“EPiC: Elvis Presley in Conert” is directed by Baz Luhrmann and is a documentary about the titular musician, following portions of his life through pre-existing footage, a good chunk of which had not yet been witnessed by the public.
Back in 2022, I reviewed the “Elvis” biopic. I waited a bit after its premiere to check it out. Not because it was off my radar. I just had other people in my life who also had interest in checking it out so I figured I’d wait so I could watch it with them. Safe to say, it was not worth the wait. While there are worse movies I saw in 2022 like “Morbius,” I do not know if there is a movie that left me with a headache like the one “Elvis” did. And it is not that I do not like Elvis’ music. After seeing the film, I think I can come to the conclusion that Baz Luhrmann’s filmmaking style is not my tempo. I have vivid memories of watching “Romeo + Juliet” in middle school, and immediately getting the sense that the movie stole my soul. Since watching “Elvis,” I have since checked out Luhrmann’s “Moulin Rouge!,” which felt like a case of style over substance.
So far, Luhrmann’s filmography has left me all but impressed, which is why I was somewhat nervous going into “Elvis Presley in Concert.” That said, this is a documentary and not a fictional narrative. Perhaps this could allow me to see a different side of Baz Luhrmann. Much like Luhrmann’s past films, “Elvis Presley in Concert” comes with a distinct, clear style. Although unlike “Elvis,” I occasionally found myself having a good time with this film.
“Elvis Presley in Concert” gives you what you came for and more. I say “more” both as a positive and a negative. The movie is part documentary, part dive into Elvis’s career, and part concert showcase. Not all of it is perfect, but let’s start with the good.
If you came for a concert film, this absolutely delivers. If you are a die-hard Elvis fan, this is automatically going to leave you impressed. This is probably the closest one can get to experiencing Elvis in concert today. I had the privilege of watching “Elvis Presley in Concert” on a true IMAX screen via its 4K laser projection system. While the film is not quite “full IMAX,” it comes very close at times. In fact, at my screening, I noticed the way the film was formatted and essentially all of the framing was off center. All the scenes that were in scope widescreen had a taller black bar on the top than the bottom. There are scenes that are a bit taller-looking that essentially have no black bar on the bottom of the screen, but a black bar on the top. It is an odd choice, but I had the sense Luhrmann wanted to make the audience believe certain people in the film were standing on my auditorium’s ground. You see a lot of movies nowadays that advertise themselves as “Filmed for IMAX.” While the footage that makes up “Elvis Presley in Concert” was filmed long before IMAX was associated with Hollywood fare, this is a film that feels like it was designed for IMAX first. This may as well sound like a negative… I feel that watching this film in IMAX almost ruins every other possible way I could see it.
That said, while the formatting of this film is perhaps best experienced in an IMAX theater, the sound mix is probably going to translate well across various formats, whether you are watching it in the cinema or at home. From the very beginning, this film is booming. The first couple of minutes unleash a sense of electricity beyond comprehension. Certain performance sequences like those for “Burning Love” or “Suspicious Minds” gave me the sense that I was part of the audience in Vegas, some of whom happened to be women screaming their lungs out. I could really tell some of the audience enjoyed the film too, because during my screening, some people were clapping to a performance here or there. Granted, this movie did not garner the same attention that the “Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour” documentary did a couple years back. There were no screaming youngsters in my audience, which, frankly, despite being in my 20s, I am okay with. I do not mind loud movies, but my sensitive ears can only take so much.
Another monumental technical achievement this film boasts is its clean editing. This is some of the craziest film editing I have seen in recent memory. Not only does the edit blend tons of archival clips together beautifully, along with one engaging soundbite after another, but all of the pre-existing material makes for a fascinating story about Elvis himself, all the while saving room for the concert experience that many people likely came to see. It is amazing how much this film was able to tell in just a short amount of time. That said, much like Luhrmann’s “Elvis” biopic, the film is almost too fast. The film tells a lot of information in a short amount of time. In fact, I was somewhat surprised to find out that the film was only an hour and 36 minutes. As the movie ended, I asked myself, “That’s it?” But apparently it was. This movie’s supersonic pace, which sometimes works, made it somewhat difficult to digest every little detail. Maybe upon a second watch I will appreciate certain parts more, but there are a handful of bits highlighting Elvis’s career and personal life that had me less entertained compared to other scenes.
The pacing issues were especially noticeable towards the beginning, which does not start off bad. In fact, the first moment of the movie features Presley walking onstage and introducing himself to the crowd. What follows is a lot less concert material than I anticipated and a lot more backstory material. I get that this film is a documentary, but given how the film has “concert” in the title, I found it to take a bit of an odd turn early on in the runtime. It’s around the first twenty minutes or so, and perhaps another point or two, that the movie spends so much time being one thing that it nearly forgets to be something else.
Do not get me wrong, I was entertained. I like the movie as a whole, but at times, it feels like it has ADHD. It is too fast and almost unfocused. Technically speaking, it is astounding at times. But I am not sure if this film is going to have much replay value for me down the line, even in the cinema again despite how immersed I happened to be.
In the end, “EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert” is undoubtedly a good time, even with its flaws, which do not take much away from an overall entertaining hour and a half. I wonder how well this film is going to play with people who are not Elvis fans. Granted, I am not a hardcore Elvis fanatic myself, though I do like some of his songs. I think even if you are not an Elvis fan, there is something to be said about how well put together this movie is. The concert scenes are a lot of fun. The footage feels seamless at times. The pacing is a bit iffy, but forgivable. That said, I think if you are an Elvis Presley lover, this will be your jam. If you are an Elvis Presley casual, I think there is something to appreciate here. I liked this film more than the “Elvis” biopic, so if anything, I consider that win, especially considering both projects were helmed by the same filmmaker. I am going to give “EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert” a 7/10.
“EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.
Thanks for reading this review! My next review is going to be for “Send Help.” I know I am a bit late to the party on this film. I was going to go see it during an early access screening, but I ended up skipping it as I felt somewhat sick beforehand. Cut to the weekend the film came out… I was in New York. Then things did not end there as I could not make time within the next couple of weeks. Blog projects got in the way, weather got in the way, other movies got in the way, but no longer! Stay tuned for that review, which will be dropping soon! Also, coming soon, I will be sharing my thoughts on “The Bride!” and “Hoppers.”
And I will once again remind everyone, if you have not checked it out yet, please watch the first ever episode of “Movie Requests,” it is a brand new review series where I talk about movies requested by some familiar faces. I just talked about “The Idiots,” which was requested by Bryce Dallas Howard. You can watch the video above to hear my thoughts on the film. Also, if you enjoy the video, please leave a like and subscribe to my YouTube channel!
If you want to see more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert?” What did you think about it? Or, since the topic is relevant, have you seen the “Elvis” biopic? Am I a monumental moron for disliking it? Leave your thoughts down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Hey everyone, Jack Drees here! Sometimes I am here to tell you which movies you should watch, but today I am here to tell you which movies you should avoid. It is time to tackle my top 10 WORST movies of 2022! For those of you who followed me for a long time, you may remember like some people, I have previously done my top 10 BEST list before my top 10 WORST list. This year we are doing the opposite, we are ripping the bad stuff off like a Band Aid. That said, I would say it is my duty to talk about these movies, because I cannot be all rainbows and unicorns all the time. Before we begin, here are some rules. First, I have not seen every movie that has come out this year. There are certain movies that I either did not have time to watch, they were not playing at a theater near me, or they just did not look like my cup of tea. I cannot get around to everything. Second, this list is based on my personal opinions of these movies. I am not saying you have to dislike these movies, I am only giving my perspective based on what happened when watching said movies. Also, these movies must have had a theatrical release of some kind, even if it is only playing in Los Angeles, New York, or MiddleofNowheresville, Connecticut. So, if you are expecting to see the Disney+ exclusive “Pinocchio” on this list, look elsewhere. It only released on streaming, and I have not watched it. Although speaking of which, I will also have a note as to where you could possibly find these movies, either at home or in theaters, at the time of writing this post, if you somehow think watching them is a good use of your time. Also, be sure to click the links next to those watching options to read my reviews for these films. That is if I reviewed them, there are a couple on the list I did not get to talk about earlier in the year. With all these rules out of the way, we shall start the countdown by listing a few dishonorable mentions.
Dishonorable mention: Amsterdam (available on HBO Max)
Starting off the dishonorable mentions is “Amsterdam.” There are a couple good moments in “Amsterdam.” But it does not change the fact that the script is messy, all over the place, and continues going in a downward spiral after the first ten minutes. The stacked cast may have been enough to get me in the door, but I felt like I was locked behind said door for a couple hours, just hoping for whatever was happening to end.
