Ebert will employ a computer voice to appear on episodes under a segment titled “Roger’s Office.” He says he will not debate the two co-hosts. American television is swamped by mindless gossip about celebrities, and I’m happy this show will continue to tell viewers honestly if the critics think a new movie is worth seeing.”Įbert will act as co-producer along with his wife, Chaz Ebert. “I believe that by returning to its public roots, our new show will win better and more consistent time slots in more markets. “This is the rebirth of a dream,” Ebert wrote. RELATED: Q&A with Ebert about reviving “At the Movies,” what went wrong with the old show and the Tweet he regrets As it is, this is just another exercise in Elvis impersonation, its upper lip twitching to no purpose.Įlvis is released in Australia on 23 June and in the UK and US on 24 June.'How to With John Wilson' Star on Nathan Fielder's Advice, NXIVM Battles and His Signature Stammer But how about a film about the Colonel, with Elvis taking a secondary role? That would have been genuinely new and Hanks would have sold it superbly. Why do the film at all? The rationale would appear to be – and might in earlier versions of the script have been – the poisonous bromance or toxic father-son relationship between Parker and Presley. ![]() Also erased, as it happens, is Ann-Margret, his Viva Las Vegas co-star, with whom he had a poignant, illicit relationship for about a year. But the film erases his actual Republican sympathies. This version of Elvis, with retrofitted liberal sensitivities, is always breaking off what he’s doing to look stunned at the TV reporting the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert F Kennedy, and to be soulfully devastated at the loss of these American icons. Luhrmann is at all times concerned to rescue Elvis from irony and failure and suffering.Īnd how about that legendary encounter with the one US president that Elvis really did admire – Richard Nixon – when the King was cordially received in 1970 at the White House because he demanded presidential action on the country’s infatuation with degenerate lefties like the Beatles? Nothing. ![]() But we don’t see the yucky burger binges or the adult diapers. He stays sweaty but reasonably svelte until almost the very end, when we see a decorous hint of flab. There is, for example, not really any such thing as Fat Elvis here. ![]() But otherwise it sticks to a defanged version of the script. There are some tiny unpredictable touches – such as a hint that Elvis secretly inflamed young gay men in the States as well as straight women. We get the basics of Presley’s career: the early days of hardship, the profound influence of black music, the blues and gospel his days on the hayseed country circuit before signing for Parker, the huge Elvismania success, the shrewd decision to calm moral-majority fears by doing two years military service in Germany, marriage to Priscilla, the bubblegum movies, the televised 1968 Comeback Special and the long Vegas goodbye. Colonel Tom is a kind of repeating cameo in Elvis’s life and Luhrmann is even less interested in Parker’s inner self than in Elvis’s – the Colonel’s own wretched post-Elvis life and death are shrugged off in the closing credit titles. But Luhrmann is clearly unwilling or unable to explore the dysfunctional Jekyll-and-Hyde relationship between the Colonel and Elvis in case any sort of dark or sad mood predominates.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |