thornton: The Life and Music. During a 1969 performance at the Newport Folk Festival, she referred to “Hound Dog” as “the record I made Elvis Presley rich on.” At another concert, she called it “a song I got robbed of.” At yet another, she launched into the song, then stopped, turning around and glaring at her drummer. “This ain’t no Elvis Presley song, son,” she said, according to Spörke. She then kicked the drummer off his seat and showed him the right way to play it, giving him a lesson in front of the audience. This was apparently a regular occurrence, a theatrical way for Thornton to pull the song out from under Presley’s shadow-long before Lurhmann, or anyone else, tried to do it for her."
@@amy675fly it won't let me post the link but I believe you may be stuck on them saying resentment implying envy or jealousy when I think they were getting at the idea that Elvis's success had to have been harder than depicted on a couple artists and by kind of keeping it in Elvis's lens and not humanizing the artists more, it could be see as a source of questionable myth making.
Thank you!
They definitely didn't hit on what Elvis did for the black community, his generosity, and his influence on the generations of artists after him.
Can you do one of these on musical Hamilton vs actual Hamilton? Huge difference
Isnt there a watchmojo video on that
Yeah, I wonder if they're gonna talk about cultural appropriation where that is concerned.
@@mbryant107 we all know cultural appreciation only seem to go one way;-)
FUN FACT that's often conveniently left out of these discussions. The reason Elvis was able to "steal" songs from black artists was because those artists didn't own or even write those songs. "Hound Dog" for example was written for Big Mama Thornton by two Jewish teenagers.
How do you know this?
@@saphireblue3563 There are plenty of music history books that cover this. Just about every famous song has its own Wikipedia page, including Hound Dog.
@@jbtechcon7434 Thank you!
Not only that but Elvis's version is based on the white group Freddy and the Bellboy's version. Elvis fused R&B with country. That's why BB King said he was unique and James Brown said he was an original
@@saphireblue3563 Those songs were written by Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, two Jewish guys who wrote a bunch of hits for Elvis. They wrote Hound Dog in 1953 for Big Mama Thornton.
"...made black artists seem a little too in harmony with Elvis, brushing over any resentment that would have inevitably been felt when he profited to such a larger degree off their music"-
YES! The movie seems to frame it like they gave their tacit permission, and it's all cool, Daddy-o.
When it comes to biopics on this level, there's usually an understanding that the family or estate had to have some say in what's allowed to be shown. So to a degree, I can see why some unsavory aspects were glossed over like all of Elvis' women. It sucks, but that's the deal. However, CREATIVE decisions like the aforementioned appropriation issue, and his politics are more weird to me. Conservatives get accused for wanting to do revisionist history, and here we have a liberal example of the same exact thing! This movie's wild.
Great Take 👍
Yeah, I'm sure all those other authors that influenced William Shakespeare were just one step away from making it big before he became one of history's most well beloved storytellers. This is the sort of stupidity I hear when people claim Elvis did something wrong by being influenced by his black-adjacent life experience. He didn't need to ask permission to be inspired by black people. Get over your racism, people!
It's worth noting that the people making this video are making their own assumptions. They're not referring to known resentment, but only assuming that it must have been there. But if you find interviews with black artists at the time, many of them had great love and respect for Elvis, and even say that he helped promote and make their own music more popular.
As for the example of Big Mama Thornton's "Hound Dog," she was the first to perform it, but it wasn't hers. It was written by two Jewish composers who sold her the rights first, but then went on to sell it to multiple artists later, which was just how the business worked at that time. There were 8 other versions before Elvis did it, and his version came out several years after hers, so it's unlikely that his had any negative impact on the sales or reach of hers. The fact that it was more popular didn't take anything from her. I'm sure racism played a part in it, and in a fair world hers would have reached a wider audience. But that wasn't Elvis' doing.
Elvis was NOT a paragon of virtue. Pretty much everything else she covered in this video is true. But people tend to be quick to assume racism and appropriation when there's very little data to back it up. I'm not denying that that shit happened A LOT. It just didn't seem to be the case with Elvis.
I’ve seen many rock n roll documentaries where most artists of the time did love elvis and did get a long with him. They do say the real king is chuck berry but they don’t resent elvis.