Dishonorable mention: Halloween Ends (available on Peacock)
Up next for the dishonorable mentions is “Halloween Ends.” While there is some entertainment value to be found in “Halloween Ends,” this is a movie that fails to understand why “Halloween” has such a following amongst horror fans. Michael Myers is barely in this movie, which is kind of a reverse of “Halloween Kills” where he takes up a good amount of screentime and Jamie Lee Curtis barely has anything to do. The trailer seems to promise one thing and barely delivers on it whatsoever. In a year of great horror titles like “Smile,” “Barbarian,” and “The Black Phone,” this one did not join those ranks.
And closing off the dishonorable mentions we have “Don’t Worry Darling.” Not only was this movie a gigantic disappointment, especially considering how Olivia Wilde directed a decent comedy a few years ago, specifically “Booksmart.” But it also has arguably the most infuriatingly unsatisfying third act I have seen in this entire decade of cinema. When the juicy press tour and behind the scenes shenanigans happen to be more entertaining than your movie, that is a problem.
With those out of the way, it is time to count down my top 10 WORST movies of 2022!
#10. Easter Sunday (available on VOD)
Starting off this list is a pretty disposable, forgettable comedy. That my friends, is “Easter Sunday.” If I had to guess how much faith Universal had in this movie, it would probably be very little. Want a hint? This movie came out on August 5th. Last time I checked, Easter is usually in March or April. It is almost as if someone at Universal saw this movie and thought they should hide it as soon as possible. I have heard Jo Koy is a funny comedian, and there are humorous moments in “Easter Sunday,” but I found it hard to like the character he plays. There is also a particular line in this movie that I imagine the writers must have thought the audience would quote by the end because of how many times they inserted it. If I were in the room with them, I would tell them to tone it down because by the fourth time it is said, I nearly had a headache. Speaking of the script, some moments were predictable and if they were not that, they might have been too over the top. This film is lower on the list is because while it is not as funny as I would have hoped it to be, it is not as anger-inducing as some of the other movies on here. That said, this film is probably not even good enough to qualify as background noise on basic cable.
#9. Strange World (in theaters, available on Disney+)
There is something strange in the neighborhood, and I am not calling the Ghostbusters. I am calling the movie theater to ask for my money back that I gave for seeing “Strange World.” I really wanted to like “Strange World” because first off, I am a fan of science fiction, which this film is to a certain degree. But also, the film looked really pretty, I was just hoping that there could be an entertaining story to back it up. Although I have the same complaints with “Strange World” that I did with “Avatar: The Way of Water.” It is pretty to glance upon, but there is very little substance. There were times where I should have stared with awe and wonder where I simply had my arms crossed. I like the lesson the film tries to convey to its audience, but it is surrounded by an utter bore of a waltz through this unfamiliar territory that I wanted to soon forget. People often claim that Marvel movies are theme park rides and not cinema. I not only disagree, but I also would say if you want a theme park ride, you should look no further than “Strange World,” and I do not mean that as a positive. I nearly tuned out at a particular point. Speaking of which, this film is distributed by Disney, and if you ask me, this could have worked as a theme park ride, but I think given how poorly this film did upon launch, there is zero chance of that happening. I liked the opening song, but like the dishonorable mention “Amsterdam,” this film had a great start followed by a lackluster progression.
Speaking of absolute bores of animation, here is a shoutout to “Paws of Fury: The Legend of Hank!” People often say that “Blazing Saddles” is a movie that would not be made today because of its politically incorrect nature. Guess what? Somebody did remake it on a technicality, but it is an animated film aimed at families. “Paws of Fury: The Legend of Hank” is the result. Boy it is a legend alright. A legend of complete and utter cringe. My friend and I went to see another movie earlier this year and saw the trailer, he thought this was a “Kung Fu Panda” wannabe. While there are elements of “Kung Fu Panda” in here, such as the classic hero’s journey where a young individual is taken under the wing of a more experienced, perhaps reclusive mentor, one thing this movie did not have, was joy. I did not leave the theater feeling satisfied. Very few jokes landed, and those that did land, were not all that memorable. I like a ton of the people behind the voices like Michael Cera, Samuel L. Jackson, and Ricky Gervais, I just wish they had better writing provided for them. There is a line in this movie that dives into meta humor, where the characters are kind of at a low point, and they’re trying to solve a problem. At said point, Hank is trying to keep everyone’s attention and digressively says, “And the movie is only 85 minutes long!” Short term, yes, it could get some laughs. But the more I think about that line, it feels like wasted time in a somewhat rushed story. Is it a good lesson for children? Perhaps. But just because the lesson is effective does not mean the same can be said for the movie.
