I recently watched the 2022 Elvis Presley movie, recounting some of his life and his relationship with the ‘Colonel’. An interesting take on the events surrounding one of the world’s most popular icons…
The film itself is around 2hrs 40mins and is recounted in part by his infamous manager Colonel Tom Parker (played by a very different looking Tom Hanks) and directed by Baz Lurhman.
It shows some of Elvis’s story and journey from the early years and development of his inspiration right through to his later, more bloated years. Some of the trials and tribulations of the star - played by a capable Austin Butler - relationships and unfulfilled dreams.
Style & Substance? A Fine Line
Let’s start with the style. Much of it is very flashy with quick edits and modernised music, making it snappy and at times disorientating and lacking flow.
There has been a shift to this sort of set up in a lot of movies and to me it’s a bit gimmicky and detracts from the story. It’s much like a comic book/cartoony type vibe which may appeal to some.
Thankfully this wasn’t throughout but just gives the impression of trying too hard to be stylish for the sake of it. The problem is coming across as more flash than substance and this film ran that gauntlet but thankfully had enough of the latter to provide a good romp.
I learnt a few things from this film. Of course, we all ‘know’ Elvis, his songs, some of his activities and much of his life. This film brought out more about his direct relationship with the colonel, along with touching on his other relationships like Priscilla.
Roots to Riches
It reviews his early years and getting inspired by black bluegrass music and blending it with folk, and ultimately gelling into his own unique style.
And the impact his certain style with his new and outrageous dance moves had on the girls in the room and society at large. This really was a new concept at the time and no-one knew what to make of it.
Well, he was told in no uncertain terms that he had to stop with his wild on-stage antics, or else face the consequences. He listened in parts but mostly stuck to his guns and remained true.
When he did go through a phase of conforming, he came out the other side and showed the real Elvis. This was what the people (well, most) wanted but some of the networks and bigwigs didn’t like and wanted to steer him towards more wholesome performances.
The movie centred a lot around the colonel and his debts. And Elvis was paying for Parker’s gambling lifestyle. This was what was driving a lot of decisions, mostly unbeknownst to Elvis. There was conflict in some of what Elvis wanted to do and the colonel being beholden to creditors.
Elvis - according to this film - was very much used as a pawn and that obviously affected him.
We see him going into the army and back out again. Losing himself and finding himself… and losing himself once more. The pills and potions that were needed to get him both up and down, ready for performing at that level consistently. And the addictions that would be his downfall.
What About the Main Actors?
Butler played Elvis very well. It wasn’t as an impersonator, more his version which observed the star and his mannerisms. There wasn’t too much depth there but he did enough in his portrayal and pulling off the perfect Elvis wasn’t the main point.
I’m in two minds about Hanks. I think he played the colonel reasonably well but it wasn’t emphatic. I know this guy is a successful actor but I’m not a huge fan of late. He’s done some great stuff in his career but I don’t think this would be defining. This is more down to my personal views on Hanks and I know others love him and his performance here.
Anyway, Elvis never got to tour the world, he was mainly stuck with his Vegas show mostly at the behest of the colonel who he finds out some truths about later in the film.
A King's Cameo!
The ending tugs at the emotions a little and it was a great idea to have the real Elvis finish off. The clips switch to the man himself and the powerful, raw performance that only he can do.
Yes, the actor playing him was fine… but as soon as you see (and hear) the real thing on stage, you know you’re in the presence of the king.
Verdict?
Critics might say it’s flashy but light on substance. I would agree to a degree but it has enough as a purely entertaining 2 and half hours or so.
As ever, take these things with a pinch of salt. It’s one interpretation based on people’s views and opinions, dissected and written, acted and directed in a certain way. Whether this is a perfect portrayal or fully accurate is not known and not so much the point. There will be kernels (must. resist. joke) of truth and some ‘poetic license’ I’m sure.
Ultimately, 4 out of 5 stars for entertainment. Pleased I watched it but it wouldn't leave a massive hole in my life if not. Worth a look and you can always cross-reference with other Elvis movies and documentaries. This film works for fans or non-fans, and most should enjoy the majority of it.
Have you seen it, and what did you think?
Adam
www.AdamBarratt.com
Image and video linked to source
Posted using CineTV