@@Seraphina.Is. that's true. Many Black artists *today* have a problem with Elvis, and I happen to agree. Black artists in the '40s probably felt the same way we do, but they had no social/political power to influence mainstream (white) opinion. If there was resentment, there wasn't much of an outlet or they used Elvis' music as a vehicle to make it big themselves. We can only read interviews and come to our own conclusions which have a modern bias.
@@amy675fly exactly
He did not bring her to live with him when she was 15. He didn't even see her that year. She moved in when she was almost 18.
Yeee I have a feeling they didn’t do much research.
Elvis reached Mytholical levels. He was everywhere & tried everything. His influence was world wide & if there are extra terrestrial's that find that time capsule floating around out there in space they to will add to this mythology. We're always searching for a meaning in everything & everyone. What is the movie trying to say, what is the song trying to say, what is the book trying to say & when you ask the author, he or she will almost always send that question right back to you. What do you think ? What did you get out of it. What did you learn & how does it relate to you. If the authors successful it will relate to almost everyone, one way or another, whether the perception is negative. Positive or both. We're all subject to the human condition. No one is flawless. There's always error in everyone. How do we learn ? The answer more than not is thru failure, mistake, or simply by accident. Einstein once replied to why he was so smart by saying that he exhausted the possibilities. John Mayer was asked similar about his song writing & he said : well it only took about a thousand songs, some worse than the next. Elvis did what he loved & by his failures & successes often finding himself exposed to temptations most of us haven't even dreamed of & for everything there is a price. Wealth & fame might cost you family. Family might cost you wealth & fame. Maybe you'll be very lucky & manage both, but no one know's until it happens & even then how long will it last before you lose it or it loses you.
Austin butler should have got a Oscar for elvis
Consider why Austin's BAFTA and Golden Globe wins are so significant.
Since The Golden Globes, Critics Choice, SAG, BAFTA and the Oscars have all coexisted over the last twenty-seven years, a whopping eighteen times, an actor or actress has swept all five awards for the same performance. Ten have been the actress and eight has been the actor.
It happened as recently as last year with Will Smith.
I can't remember a time in recent years where so many people have been going on and on about what a great performance someone gave as they have with Brendan Fraser, and how he should win everything because of it and his comeback story, other than those who were claiming Austin should win everything but may not because of his lack of experience and youth.
It is telling how well Austin did to prevent not only the Fraser performance, but also his narrative that was massive, from taking all five. Especially when you consider that Austin held him to only three.
As far as I'm concerned, seeing as how Austin pulled that off, when so many other actors and actresses have won all five, I'm convinced Austin wins all five if he had a couple of more leading roles and was maybe a few years older, or if Fraser didn't cry in public, pandering for votes and have his sentimental story to go with his performance.
So, the next time you watch "Elvis", instead of thinking "How in the heck could they not give Austin the Oscar, or even SAG or Critics Choice?" Instead, say to yourself, "This is so great that he even stopped Brendan Fraser in The Whale from winning everything."
For the record, here are all Austin's wins as Elvis, not including his 11 Breakthrough performance awards:
The Hollywood Foreign Press/Golden Globe (Best Performance in a Motion Picture -Drama)
The British Academy of Film and Televison (Best Leading Actor)
The Australian Academy of Cinema and Televison International (Best Lead Actor)
Sunset Circle Awards (Best Actor)
International Press Academy/Satellite Award (Best Actor in a Motion Picture - Comedy or Musical)
People's Choice (Drama Movie Star of 2022)
The Minnesota Film Critics Alliance (Best Actor)
Sant Jordi Award (Best Actor in a Foreign Film)
CinEuphoria Best Actor - International Competition
Oh good gravy...this Film WAS NOT ABOUT every facet of his life. This film was to have been seen through Col Tom Parkers eyes. It had nothing to do with the "other women" in his life. Priscilla was part of his troubles with Col Parker and for crying out loud she was married to the man. This FILM WAS MESMERIZING AND PHENOMENAL. Baz Lurhmann did a amazing job and his research was amazing. The people who think they should have been in the movie just don't get it and this has nothing do with them. They want a piece of the pie for the films success. Austin Butler was absolutely fantastic embodying the essence and soul of Elvis. As Priscilla Presley, and for heaven sake she should know, said Austin had Elvis down to a tee! And let's not forget Lisa Marie's comment, "it was FINALLY" done right". Again, she would know, he is her father.
