‘Elvis’ brings scenery, music, and more (Where’s Mr. Presley?)

Elvis may have left the building, but he left no trace in Baz Luhrmann’s hands.

“Elvis,” the number one hit on the late rock icon, is different from every previous presentation. That’s healthy and welcome, and no one can amaze us like the author behind “Moulin Rouge” and “The Great Gatsby.”

Except for Luhrmann, he forgot to include people in his atypical resume. Nobody records, neither the king of rock nor the wanderer who guided his career until Presley’s death in 1977.

You’ll come out of “Elvis” not knowing much about the singer and nothing more.

On paper, “Elvis” traces the rise of one of music’s biggest stars, who brought Austin Butler back to life. We see Presley’s early days, working blue collar jobs while trying to impress record label types. As soon as he steps up on stage, and those hips start to rotate, the real Elvis Presley appears.

Teen girls do more than faint in their seats. They writhed, their eyes sparkling with palpable heat. It’s comically framed by Team Lurhmann, but the point goes down as intended. We’ve never seen anyone like Presley before.

(The film’s version, just days after Christian Aguilera wears a rubber dick on stage, speaks volumes about societal change.)

Presley is known to put a white face on R&B music, and “Elvis” does not inspire the singer’s inspiration. In fact, these sequences are the most effective in the film, with a group of black actors recreating Presley’s formative influences and the musicians who inspired his musicals.

It is a shame that Kelvin Harrison, Jr. , the actor who plays one role far from stardom, doesn’t get as much to do as BB King. Then again, nobody here appears as a soul of flesh and blood, neither Butler Presley nor Tom Hanks as Colonel Tom Parker.

Parker’s role is the biggest change in the Elvis screen canon. Hanks tells the story and embodies the man who dictates Presley’s career. He’s a con artist, admittedly, however, despite his massive uptime, we don’t really know much about him, and even less about his relationship with Presley.

it’s a problem.

RELATED: Why You’d Vote for Elvis & Nixon

Such is the impenetrable mantle around the title character. Who is Elvis Presley? Was he a musical prodigy, or a handsome guy who used his voice to bring R&B music to the masses? Was he so stupid that he didn’t realize what Colonel Parker was up to, or was he just sweetly naive to the core?

The film never revealed the layers that made Presley an icon, and the lack of psychological depth is the reason for her decline. Together with Luhrmann, we will endure a change in the traditional resume format. Not caring about the spirit behind the myth… This is a narrative bridge too far.

Elvis takes on everything with this superficial approach, from historical tragedies like the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. to Presley’s TV special back in 1968. The latter hinges not on the artist’s creative birth but whether he’ll wear a raucous Christmas sweater and sing about Ol’ Saint Nick.

Priorities… This movie deals with it poorly.

However, this is one of Luhrmann’s masterpieces, so there is always enough to focus on to grab our attention. Butler’s restoration of Presley’s theatrical film is ferocious and worth bearing on the film’s myriad flaws.

He would probably miss Oscar’s conversation. This “Elvis” does not linger in our memory, unlike the icon that inspired this amazing glitch.

hit or miss: “Elvis” brings all the gritty film director Baz Luhrmann can summon, but we don’t really “meet” the king of rock.

Leave a Comment