I often think about my favorite directors in the industry. Some include Christopher Nolan, Quentin Tarantino, and Damien Chazelle. I often think about the ones I like, but if I were ever forced to name a director on the opposite side of the spectrum, one of the first that comes to mind is Baz Luhrmann. Case and point, “Elvis.” I was looking forward to “Elvis,” partially because I forgot who was directing it. While the movie has a glitzy and glossy style that feels somewhat synonymous with Elvis Presley and his brand at times, the style is definitely more evident than the substance. This movie is too much at too quick of a pace. It is the most headache-inducing movie I have seen in years. The worst part of this movie is the fact that it at times doesn’t even feel like it is about Elvis. The spotlight is often stolen by Elvis’s manager, Tom Parker, played by Tom Hanks. Austin Butler is great in the movie, but unfortunately, he is surrounded by a buttload of inexcusable garbage. If you polish a piece of crap, then guess what? It is still a piece of crap, but just shinier! It still looks and smells atrocious! I cannot personally recommend “Elvis,” but I think if you are a fan of Baz Luhrmann’s style, you might feel different about this film than me.
#6. The Mean One (released in theaters, home viewing options unknown)
While “Elvis” was a well-stylized movie that was not for me, “The Mean One” on the other hand is an eye-burning picture that like “Elvis,” was definitely not my cup of tea. There are certain films that I liked this year that I would call “cinematic achievements” because of how excellently they executed a certain aspect of their project. These may include aspects such as storytelling, animation style, or sound. Similarly, I would call “The Mean One” a cinematic achievement in somehow making a worse “Grinch” movie than Illumination did four years ago. Yes, I know, technically speaking, the Grinch is not in this movie. It is an expression. One of the reasons why this film is not on one of the worse spots on the list is because this film did not have a humungous release. It hit some theaters, and I unfortunately drove out of state to attend one of those theaters, but still. The film looks like it could receive a fair grade as a high school film project, but it is not, so I am not treating it like one. The color grading is the worst I have seen all year. The special effects are obscene. The writing, whether the movie is trying be horrific or comedic, fails on both levels. David Howard Thornton gives it his all as the Mean One, but that has to be the one silver lining in this dumpster fire of a film that will definitely not go on my Christmas movie watchlist next year.
#5. Ambulance (available on Prime Video)
The plot may be simple, but the headache I had while watching this movie is as complex as the space time continuum. Coming in at #5 is Michael Bay’s latest film, “Ambulance.” Interesting enough, an ambulance just so happens to be a vehicle I could have probably used after finishing this travesty. This movie had an okay concept, despite not having many layers to it. Essentially, “Ambulance” follows bank robbers who carry a ton of money in an ambulance. This had the potential to be a really epic heist and chase flick. It did not even come close to being epic! A more entertaining chase than what this movie contains would probably be the chase for my refund from Best Buy for the absolute ripoff that this movie happened to be. Yes, I bought the film on disc. Physical media forever! The shots are repetitive and made my head spin. The drone shots made me want to rip my eyes out of my sockets. The editing is the worst I have seen this year. The editing is so bad, I would contend it is one of the most bottom of the barrel examples of an edit I have witnessed in the action genre. There is a point where this movie looked so technically off the rails in such a piss poor way that I stopped caring about what was going on. I cannot see myself watching this movie ever again unless I lost a dare. Michael Bay movies may be known for their explosions, but the thing that exploded the most when I watched “Ambulance” was my IQ. I feel ten times dumber for having watched whatever on earth this happens to be.