Priscilla would never let baz put anything in unless it was all about HER
I just finished watching this movie last night. It was good, and I'll say that Austin Butler deserves best actor but this was not the best picture. It had a lot of pacing problems.
Curious … can you think of a couple of specifics where you identified these “pacing problems”?
I felt that too when I watched it. It was few months ago so I don’t remember which parts but it did flow weird.
@@pneumanaut1 it just overall moved too fast. There wasn't a steady flow. There was too much overlapping of scenes in order to move the timeline along.
@@MagTheSag90 see, I think that was a visual depiction of what his life was like during those times. A book can say, “his life was chaotic,” but a movie has to create a visual representation of that chaos. I did not see that as a fault but as a deliberate editing choice to depict something that was part of the overall story and theme of the film. The movie is in 3 distinct parts, each one visually and cinematically different, to bring those differences at the very least into our subconscious. For me, what you describe is not a flaw (personal dislike) but a strength of the artistry (deliberate director choice for his cinematic message) of the film.
@@pneumanaut1 i didn't say it was a flaw. I gave my perspective. Everyone receives artistry differently. Me, i just felt it was kind of rushed vs a standard biopic that goes through each significant moment beat by beat. It felt kind of cartoony.
A take that is a mile wide, an inch deep, and a tad woke. It was a big screen story of the world's biggest star. We waited a long time for such a movie. Was it perfect? No, but it was a roller coaster ride that pulled you in and held you for over two hours. Butler deserved an Oscar, and though filmed in Australia, the downtown Memphis scenes from the 50s made me think I was back there again as a kid. I saw Elvis in 1956 when I was 8, and it jumpstarted my love for all music if it was/is authentic. We also waited a long time to see the Colonel get his comeuppance. If Elvis had separated from his control, I believe he would have lived longer. You can't let creative talent get bored, and that's what Parker, the addictive gambler, did. You can't negotiate contracts for your client when the hotels/mob is holding your debts, a massive conflict of interest. When the prime minister of Japan came to America, he was asked what he wanted to see. His answer, Graceland. So, he and the POTUS at that time went to Graceland. Elvis broke the color barrier in Memphis by attending the WDIA event put on by Rufus Thomas, and the kids there were thrilled. If anyone sees this epistle, go see the movie, enjoy it for what it is, and dig deep into the history of Elvis, the man, his music, and his impact on culture.
Elvis will always be the king of rock and roll! Was he perfect? Is anyone? But he did a lot of good in the world and had a lot of depth…unlike many today in the industry.
Chuck Barry & Little Richard are Kings of Rock n Roll. Elvis a culture vulture
They were all great absolutely. My Dad loves them all and I grew up listening to them. But Elvis is the king of rock and roll. Not sure what culture vulture means. Elvis also came from very humble beginnings and just did what came naturally to him with music. But he just had something very special. And being easy on the eyes didn’t hurt him.😉
I thought it was because Elvis' estate owns the rights to his music so if the studio wanted to use any of Elvis music it has to be cleared by his estate? As one would imagine they won't allow any of his music in a project that paints Elvis too negative, it's common with biopics.
It may have been because when Priscilla took Elvis to divorce court the second time, she got so much of his money that he had to sell the rights to his old hits, making him have to live off just what he got by touring. And that for the hits he got after that, Lisa sold or gave much of it to Micheal Jackson.(Why? Obsessive love or money?) So the estate no longer owns a lot of his music.
Elvis sold the rights to RCA early in his career. I think it was the late 50s or early 60s and long before he married or Lisa Marie was born.
Parker sold the rights to Elvis's music up to 1973, sadly for 'a song'.
@@jessicachapman2227 I don't know what he sold early in his career. But by 1973 he had accumulated a lot more. He had to sell the rights to them to pay Priscilla.
@@fparkes5781 Parker did it because he did all of Elvis' music business. But he did it because Elvis needed the money to pay Priscilla.
