Movie Review: "Elvis"
On Saturday night, Partner, FAM, and I went to see the new movie Elvis, directed by Baz Luhrmann. Here's why I wanted to go:
1. Luhrmann -- He is uneven as a director, but to my mind, he's always at least interesting.
2. Elvis -- I've never been a huge Elvis Presley fan, but it was impossible to grow up when I did without being aware of him and sort of automatically learning things about his life and about the complexities of his connections to race, popular culture, music, etc. I like a lot of his songs, and I remember being shocked when he died. So he's definitely part of my experience of the world, and I was curious about how he'd be presented.
3. therealsnape recommended the film, and a recommendation from TRS is always worth listening to.
My reaction, short version: A fun, dynamic picture that is nonetheless far too long. I enjoyed it, and yes, it's certainly interesting. On the whole, though, I don't think there's much "there" there. Strip away the filmic pyrotechnics, and you have a pretty standard hagiographic biopic that doesn't really say much that is new about the "King" or his cultural impact and that ignores the darker elements of EP's personality and behavior. But am I glad I went? Definitely.
In random order, here are some things I liked and some I didn't.
Plusses
+ Austin Butler, who plays Elvis, is excellent. He's got EP's moves down; he communicates a lot of Elvis's vulnerability and charm and explosive charisma; he's very compelling to watch.
+ The musical numbers are pretty damn great, both those that "Elvis" sings and those from others -- Little Richard, Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Big Mama Thornton. The vocals and the choreography are really strong. I felt like leaping out of my reclining seat and gyrating away right there in the theater. (I did not do so, however.)
+ The story is told from the pov of Colonel Tom Parker, Elvis's Svengali-like, criminally exploitative manager. Some critics didn't like this approach, but I thought it was one of the more effective and innovative things about the movie. Without the Colonel's fevered edge and the wonderful chance it offers for turning all sorts of things askew, the film would have been much less interesting.
Minuses
- Length -- At nearly three hours long, "Elvis" wears out its welcome at about the two-thirds mark; the last third is repetitive and frustrating to watch. In my head I was screaming, "End already!! Just end!!"
- While I generally like the "Colonel Parker fever dream" approach, the downside is that at times the film becomes too chaotic and disjointed; it starts to feel pointless and unfocused.
- I like that the film at least acknowledges the racial complexities of Elvis's career, but it doesn't really go anywhere meaningful with that thread. The whole business of his murky relationship with Priscilla is glossed over, too.
Bottom line -- Enjoyable summer fare that is not without flaws but will make you wanna dance. And sing "Hound Dog" at the top of your voice (at least until you become sulky and sullen because the damn movie WILL NOT END).
(NB -- I read all sorts of reviews of the film ranging from an absolute rave in The Guardian to a more nuanced assessment in the New York Times to a total "I hate this" pan in Indie Wire. I agreed with some of the Indie guy's statements and disagreed with others, but his writing was flat-out hilarious.
Here is my favorite line: "Elvis" is "a sadistically monotonous super-montage in which a weird Flemish guy manipulates some naïve young greaser over and over and over again until they both get sad and die."
Ahahaha! Actually, Colonel Parker was Dutch, but let's face it, "Dutch" would not be nearly as funny here as "Flemish.")
1. Luhrmann -- He is uneven as a director, but to my mind, he's always at least interesting.
2. Elvis -- I've never been a huge Elvis Presley fan, but it was impossible to grow up when I did without being aware of him and sort of automatically learning things about his life and about the complexities of his connections to race, popular culture, music, etc. I like a lot of his songs, and I remember being shocked when he died. So he's definitely part of my experience of the world, and I was curious about how he'd be presented.
3. therealsnape recommended the film, and a recommendation from TRS is always worth listening to.
My reaction, short version: A fun, dynamic picture that is nonetheless far too long. I enjoyed it, and yes, it's certainly interesting. On the whole, though, I don't think there's much "there" there. Strip away the filmic pyrotechnics, and you have a pretty standard hagiographic biopic that doesn't really say much that is new about the "King" or his cultural impact and that ignores the darker elements of EP's personality and behavior. But am I glad I went? Definitely.
In random order, here are some things I liked and some I didn't.
Plusses
+ Austin Butler, who plays Elvis, is excellent. He's got EP's moves down; he communicates a lot of Elvis's vulnerability and charm and explosive charisma; he's very compelling to watch.
+ The musical numbers are pretty damn great, both those that "Elvis" sings and those from others -- Little Richard, Sister Rosetta Tharpe, Big Mama Thornton. The vocals and the choreography are really strong. I felt like leaping out of my reclining seat and gyrating away right there in the theater. (I did not do so, however.)
+ The story is told from the pov of Colonel Tom Parker, Elvis's Svengali-like, criminally exploitative manager. Some critics didn't like this approach, but I thought it was one of the more effective and innovative things about the movie. Without the Colonel's fevered edge and the wonderful chance it offers for turning all sorts of things askew, the film would have been much less interesting.
Minuses
- Length -- At nearly three hours long, "Elvis" wears out its welcome at about the two-thirds mark; the last third is repetitive and frustrating to watch. In my head I was screaming, "End already!! Just end!!"
- While I generally like the "Colonel Parker fever dream" approach, the downside is that at times the film becomes too chaotic and disjointed; it starts to feel pointless and unfocused.
- I like that the film at least acknowledges the racial complexities of Elvis's career, but it doesn't really go anywhere meaningful with that thread. The whole business of his murky relationship with Priscilla is glossed over, too.
Bottom line -- Enjoyable summer fare that is not without flaws but will make you wanna dance. And sing "Hound Dog" at the top of your voice (at least until you become sulky and sullen because the damn movie WILL NOT END).
(NB -- I read all sorts of reviews of the film ranging from an absolute rave in The Guardian to a more nuanced assessment in the New York Times to a total "I hate this" pan in Indie Wire. I agreed with some of the Indie guy's statements and disagreed with others, but his writing was flat-out hilarious.
Here is my favorite line: "Elvis" is "a sadistically monotonous super-montage in which a weird Flemish guy manipulates some naïve young greaser over and over and over again until they both get sad and die."
Ahahaha! Actually, Colonel Parker was Dutch, but let's face it, "Dutch" would not be nearly as funny here as "Flemish.")