To paraphrase the original “Jurassic Park,” Universal became so preoccupied on whether or not they could make a ton of “Jurassic” sequels that they didn’t stop to think if they should. And that is arguably why we have the absolutely abysmal “Jurassic World: Dominion.” I knew a couple people who were looking forward to this film. But when I saw that first trailer, I was not exactly sold. It looked like an inferior “Fast & Furious” installment with dinosaurs. As for the movie itself, it flat out falsely advertises the plot to its audience. Remember all that dinosaur action in the drive-in? That was not in the theatrical cut! All of that was cut out! Apparently, this movie needed more time to establish the real villain of the story. Not dinosaurs, not dino-abusing humans, but locusts. Kids love locusts. Right? Last year, Sony and Marvel Studios gave the moviegoing public “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” which successfully celebrated three different generations of Spider-Man. It was glorious to say the least. “Jurassic World: Dominion” attempts to celebrate the two “Jurassic” generations, but falls flat on its face in the process. The directing is stale, the dialogue is cheap, and the connections between the characters feel forced! The “Jurassic Park” franchise has had misfires before like “Jurassic Park III,” but “Dominion” honestly makes “Jurassic Park III” look like “The Shawshank Redemption!” What other movie in history made dinosaurs BORING?! Oh, how the mighty have fallen. Steven Spielberg struck magic back in the 1990s only to have this money-making machine release increasingly disposable content like “Jurassic World: Dominion.”
To this day, I can thankfully say that I have never fallen asleep to a movie in the theater. I find that incredibly hard to do. Although after seeing the absolute travesty that is “Medieval,” I certainly came close. How bad does your movie have to be for Michael Caine to come off as the human equivalent of melatonin? Some of the performances in “Medieval” barely have any life to them, especially when compared to another depressing epic from the year prior, “The Last Duel.” Except that movie was brutal and satisfying at the same time! The action sequences are barely enough to keep me awake. It is like if the director of “Taken 3” were given the tools to helm a period piece like this. Aside from one or two neat locations and one or two attention-grabbing deaths, this movie had nothing going for it. No presentable characterization. No reason to care for anybody. No emotion. The costumes and setting look okay. This movie barely has enough appeal in its looks, but it is only slightly better than what the story can provide. And that is if the story can provide anything. I was bored from scene one to scene done. Thanks a lot, “Medieval.”
Roland Emmerich is often seen as the master of fun disaster films with iconic titles like “Independence Day.” Speaking of disasters, let’s talk about “Moonfall,” one of most mind-numbingly painful movies I have watched in the past couple years. Am I surprised that “Moonfall” is as bad as it is? Yes and no. For one thing, I figured that this movie could at least be stupid fun with cheesy dialogue. We definitely got the latter, but without the inclusion of the former. Well, other than the stupidity, so that’s halfway there. Many of the characters are forgettable despite being played by some decent actors like Halle Berry and Michael Pena. In addition, some of the characters themselves feel like stereotypes. Any and all semblance of scientific accuracy that could have been in this movie is thrown out the window. As if things could not be more terrible, “Moonfall” has one of the worst third acts I have seen in all of science fiction. I should have known what was coming from a movie where the moon suddenly goes out of orbit and crashes into the earth for some reason. But what can I say? I am an optimist. I thought this could have been fun. The worst thing about “Moonfall” is that it somehow managed to make its competitor, “Jackass Forever,” which came out the same weekend, look smart. That is an accomplishment. The movie where Johnny Knoxville and his buddies destroy their bodies not only feels less painful for the brain, but it is comparatively more entertaining. This is a reality I did not think we would experience.
To call this next entry to the list a “movie” would be an absolute injustice. Up next is arguably the worst comic book movie in the history of mankind. My #1 worst movie of 2022 is “Morbius.” There is often a debate as to whether comic book movies are “cinema,” but if cinema happened to be equal to cliché dialogue, forgettable scenes, and flat-out boring, lifeless, uninteresting, stale characters, then this movie is a cinematic masterpiece! I feel terrible for Jared Leto, because he is a good actor. But now, he not only has suffered by playing an inferior Joker character in DC, it just so happens that Marvel is tarnishing his reputation too. When I did my top 10 worst movies of 2018, I put “Venom” on the list, yet another Sony “Spider-Man” villain-based comic book film. After watching “Morbius,” I can confirm that “Morbius” makes “Venom” look fun. Because at least “Venom” kind of had some cheesy dialogue and one or two funny moments. It was not what I wanted, I did not particularly enjoy what I saw, but there may as well have been slight hints of entertainment value from start to finish. Just to think, this movie was supposed to come out in July 2020. They had all this time to make this movie better until its eventual release in March/April 2022. And they did absolutely nothing.