I loved Austin’s portrayal of Elvis, I didn’t like the movie being told by Parker. So much was just not true. Austin should have won an Oscar, but Hollywood didn’t ever like Elvis . He was never given the awards he merited. Elvis was and always will be the most talented, singer, entertainer and musical producer. He was humble, giving, generous, and kind. He was extremely ill at the end . I wish they would republish Charlie Hodge’s book for more people to read about the real Elvis.
I know the movie doesn’t tell the whole true. But it would never take away the fact that Elvis broke boundaries & in reality he wasn’t such a bad person. Elvis wasn’t perfect.
The colonel was so manipulative! He understood Elvis was looking for a father figure. His dad couldn't stand up for him and had issues with the law. So he put him in a position where he would fail (business manager?).
This way the dad will constantly disappointed Elvis, which will made Elvis "seek" and stay "addicted" to the stability the Colonel was giving him.
And have Elvis go into Army training so Elvis wouldn't have his mom to control him. I think Tom Parker wanted to knock down everyone that cared for Elvis and just only focus on him. Such as his dad, his mom, his friends, his cousins *(The friends and cousins he had in his Memphis Mafia)* , even his own wife! And I think Parker also wanted to control Elvis to not think about going around the world to have an international tour because he couldn't leave the country.
One thing that disappointed me was the "blink and you'll miss it" mention of his movies. In my opinion, the movies showcased how multi-talented he was and some of his best singing performances were in those movies.
its a shame no one has put together a decent DVD of all his movie songs, the good and the bad. In reality they were the first video clips, way before MTV.
One of the problems with this adaptation of Elvis Presley’s life is Baz didn’t live threw that era. He is a great director granted but research alone is just that research when writing a book or directing a movie. Was Baz around in the 1950’s when Elvis Presley broke into the music business or when Elvis Presley began his career in Hollywood? The answer is obvious, and when those movies premiered in the theaters he wasn’t around. He never even touched on the career f Elvis in the movies except for a very contrite mention. If you want to make a great or the greatest movie about Elvis Presley you would have to be there from the beginning and experience it first hand. The book Elvis: The Quest for an Oscar, was written with that specific goal in mind. Get Hollywood to recognize Elvis Presley for his immeasurable contributions to the movie industry…..finally.
Elvis didn't contribute much to the movie industry because after he came home from the army they never gave him a decent script. Maybe a couple, but not enough to make a mark.
Check out the research Baz did. It's extensive and there are movies and documentaries galore about historical people and events from far longer ago than Elvis they're made by people who study. According to you we can't understand the Civil War because we weren't there
THANK YOU FOR SAYING WHAT IVE BEEN THINKING PS: LOOK UP PICASSO’s CREEPY CYCLE OF ONLY BEING W YOUNG YOUNG WOMEN “muses” UNTIL THEY GOT TOO OLD AND WAS SO EMOTIONALLY ABUSIVE BUT HE IS THE GENIUS THAT GOES DOWN IN HISTORY……
He was. One thing has nothing to do with the other one.-
That was not Elvis.
I've heard a lot of rumors that Picasso was an asshole period 😭
@@alim.9801 that doesn’t make him less of a genius. You don’t have to like him to accept the fact that he changed art as we knew it.
I think it would be pretty disrespectful to put a human beings private life habits in a Hollywood-biopic film and I think Elvis would not want that, as well as all the books that have come out about him and his privacy after his death just to make their money he’s a human being let the man Rest In Peace
Interesting. I knew when I watched Elvis with my mother I was only getting a version of his life's story and not it's entirety. I learned that the hard way with 2004's Ray with Jaime Foxx, not everything showed is true. Anyway, I didn't know much about the musician except he was a part of pop culture as a kid. Still surprised he never did a world tour. The message I think the film wants audiences to know is how much of an impact Elvis. Plus capitalism and exploitation can bleed someone dry metaphorically. The Elvis in the film felt like a shell by the end who loved music and wondered if he'd even be remembered. I think that part might've not been totally fictional.
Yes, he didn't believe he would be remembered, according to those close to him.
Capitalism is the worst economic system except for all the others. It works as it blends in well with human nature. It’s got downsides but the good far outweighs the bad as evidenced by all the other attempts to try something different. Communism is a prime example of failure but they keep trying it out. DUMB!
