Once drafted, you either join up, service is exempted/delayed/deferred for a legitimate reason, or... you could go to jail. The movie conflates the reason there might be jail, but in the end, it was true.

Aggies76 said:

---

Great movie.

Would Elvis really have been arrested if he hadn't joined the army? Don't remember hearing that before.

Also, was Parker really an alien from Europe and did that keep Elvis from doing a European tour? Guess I need to do some research.

Edit: Parker emigrated from the Netherlands illegally to the US at the age of 20.

More fact checking: Elvis to the Army was a PR coup by Parker, not a way to keep him out of jail.

---

Absolutely true.

Philo B 93 said:

---

"Elvis" was a good 80 minute movie squeezed into 2 hours and 39 minutes. My advice to Baz Luhrman: cut out half the slow motion scenes (approx 30 minutes of saved runtime) and half the music montage scenes (approx 25 minutes of saved runtime). Cut out all the modern music montage scenes (10 minutes saved runtime). Who goes to an Elvis biopic to hear hip-hop?

As it was, the movie is too long and dialogue-starved for my parents, the true Elvis fans. It is FAR too long, in-depth, and anciently historic for my kids, true music fans (who loved Bohemian Rhapsody). Give 'em a break, they were born 3 decades after Elvis died.

As for me, I'm a big Elvis fan, and this movie made me realize that I really like the '68 Comeback and later Elvis years. That was about the last third of the movie. I'd sit through that again, although I'd leave as soon as it starts getting sad. No spoilers, we all know how Elvis died. The first two-thirds of the movie was abundantly full of slow-mo scenes and music montages. Hell, i thought maybe I'd mistaken some regular candy for a weed gummy. I guess there isn't as much video footage and information on those years to craft a movie around, so they fill it in with scenes from the 50s and 60s and pictures of newspapers with headlines about the evil of Elvis and Rock and Roll - the twitter of the 20th century. I also wish I could unsee at least one scene of Elvis and his mother.

There are a handful of scenes that make the movie worth seeing at the theater. None of them involve Tom Hanks. I'll give the movie 2 1/2 stars. Its worth seeing if you're an Elvis fan and have 3 hours to burn. Maybe don't see it too soon after "Top Gun: Maverick."

---

This is where I am. My wife and I saw it Wednesday night and we leaned over to each other in the first 20 minutes and said, "I am so confused. What is going on?" Having Col Tom walking through the casino over and over again with his iv pole was just stupid.

We loved Austin Butler. I'm glad I saw it but I don't need to see it again.

I was grateful to learn more about the '68 comeback special. I saw it on HBO or something about 25 years ago and thought it was fantastic, especially the sit down session. Had no idea it was supposed to be a Christmas special.

Hard to believe the hold Parker had on him.

Zero chance this thread escapes moderation by tomorrow afternoon

So Elvis was gay? I'm so confused now

Super job you two. Take you pillow fight to The Who Gives a Sh*t forum.

Sea Speed said:

---

Zero chance this thread escapes moderation by tomorrow afternoon

---

Called it

Willy Wonka said:

---

Having Col Tom walking through the casino over and over again with his iv pole was just stupid.

---

They keep showing you that because of what's in the IV bag... of the narrator of the movie.

New World Ag said:

---

Saw this tonight. A must see IMO. Could have used more Elvis and less Colonel Parker but I think Hanks did a good job. Butler is fantastic, I have to imagine he will be the overwhelming favorite for Best Actor this year. Highlights are the 68 comeback special and the well done ending scenes.

Time wise it's a long movie but it kept my attention the entire time. Very entertaining with a poignant ending.

---

For me, Best Actor right now is between Alexander Skarsgard in The Northman and Austin Butler as Elvis with a slight edge to Butler.

Right now, I think Tom Hanks is a lock for Best Supporting Actor.

bonfarr said:

---

TCCTS' comments are spot on. Butler was fantastic in this movie, every scene he was in was great and his stage performances were unbelievable.

The focus on Parker was annoying and the accent was atrocious. I listened to interviews of Parker and he didn't talk like that at all so kind of weird.

---

I saw this today and was annoyed at the beginning and worried it was going to focus on Parker. And Parker's accent grated on my nerves!

Austin Butler was fantastic. Got a laugh how all the women were acting and how their husband's were p'd! Was hoping there was going to be a fictious reference of getting some of his moves from "Forrest"

TCTTS said:

---

First, three quick caveats...

- This is DEFINITELY a Baz Luhrmann movie. The Great Gatsby. Australia. Moulin Rouge! Romeo + Juliet. For better and for worse, it falls right in line with his other entries; impeccable style/production design and some rousing highs... but also an overuse of CGI/green screen and a general, schizophrenic nature. To that last point, this movie is basically one, long montage. Sure, there are scenes, but it's a "scene" that then montages into the next "scene," that then montages into the next "scene," and on and on it goes. It never sits still or lets you revel in a poignant moment.