To make matters worse, this movie contains the worst… No MCU movie can claim this, I swear on my life, the single worst credits scene in film history. It makes no sense whatsoever. There is a scene that shows what is wrong with Sony, what is wrong with some people’s thinking about comic book movies, what is wrong with the modern moviegoing market. I get that superheroes are hot right now. I get that people want to see certain things out of the market. But Sony’s thinking provides for a rushed motive that may as well fall flat on its face. If this movie did not come out after the MCU’s “Spider-Man: No Way Home,” there is a slight chance we may not be in this situation. Remember how I said “Halloween Ends” and “Jurassic World: Dominon” failed to deliver on what they advertised? Well, “Morbius” is not only terrible as a movie, but like those examples, it uses particular scenes in its marketing campaign to arguably dupe its own audience. “Spider-Man: No Way Home” had misleading trailers, but those misdirects were done to the movie’s, and therefore the audience’s, benefit. This time around, the only people it may benefit are Sony executives who are snatching people’s wallets and slapping them across their faces.
The only positive outcome that “Morbius” may have brought to mankind are some of the memes. In fact, Sony must have seen these memes, because after they started clogging up my feed, they did a rerelease for the film, and it was a total flop! Newsflash, I am not interested in watching “Morbius” a second time because of the memes! The reason why I was at least somewhat curious about the memes is because of how bad this movie was from my first, and hopefully last, viewing. Yeah, I could also suggest that I might want to watch “The Room” because of the memes, but the difference is that those memes, intentional or not, literally define the movie. The memes for “Morbius” make it look more entertaining than it actually is. From experience, I have seen better characters, I have seen better origin stories, and most importantly, I have seen better movies. The ending of this movie is also so abrupt it is not even funny. It is as if the writers just gave up or something. Let me remind you that this movie has a smart scientist, Martine to be specific, who apparently does not know how to properly pronounce the “Nobel” in Nobel Prize. Inconceivable. How did this get made?! Better, how did this get released? The fact that it had been marketed since the beginning of the COVID-19 era only makes the result more infuriating. “Morbius” takes the cake as not just one of the worst comic book movies ever made, but also one of the worst movies period. It is by a long shot, my worst movie of 2022.
Thanks for reading this countdown! I hope everyone enjoyed finding out about my worst movies of 2022. Believe it or not, there actually have been a number of good movies to come out this year, but every once in the while there was a notable dud. I guess you cannot win them all. In the meantime, if you would like to observe another countdown I did recently, be sure to check out my picks for my top 10 MOST ANTICIPATED movies of 2023! Also, this week, it is time to turn this frown upside down, because I will be talking about my top 10 BEST movies of 2022! I am excited to share my picks with everyone, I always have fun doing these lists! If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, what are your least favorite movies of 2022? Do you have a top 10? 5? 15? List your picks down below! I would be happy to hear them! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
“Elvis” is directed by Baz Luhrmann (Romeo + Juliet, The Great Gatsby) and stars Austin Butler (Life Unexpected, Switched at Birth), Tom Hanks (Toy Story, Cast Away), Olivia DeJonge (The Visit, The Society), Helen Thomson (Bad Mothers, Stupid, Stupid Man), and Richard Roxborough (Moulin Rouge!, Mission: Impossible II). This film is a biopic on the iconic musician Elvis Presley. The movie providers glimmers of his childhood in addition to his life in music and movies. There is also a shining of light on Presley’s relationship with his manager, Tom Parker.
I was looking forward to “Elvis” ever since I saw the trailer. It looked electric, zazzy, and colorful. I also will admit that I enjoy listening to Elvis Presley every once in a while as “Suspicious Minds” is sometimes a notable song choice of mine when I am writing. I am not a hardcore Elvis fanatic, but I was quite curious to get to know more about the iconic musician’s life and perhaps see a killer performance from Austin Butler. While Butler has had plenty of acting experience, this is undoubtedly the role that will make him a star, and not just because he’s playing a star. This leads me to my most prominent positive of the film, which is that Austin Butler does not waste a second on the screen.