Every biopic leaves stuff out or makes the person look better than they were lol.
I've been watching biopics throughout my life when I see them on TV or streaming. But when I found out that they're going to make a biopic on Brian Epstein called _Midas Man_ , I'm taking this with a pinch of salt.
Don't get me wrong, I love the movie _Elvis_ . When I saw the trailer for the movie, I was interested and I wanted to listen to more of Elvis's music. But after I found out that these kind of movies could have truth/false facts in them, it's a 75%/100% of how I like biopics.
@@lisettegarcia7013 yea
I was well aware of unattractive aspects of the Elvis story before seeing the movie but I still enjoyed it, probably because making Col Tom the villain and Elvis the innocent vessel left me more free to like the movie Elvis.
Well Elvis isn't here to defend himself, just what Cilla says 😠
The movie broke my heart and its an excellent movie, id love to watch it again, but it exhausted me. Clever casting for the grooming narcissist gas lighting tom hanks as his manager. hanks managed to convince most of us of how kind he is.
Elvis himself wasnt into drugs, the POS started giving it to him so that he can perform like a machine. Heartbreaking!
No matter how many times people try and bring him down .. the man still stands tall.
Long live the legend that is Elvis.
Also the Elvis estate was very involved and they probably didn’t let him show everything for example Martin Scorsese wanted to make a bio pic on frank Sinatra but the Sinatra estate didn’t let him.
That's too bad, what an interesting movie that would be with his mob connections and everything.
@@missj794 true I think it would be a great film Martin Scorsese is my favorite director and both Al Pacino and John Travolta where contestants for Frank Sinatra but it wasn’t to be
Another thing to consider is who has the (legal and creative) right to tell Elvis' story and the impact that ownership might have on the narrative slant. In this movie's case, the filmmakers would have needed permission from Elvis' estate to use his music, and there's no way said estate would have granted it if the portrayal was less than positive.
I think I’ve seen this quoted elsewhere on a video essay …but since I did I do apply it to things like the elvis biopic. There’s always a whalers on the moon aspect
It's weird to think that music is racially divided. Even Whitney Houston was criticised for sounding white. Music is music. It unites people.
All they do is label and Categorize to Divide People.They forgot to mention that Elvis was influenced by Country Music also,Also the Blues Songs He sang were in HI’s unique style,He didn’t steal ,He blended many forms of music to create his own style
@@retrobilly1719Correct, he fused his cultural upbringing of both R&B and Country from black and white Tupelo and Memphis. That's why BB King said he was unique and James Brown said he was an American Original
The influence on Elvis also came from crooners like Dean Martin and a ton of country music singers. NONE of that was touched upon in the movie.
It's assumed with him being a white kid that he also listened to white music. It shows him at the all white Hayride and Parker says Phillips needed a singer for his country act. Elvis fused country with R&B and they play Jimmy Carter's statement about that at the end
I knew nothing about Elvis before the movie. Now Im Amazed at how much the movie covered while only skimming the surface.
He was only offering his services as federal agent at large so he could get what he really went there for-the narc badge he desperately wanted for his collection Derr
From the moment he became famous, he never stopped seeing other women even after meeting Priscilla and he constantly beat himself up, wishing he was a better father to Lisa Marie.
No, not all of Elvis' early hits were written by black artists - Hound Dog, Blue Suede Shoes, Love Me Tender, Love Me, Jailhouse Rock.........
Waiting for Sofia Coppola's rendition , Baz putting the Moulin Rouge on everything ... ugh it worked Brilliantly once
What a great movie, I've seen it 12 times now and I'm not tired at all😅
Same! 😂
So what u would take drugs too if you were him ..they all did
.so leave him alone x he was the gladiator on stage performing ..there will never be onether Elvis ..he did what artists do now years ago ..rest in peace my gorgeous Elvis x🥰💔💘💜💙❤❤❤🙏
Like they said in the 2017 documentary 'The King' -
"If Elvis is your metaphor for America, we're about to OD."