- This is also a looooong movie. Like, 2h 39m long. And when the entire thing feels like a never-ending montage, you can *really* feel the runtime at parts.

- Tom Hanks is basically playing a caricature. He looks like a caricature, talks like a caricature, and acts like caricature. You get used to it after a while, but for the first 20-30 min or so it's kind of ridiculous. He's also in the movie way too much, to the point where it's basically told from his point of view for some reason.

All that said, if you go in *knowing* it's a long ass Baz Luhrmann movie, in which an ever-present Tom Hanks is basically a cartoon villain, in all seriousness... it's pretty damn great. In particular, Austin Butler is ASTOUNDING as Elvis. Like, just-give-him-the-Oscar-now astounding. Very rarely do we get to witness an actor become a superstar right before our eyes, but that's exactly what happens here. The dude absolutely owns every last aspect of the role - no questions or complaints at all - and it's so incredible to watch, increasingly so throughout the movie.

He IS Elvis.

To that end, the musical performances are fantastic and easily the best parts. The energy, the vocals, the costuming, the attention to detail... it's all kind of mind-blowing. There are two on-stage moments, in particular, where Elvis "sticks it to the man" that are worth the price of admission alone. Easily my two favorite moments of the movie.

Overall, there were 13 of us in our group, and everyone seemed to genuinely enjoy it. Again, my friend ran the marketing campaign, invited a group of friends and family tonight, and I'd never met three of them, so I can't vouch for everyone. But the general vibe when we got out was basically "wow." Everyone agreed that it was probably too long, and a little too zany at times, but we all just kept going back to how amazing Butler was. Like, we couldn't shut up about him.

I have a feeling reactions are going to be all over the place, and understandably so, but one thing everyone will agree on is Butler. Between this and a big new role in Dune: Part Two, he really is a superstar in the making.

So curious to hear what some of you think this weekend...

---

Agree with so much of this…. And Hanks' portrayal was odd….. but I loved how they did this through his "eyes" or telling from his side of the story while still showing how he screwed Elvis over his whole life….

I loved this; it was great! And Butler was absolutely incredible and stole the show.

Saw it Friday.

The Bad:
Overall I was little disappointed, I didn't look into it much so I didn't realize it was a Baz Luhrmann film, and I'm not really a fan of his style. To each their own. It felt like two different movies combined. The first half was almost all music and almost a fictionalized version of Elvis' early life and career, while the second half was much more traditional in the storytelling. Wasn't a fan of Tom Hanks' voice, especially since it wasn't historically accurate. Really just think the movie could have been done better, but it was very Luhrmann so I should have known better

The Good:
Austin Butler was fantastic, give him the Oscar, the singing, personality, looks...all outstanding. The music (not the rap) was great, loved the performances. I thought the run time was fine, there was really nothing that I thought could have been cut out except maybe some of the focus on Parker, I did know however that Elvis' relationship with Parker was a central part of the movie and I'm glad it was told because people really are unware of the huge influence that he had.

Even though I was disappointed I would still recommend it, just thought it could have been alot better.

CincyAg said:

---

Just got back and enjoyed it. Echoing the greatness of Butler's performance.

Were there any parts of the story completely fabricated or heavily revised?

---

They did not meet up at a carnival.
Elvis did not fire Tom Parker from the stage. He did have a rant on stage in real life about the later owner of the hotel Baron Hilton.
But most - even some of the outrageous stuff was pretty much true.

This one is certainly up there. Some of my other favorites:

Christoph Waltz in Inglourious Basterds
Ian McKellen in LOTR
Al Pacino in Godfather I/II
Leo DiCaprio in Revolutionary Road
Henry Thomas in E.T.

Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill

---

And Gary Oldman as Dracula.

Anthony Hopkins as Dr. Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs

I just watched the 1981 movie (part documentary, part acting) on his life. It's not a deep dive but the concert footage is very cool. I was a teenager when he died and didn't pay much attention to him. Amazing the access he gives for this movie. I've grown to appreciate his love for his family and the respect and reference he had for the blues/gospel music. Sad the amount of people who wanted a piece of his wealth. Interesting how Lisa Marie became involved in the weirdness of Michael Jackson, who was probably the closest in stature to her dad.

Psychag said:

---

I just watched the 1981 movie (part documentary, part acting) on his life. It's not a deep dive but the concert footage is very cool. I was a teenager when he died and didn't pay much attention to him. Amazing the access he gives for this movie. I've grown to appreciate his love for his family and the respect and reference he had for the blues/gospel music. Sad the amount of people who wanted a piece of his wealth. Interesting how Lisa Marie became involved in the weirdness of Michael Jackson, who was probably the closest in stature to her dad.

---

Although they obviously had different demons, the last 20-30 minutes of the movie really rings true of Michael Jackson - getting doped up to get on stage, totally out of touch with reality, being lonely when you're the most famous person on the planet, and having more pills on hand than 5 pharmacies.

That's a pretty strong recommendation

We got to talking - what are the best/definitive Elvis movies - because as they even admitted, some of them were complete trash. Others were fun.