Similar to how Rami Malek practically transformed into Freddie Mercury in 2018’s “Bohemian Rhapsody,” Austin Butler gives a performance for the ages. In fact one thing that I think Butler does better in his performance as Presley compared to Malek as Mercury is that we actually hear Butler sing. There are snippets of the movie where Presley’s actual voice can be heard, but unlike Malek in “Bohemian Rhapsody,” the singing sequences in “Elvis” were not completely lip synced. Butler also looks like a king in this film. Speaking of which, one notable element of Elvis Presley that I often think of is like some modern musicians like Megan Thee Stallion or Cardi B, there is some definite sex appeal that had been accurately reflected in the movie. Sometimes this comes with the idea that the sexualization goes too far. Young people, especially women, are seen in this movie losing their minds the moment they see Presley himself. I liked this aspect of the film, I thought it was perfectly showcased.
Butler gives a transformative, otherworldly portrayal of a musician who has not been alive since the 1970s, but somehow has risen from the dead just to stand in front me as I eat popcorn for two and a half hours. It is undoubtedly one of the best performances of the year. I think they made a good choice on casting Butler, not only because he’s a great actor, but unlike say Harry Styles, who was in the running to play the character, Butler is way less recognizable, which I think comes off as less of a distraction. This adds, again, more of a transformation factor than anything else. Although I was delighted to know that before “Elvis,” Butler’s most recent outing was in the insanely good “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,” where he slays as Tex Watson. There is no denying it, Austin Butler was perfect in “Elvis.”
Too bad almost every other aspect of the movie pales in comparison.
Speaking of performances, let’s talk about Tom Hanks. Unlike Austin Butler, it is almost certain that most moviegoers would watch a movie just because Tom Hanks is in it. He is great in everything he does, except for “Elvis.” Tom Hanks plays Elvis Presley’s sleazy, gambling addict manager by the name of Tom Parker. Judging this performance is incredibly difficult. Because on one hand, Tom Hanks plays a much different role than I am used to seeing him in. This is a rare instance where Hanks actually plays an antagonist, so I appreciate that Hanks is trying to drift away from always being typecast as Mr. Nice Guy. But this is not only not Hanks’s bread and butter, he delivers a performance that feels weirdly over the top and stereotypical. Granted, it kind of matches the tone of the film, which almost feels animated at times. When I think of Elvis Presley, the artist, I think of lively, vibrant music that often lights up a room. Tom Hanks definitely feels animated. As for lively and vibrant, not so much. And that accent got on my nerves real fast…
Let’s put it this way, Tom Hanks has had a long and prestigious career as an actor to the point where he has done many great films like “Toy Story,” “Saving Mr. Banks,” and fairly recently, the somewhat overlooked “News of the World.” Of course he has had bad days at the office. Just look at “The Circle,” a movie that almost ruins the reputations of several iconic names in Hollywood like Emma Watson and Patton Oswalt. Even in a bad or fairly mediocre Tom Hanks movie like “Sully,” Hanks is never the problem. He gives it his all. “Elvis” is a rare instance that not only is the movie atrocious, but Tom Hanks gives one of the worst performances I have seen from him. I do not completely blame Hanks. I think in terms of makeup and costume design, his character looked transformative. Hanks himself, once again, sort of diverged from being a “nice guy” that not only audiences are used to seeing, but people claim him to actually be in real life. The directing and script are the real problem here. Tom Parker comes off as one of the most stereotypical and cliche characters of his kind in cinematic history.
It also feels weird knowing that this movie is called “Elvis” and yet it almost feels more like “The Tom Parker Chronicles” in disguise. I mean, sure, in a way, Parker was a monumental part of Elvis Presley’s legacy. But when I go into “Elvis,” I want, well, Elvis, taking up as much spotlight as he can. The movie IS about Elvis, but it almost does not feel that way at times. I am almost surprised we did not see Tom Parker in a mid-credits scene suddenly walk out on stage, bedazzled, singing a snippet of “Can’t Help Falling in Love.”
Here is a fun fact for you all, so far, the only movie in history to have not just been nominated, but win both an Oscar and a Razzie is the 1987 film “Wall Street.” Michael Douglas won an Oscar for Best Actor and Daryl Hannah won a Razzie for Worst Supporting Actress. This is a shot in the dark prediction, because awards season is technically still on the rise. Although I think there is a solid chance that “Elvis” could categorize itself as one of two films to win both the Oscar and the Razzie. I can see Austin Butler winning Best Actor, and I can see Tom Hanks winning Worst Supporting Actor. It goes to show how much of a mish mash “Elvis” feels like. This film comes off as a Saturday morning cartoon, a grounded drama, and unfortunately, a confused narrative. I think the confusion is best summed up in one of the first lines, where Tom Parker introduces himself.