Austin is good and serviceable. The filmmakers and screenplay channeled his talent into a greatest hits tour, giving him some divine pass for appropriating black music, and thrusted into the spotlight as some civil rights hero that only perpetuate the myth and not truly reflect the man. At least most biopics of prominent artists make an effort to show their flaws, Elvis goes out of its way to sanitize and remove blemishes from his life and throwing the grunt of his wrongdoing solely onto the colonel. I think Baz is more interested in the superficial spectacle and chose to omit anything that would complicate his rose tinted vision of Elvis Presley.
Elvis was human and had faults like everyone. Leave this beautiful soul alone and let him rest in peace. Most of the film is inaccurate as told by Billy smith his cousin who was actually there!
It’s a MOVIE , not a documentary.
All matters, Elvis always be the king
Elvis was a building block for Societal progression (in means of introduction to black culture and music). Elvis didn't "steal" black music, he just played music, and the reason it is music and not black music is because Elvis grew up in a black town for most his life, to him black music was music. He reportedly covered things he heard on the radio, not things he sought after in hopes of profiting from them. His Father Vernon Presley said in an interview, Elvis once ran away to a black church and watched/sang gospel. This man had no intention of appropriating anything and he sure respected his fellow black artists. B.B. King spoke in high regard of Elvis every time his name was mentioned. Once Elvis had a performance and was told that his backup singers, the sweet inspirations couldn't sing with him, and he refused to do the show without them. America was in such a damaged, poor state in the 50s, and just because a white man profited off black music whilst being exploited himself, didn't mean he was stealing black music, Right Person, Bad Timing. Coming back to societal progression, Elvis is a main reason why there is far less discrimination amongst the black community today, in regard of music. Back then Black music was very unknown. Nowadays, the most successful artists of all time have been black artists. If a white person couldn't act on the problem at hand, the chances of change would be very slim. Unfortunately the corrupt government wouldn't listen to black people nor treat them as humans, it is only when someone "of their kind" did a rebellious act, or many. We know Elvis had many flaws, but he is also human, we all have many flaws, no one is perfect. But the one view I always find to be the most misconstrued is Elvis view on black people, culture and music.
They missed some of the lighter truths too. I mean, almost all of Elvis's Gospel stuff and his love for the church...gone!
it is so stupid that people claim that Elvis profited off of Black Music! he sang songs that other people wrote and so did many other artists! Elvis made Black song writers even more popular when he recorded and performed the songs that they had written and he made many of them rich by recording the songs that they wrote!
Elvis was a country artist too and fused it with R&B at Sun Records which is what changed music. He was raised in southern culture with blacks and whites. You can't appropriate your own poor southern culture. People wrongly view Elvis as a white person someone used to present black music, when it's the opposite. He wasn't Pat Boone or Bill Haley. Black music and culture, along with white music and culture were both in his DNA from his childhood in Tupelo and Memphis. When he entered Sun Studios, Sam Phillips receptionist asked Elvis what he sang and Elvis replied "All kinds" she then asked who do you sound like and he said "I don't sound like nobody" He was being honest that he had his own delivery and style which was a combination of all his influences of Blue Grass, Honky Tonk, Blues, R&B and Gospel. Elvis charted on the R&B charts for years because black DJs played his records due to blacks requesting him.
Early Wright played Elvis on his all black station until he retired and Elvis not only attended black Pentacostal churches with Sam Bell, he also attended the Memphis all black East Trigg Baptist Church and was in Rev. Brewster's choir.
The film covers the racial issues of the day thoroughly by showing how they wanted to ban Elvis because of his association with black friends and artists and him dancing like black performers do, but not as copying, but him too having rhythm and musical expression. It talks about him breaking the segregation laws by going to the all negro night at the fairgrounds and hanging out at Club Handy. It shows his friendships with blacks B.B. King, Sister Rosetta, Fats Domino, Mahalia Jackson, as well as Sam Bell's black gang as kids in Shake Rag, and his black girl group the Sweet Inspirations, but without looking like pandering they couldn't go into showing what overall great friendships he had with James Brown, Jackie Wilson, Little Richard, Calvin Newborn, Brook Benton, Ernest Withers, Dionne Warwick, Cissy Houston, Billy Ward,
Muhammad Ali, John Lee Hooker, Sammy Davis Jr. ect.
