Elvis Story Link – https://mwreviewz.com/web-stories/review-on-the-new-elvis-movie-2022/
Elvis 2022 Movie About and Summary
Elvis 2022 Movie about and summary- Elvis features all the glitz rhinestones and jumpsuits you’d anticipate from an Elvis movie but it lacks the complexity required for a 2022 picture about the King. Baz Luhrmann a maximalist director who despises aesthetic constraint and prefers enormous theatricality, ought to be the ideal director for a Presley biopic, but he isn’t. Luhrmann gives us this icons story from the perspective of the singer longstanding unscrupulous manager Colonel Tom Parker Tom Hanks. A neardeath Parker awakens by himself in a Las Vegas hospital room after collapsing in his garish memorabilia-filled workplace. He needs to clear his name because he has been called a criminal and a cheat who took advantage of Elvis Austin Butler by the media. Luhrmann aesthetic vocabulary is evident right away: Parker enters a casino wearing a hospital nightgown and makes his way to a roulette wheel after an IV drip transforms into the Las Vegas skyline. Hanks plays Parker like the Mouse King in The Nutcracker carrying a lot of affectations. Elvis moves like a Christmas fairytale turned nightmare for exactly the first half hour of the movie one that is propelled not by jealousy but by the pernicious grips of capitalism and racism, and the potent concoction they produce.
It’s challenging to fully describe why Elvis fails especially given that it occasionally provides engrossing amusement for extended periods of time. Luhrmann and co-writers Sam Bromell Craig Pearce, and Jeremy Doner carefully construct the early events around Presleys influences. They demonstrate how much his time spent at Beale Street influenced his style and sound, as well as how equally enthralling Gospel and Blues were to him. A brilliantly edited both visually and sonically, sequence combines the two genres through a steamy performance of That’s Alright Mama. Furthering the argument are Big Mama Thorntons Shonka Dukureh rendition of Hound Dog and the appearance of a dazzling B.B. King Kelvin Harrison Jr. Presley adores the superhero Shazam and aspires to the Rock of Eternity, which is a metaphor for fame in his life. Even though Hanks has acted in many biopics he has rarely been a game-changer. His accent is now shifting back toward Hanks in this instance. Additionally the bulky prostheses do him little good because they take away his facial range, a useful element in his toolbox. Furthermore. Hanks already finds it difficult to portray blatant villains, so framing the narrative from his point of view lessens the threat he may otherwise pose. It’s a tough line for Hanks to walk to be unsuspecting yet vicious. Although Hanks friction doesn’t always work, it fits well with Luhrmann’s film which heavily relies on artifice.
The expansion of commerce and race in Elvis is the most fascinating connection. Parker is drawn to Presley because although being white he performs Black music. Elvis alienates homophobic men who see him as a fairy, as well as the elderly white Christians who are white and Christian, such as the senile country artist Hank Snow David Wenham. However, he appeals to young people and has sex appeal, much like Jimmie Rogers Kodi Smit-McPhee both performers give wonderful comic relief. Please allow me to wiggle. Luhrmann depicts shouting, sexually possessed ladies because he takes that very seriously. Butler pink slacks are perfectly tailored, and the camera is focused closely on his crotch. The early parts of this biopic are especially memorable thanks to harsh zooms fast whip pans, and a thirst for horniness (by both men and women.
Unfortunately, Elvis quickly enters the realm of the stuffy biopic. We see Presley’s rapid ascent, his early errors whether brought on by greed or naivet and his ultimate slide into self-parody. The most cliched of beats leads to the death of his mother Helen Thomson. Richard Roxburgh, his father, trembles in the most insignificant of ways. When Priscilla (Olivia DeJonge) shows in, she is given the usual tragic wife material. The plot just doesn’t have enough fun or interiority to hold up as the rhythm slows. Even so Luhrmann’s film does have some enjoyable moments in the later half: It is stunning to see Presley play Trouble in which he opposes Southern racists who worry that his sensual Black-infused music will infect white America. Mandy Walker a cinematographer, uses freeze frames to resemble black and white photographs as if history were being covered in dew in the morning. Elvis song of If I Can Dream during his comeback spectacular in particular, soars. The lavish outfits and outrageous make-up used in the Vegas scenes serve to highlight Presley’s physical deterioration. And Butler an unlikely Elvis fiercely holds the reins by playing note after note that steals the show. There isn’t a hint of fakery in anything Butler does. Even in its decline, Elvis is lifted by this genuineness. However, the movie too frequently succumbs to the great white hope mentality with Presley playing the true white hero who discovers the exotic and seductive Black artists of his day. The only real-life supporters of Presley B.B. King Big Momma Thornton and Little Richard, are either attractive characters from another planet or bulletin board cheerleaders. Even as a paternalistic Presley pushes the cause of these Black artists they seldom speak or retain any depth despite Luhrmann’s recognition of their significance and the complicated history of Black art in white spaces. The strategy neither clarifies nor elevates these figures. Instead Luhrmann makes an effort to conceal the mixed emotions that many Black people of different generations have toward the alleged King. Presley loses enough intriguing twists and risk in the smoothing process to make the entire endeavour predictable. A filmmaker has a responsibility to consider whether they are the best person to tell a story since awareness alone is not enough. Not Luhrmann and that’s a flaw that a lot of viewers won’t be able to overlook.
Other the elements of the Elvis legend that Luhrmann avoids include the age difference between Priscilla and Presley the two met in Germany when the former was 14 years old and the time when Elvis turned into a Nixon stooge. It doesn’t make much sense to exclude the latter in a movie about how business and conservatism turned Presley into a commodity. Luhrmann wants to depict the demise of a starry eyed idol at the hands of evil forces, but he never goes far enough to make the character unlikeable or better yet complex and human. This story is readily flattened by recounting it from Colonel Parkers point of view. Black folks are cardboard cutouts because he doesn’t care about them. Priscilla has minimal personality because he doesn’t give her any attention and Parker won’t degrade himself to the point where he tarnishes Elvis reputation or brand. These negative results which are facile and meaningless, are logically explicable in light of how the story is structured. But in 2022, what use is it to produce a sanitised Elvis biopic? Who, after all, needs to reinforce Presleys cultural significance any further when it has already dominated for more than 60 years? Another offensive draught of history has been hastily penned by white hands.
Elvis delivers precisely what you’d expect from a Baz Luhrmann film, and it does work as a jukebox. However, it never approaches Presley, engages with the complex character hiding under the jumpsuit, or addresses the complexities of his legacy. It is crammed full, bloated, and makes corny biopic choices. Until the credits, when he pans to old video of Presley singing “Unchained Melody,” Luhrmann consistently puts Butler in the greatest possible position to succeed. Luhrmann then brings to your attention the myth-making that is taking place. Which, given Luhrmann’s deceitful, plasticine attitude, is perhaps a good thing.