“For those of you who are wondering who this fella here is, I am the legendary Colonel Tom Parker. I am the man who gave the world Elvis Presley. Without me, there would be no Elvis Presley. And yet, there are some who’d make me out to be the villain of this here story.” -Tom Parker
Yes, there are movies I like where the villain technically becomes the hero of the story. “Avengers: Infinity War,” despite having “Avengers” in the title, starts and ends with Thanos, the man who wants to rid of half the universe’s population. But not only did he feel fleshed out, I bought into the character. Similarly, there are movies about self-absorbed, entitled morons that make themselves out to be the hero, like “The Wolf of Wall Street,” and if it is written and directed in a certain way, it can work. “Elvis” honestly feels inconsistent, and part of it is because Parker needlessly steals the spotlight in every other scene. There are scene stealers, and then there are scene hijackers, like Tom Parker. Tom Parker comes off as a paper thin cartoon within a grounded story. It is kind of like “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?” if Roger Rabbit had actual human flesh.
I should not be surprised, but as I watched this movie, I failed to realize perhaps the greatest source of my pain, the director, Baz Luhrmann. Baz Luhrmann directed and co-wrote “Elvis.” This film definitely has a style, but despite its occasional ease on the eyes and ears, the movie travels at the speed of a rocket. Only thing is, I am not in the rocket, I am hanging right by the engine. It feels like I was watching “Run Lola Run” but if the runtime were doubled. This is probably the closest I have come to having a headache while watching a movie in a theater. Now, Baz Luhrmann did not direct “Run Lola Run.” He did direct other glitzy, glossy films like “Moulin Rouge!” and “The Great Gatsby.” I have not seen those movies. But I did see another film from Luhrmann, the 1997 “Romeo + Juliet.” I understand what the movie was going for by trying to modernize the classic Shakespearean play. Perhaps give it more of an oomph for people who tend to nap during class readings and discussions of William Shakespeare. But I genuinely thought it was one of the most annoying and mind-numbing movies I have ever watched. “Elvis” is more entertaining, but compared to “Romeo + Juliet,” it suffers from a longer runtime and pacing issues. “Elvis” is 2 hours and 39 minutes long, and yet it feels like an eternity at times.
Speaking of negativity and hate, let’s dive into another positive. Trust me, this makes sense. Like other modern musicians such as Kanye West, Taylor Swift, or Justin Bieber, Elvis definitely had his haters. While I was not a fan of the Tom Parker character and his portrayal from Tom Hanks, one thing I did like is how all out this movie went to showcasing the merchandising for Presley. They even sold “hate” merchandise which upon one’s purchase, the money from said purchase goes directly to Parker and Presley themselves. This is genius and I think if we lived in a non-Internet age, we could have seen more of this from other high profile names, including politicians. Unfortunately for the movie “Elvis,” the negatives outweigh the positives. Therefore, if I had to buy a button symbolizing my thoughts in regard to the movie, it would probably lean toward the “hater” route. Baz Luhrmann is a director who knows his style, but leaves much to be desired when it comes to delivering an entertaining narrative.
In the end, “The Tom Parker Chron–” sorry, got confused for a sec… In the end, “Elvis” is a long, overblown, glitz and glamour fest that melted my brain. It is sad to say that perhaps the most positive thing I can say about “Elvis” is that it is at least more watchable than “Romeo + Juliet.” But much like “Romeo + Juliet,” I cannot see myself ever watching “Elvis” again even if I were promised a million bucks. This is the movie that is going to be remembered as both Austin Butler’s big break, and yet, one of the worst days at the office for acting legend Tom Hanks. I am going to give “Elvis” a 3/10.
“Elvis” in now playing in theatres and is also available on HBO Max.
Thanks for reading this review! Speaking of music-based films, my next review is going to be for the brand new Japanese animation “Inu-Oh.” The film follows a dancer and a musician who develop a friendship and perform for crowds across the land. If you want to see more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Elvis?” What did you think about it? Or, have you seen any other Baz Luhrmann films? Tell me your thoughts on the ones you like or dislike. Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!
Scene Before 