Elvis was recognized by the black peers of his day as essential. Little Richard said Elvis was an integrator and a messiah, B.B. King said Elvis had a unique way of looking at a song and that he was inventive, James Brown said Elvis was an American Original and they'll never be another like that Soul Brother, Jackie Wilson said black solo entertainers copied Elvis stage mannerisms and that he took as much from Elvis as he took from him, Stevie Wonder said Elvis did a lot to end racism, Al Green said Elvis broke the ice for all of us with his approach, Isaac Hayes said Elvis influenced everyone in the business, Ernest Withers said Elvis did more for Civil Rights than people realize and Chuck D had to recant his comments about Elvis and said Elvis was real and gave props to his roots. And Elvis was a far better singer than just country and R&B. He was a world class vocalist of of ballads of Italian, Spanish and Hawaiian heritage, as well as standards. His greatest selling point was his vocal talent and range. As for those claiming racism: James Brown also said Elvis wasn't just my friend but my brother and they'd sing gospel at Graceland, Fats Domino said he loved Elvis, B.B. King said he and Elvis were the original Blues Brothers, Ernest Withers said Elvis invited his sons to his house and defended him when a reporter asked Elvis why he called Withers "Sir" when he's a tar boy and Elvis said cause he's a person. Elvis would sneak into the segregated theaters and climb the segregation barrier to sit with his black friends in Tupelo.
Muhammad Ali said that he doesn't admire anyone but Elvis was the sweetest the most humble person you'd ever want to meet. Little Richard said Elvis was his boy and he loved him. The Sweet Inspirations tell the story of how the Houston Astrome asked him not to bring them to the shows and Elvis threatened to cancel the engagement. Sam Bell's grandparents couldn't believe a white kid in the 1940s called them sir and ma'am.
Tom Hanks should have won an Oscar.
Unfortunately he won the Razzie
I don't think cultural appropriation was even a thought by Elvis, or those involved. Even the black folks. Viewing the past through the lens of the present isn't that beneficial. But what do I know.
Priscilla was Not 15 when she moved in with Elvis!.... she was 17 when she moved to Memphis!!.. 21 when she married him!!
yes, they twist the final story of Elvis to correct the betrayal committed by priscila beaulieu. Linda especially Ginger the last woman standing in Elvis's life should have been included. there should be Elvis part two
Elvis made the kind of music that he loved. It’s not his fault more people purchased the records when he recorded it.
You should make your own version of the movie....that make you happy
Movies are for entertainment, dreaming, hypnosis and escapism. I have very little interest in watching any type of movie that tries to remain factual. If I want to watch the facts about something, documentaries, news, books, video essays, lectures, and journals are much better medium. I dont know when this trend started, but accuracy in movies or tv shows is the not important. We have and should use other outlets to get our factual information. When I saw Watchmen Oklahoma scene and I went to find other sources about its veracity. Obviously, the scene is not 100% historically accurate, but it was based on a true event and completely spiked my interest in the subject. I think movies and tv shows because of their mass popularity, cost and limited time should NOT be taken as seirous sources of information but are capable of driving us towards those sources.
The movie is wonderful and everyone commenting here is resentful who didn't understand the movie or the essence of the king of rock and roll, if you don't like it you have thousands of movies you can watch.
I am a big Elvis fan. But the truth is, the movie left a lot of important part of Elvis' life. So it created pacing problems. Also, the movie tried to paint a picture.
I'm glad you liked the movie, but it's ok to let people criticize something you liked. It's not very nice to shoot them down by telling them they just don't understand the topic. If you care that much, maybe you can share some of your love for and knowledge of the subject
Magnífico!! Merecia o Oscar. Love Elvis! Love austin!❤❤❤❤😊
His life was sanitized in this maybe because his life was run thru Hell just after he died
Every nasty detail was brought out whether his fans wanted to see it or not
I was a 14 yr old fan who could’ve done without that
If they touched on everyone and every aspect of Elvis' life; the movie would have been so long; no one would have gone to see it. ✌️
Elvis is the King...... if you agree great! If not no one cares lol
Didn’t tell the whole story? He didn’t even tell half of the story. This isn’t an Elvis biopic it’s the story of Elvis and his managers relationship. Not about Elvis his whole life
They left out Prisella's taking drugs and her affairs as well.
If the Presley family more or less bankrolled this movie - of course they would sanitise his life post Priscilla
Are yu for real? The Presley family had nothing to do with this movie, certainly not investing money in it. They did promote it afterward.
His life post Priscilla? He just slowly deteriorated and died. That's all there was to it. He couldn't take it when she left him.
Me growing up in Memphis, I been known the truth about Elvis; all of us from the city do! I even use to work at UPS with a guy who’s family member went on the road with him. His cousin said he was an asshole when would come back home to the city around his family.
Would love to see "the last train to Memphis" made into a movie 🕺🕺🕺🕺🕺
There was LOADS MISSED OUT abt Elvis as the Presleys didn't want his image sullied which definitely wasn't perfect: eg Dating a 14 yr old! Drug addict! Obesity! Unfaithful!
A biopic is never meant to be a documentary. The difference is in how the story is told, and what's done with the details.
Elvis did not "Culturally Appropriate" black music. he always gave credit to the Black Musicians that inspired him.
I wish they could have brought more of Parker’s greediness
After all, Tom Hanks portrayed him
That man didn’t need any limits put on him
priscilla was 18 when she moved back to america/graceland with elvis
From this perspective re: the biopic, what was Bohemian Rhapsody trying to say aside from gay = bad?
As soon as I saw the old man in the beginning I knew the audience had a unreliable narrator.
The old man was his manager Colonel Tom Parker
But you can’t forget that he loved mlk and literally just took inspiration from there music bc he LOVED it so much and he grew up around it ofc he took inspiration I don’t think he thought ab it like he was taking away from them if anything he was saying hey look at their music it’s amazing and he led a path for them if you watch his old shows his band was mostly African American
9:20 easily the greatest movie out of all three mentioned
'Dark facts' >conservative
Apparently having political opinions you don't like is something dark
I thought leaving out the other women was a strategic move to sell the Presley’s on the movie. I also thought “Hollywood” “starring Priscilla Jerry Schilling (bold letters ) yet another strategic selling point. I LOVE Jerry from Beach Boy tour manager days yet his name and Priscilla’s placed front and center. Joe (Esposito) reduced to just “Joe” and Linda Thompson totally ignored. I LOVED the movie yet with my marketing and sales experience I could see what was done to lure the decision makers give it a thumbs up. A terrible snub to Linda Thompson (loved by Memphis Mafia and she prolonged Elvis’ life).
Elvis was going blind. He was on Prednisone which makes you balloon up. Think of Jerry Lewis toward the end of his life. As for meeting Priscilla at 14. So what? My aunt got married at 15 and had two(2) kids and we are not from the south. Whatever his flaws, his fans came first. He was kind, generous, thoughtful. The rest doesn’t matter.
I get so sick of people making such a big deal on the fact that she was 14. My mother had me when she was 16. My grandmother was married at 13. That was the south. If you were 25 and not married, you were an "old maid" an object of pity.
People need to understand it was a different time and they didn’t get married or get intimate until she was older. Plus Prescilla does acknowledge that even though their relationship wasent perfect she doesn’t regret or considers herself a victim
This movie was already 2hours and 40 minutes long! Half the people said it was too long. If you cut anything out, there wouldn't be much of a story Left. In all actuality, it should have been a 4 hr long movie. It skipped through the 50's. Barely noticed his movie career in the 60's. The movie really got started with the '68 Come Back Special. We had some Vegas on the early 70's, but a lot of the 70's was not covered. Bottom line is, Warner Bros told Baz, the movie had to be no more than 2 and a half hours long. What can you do? You have to do a lot of cutting. Elvis lived 3 lifetimes in one. The Elvis story could be told in 3 movies. That could do it justice. I personally had problems with the time line. Elvis didn't buy Graceland in 1956, right before the Milton Berle show! That was a crock. There were more things, I can't remember now. The movie, to me, definitely could have been better. I didn't really like the directors style. It was like Elvis, his story, was in competition with Baz and his directors style. Instead of complimenting one another, they competed against one another. In the end, style over substance. The movie was good though, just not great. Definitely, not great for a King. Props to Baz though, for even having the balls to make this film The definitive Elvis movie, has yet to be made! Will I see it in my life time? Lol, stranger things have happened.
Please do an episode on the Weird Al biopic, a better movie