Elvis: Why Baz Luhrmann Didn’t Tell The Whole Story

With Elvis, we are hearing the King’s story through the voice of a classic unreliable narrator: Colonel Tom Parker, a self-proclaimed conman who built Elvis’ brand and bled him dry. So, what did Tom – and director Baz Lurhmann – leave out… and more importantly, why? When it comes to the truth, and the story, where should the responsibility of the biopic lie? And in this case, would a fuller picture of Elvis damage our empathy with the character?

If you like this video, subscribe to our channel and support us by becoming a Taker or joining our Patreon for amazing perks like early access and custom polls!

CHAPTERS
00:00 Luhrmann's Elvis doesn't tell the whole story
00:58 The controversies of Elvis' affairs
03:48 The reality of Elvis' true politics
06:48 How Elvis sold his soul to the industry

CREDITS
Executive Producers: Debra Minoff & Susannah Mccullough
Chief Creative Director: Susannah Mccullough
Associate Producer: Tyler Browner
Writer: Harry Harris
Video Editor: John Clark
Narrator: Kayah Franklin

[trinaq]

I've heard that a lot of people feel exhausted after watching this movie, myself included. However, this reflects Elvis himself, who was emotionally drained after overworking himself under Parker's toxic influence. His wealth and success didn't make him happy, and you just want to give him a hug, and keep him away from Parker forever.

[crod]

Even though this movie has its issues, I do appreciate that it was still respectful towards Elvis. Unlike whatever Blonde was trying to do with Marilyn Monroe.

[CarrieV]

Traumatic Brain Injury and autoimmune disease is a compelling theory I’ve read recently that would explain Elvis’ rapid physical and mental decline, as described in a medical paper I read recently. Fascinating and heartbreaking.

[theylied]

What people need to realize about Baz Luhrmann's Elvis, is that it is a pure Character Study. Not a Biopic. So don't come away from this movie thinking that this is simply the rise and fall of Elvis. They specifically chose life-changing pivot points in Elvis's life. It's supposed to make the viewer ask... What would I do in that situation?

[mariaskabardonis]

It’s not a documentary. It’s mostly on Elvis and Parker relationship and how that shaped Elvis life first being good since he brought him the fame but then toxic. It showed respect to Elvis that his family liked it especially Lisa Marie who died which was sweet because she and Austin had a good friendship. I felt it was a good movie and made me wish Elvis had a better support system at the end

[annettedominguez]

Realistically, all of the pretty and ugly truths of any person’s life cannot possibly be included in a 2hr movie. Only a documentary can do that because they are usually longer and pure facts. Biopics serve like historical fiction; some parts are true, some are added/changed/removed for entertainment purposes, more drama essentially. In other words, biopics can show parts of a person’s life, or focus on certain aspects, not the entire thing. In the case of Elvis, the focus was on the relationship between him and the Colonel, plus it was in his perspective, so it makes sense.

[diankreczmer]

I am 85, elvis voice was phenomenal because at last we had music we could dance to. I don't care where it came from, had what we needed and later that voice became godly, his strong baritone going into tenor was heavenly, giving us almost opera, ballads gospel and country and the old rhythmic dance music he started with
Elvis started with rhythm but ended with a voice that could transport us to heaven and back. Don't you get it? It is the voice!

[trinaq]

The immensely lovable Tom Hanks made you really love to hate the Colonel, since his greed, selfishness and manipulation ultimately destroy Elvis. It's especially heartbreaking since Elvis initially viewed Parker as a second father figure, and by the time he figured out his true nature, it was much too late.

[shiitakehappens]

Looking at Elvis with a 2023 lense definitely shows the bad stuff there’s no arguing that. During his prime, if he sang your song it meant more sales and recognition for that artist too. He definitely enlightened a lot of white people to what the black community had been doing for a long time and without him serving those songs to the masses as he did during times of segregation they may not have listened. He also tried to give back to the community and help fellow artists out. I don’t think it was all completely lost on him.

[Design____ByS]

To be fair, I enjoyed the visuals of the movie, the concerts, and that little I could see of Austin Butler's performance as unfortunately it idn't get much screentime, how ironic since he's the titular character. But apart from that, I did get the sense the story was told in a very surfice level way. Too bad.

[thevfxmancolorizationvfxex]

I do think that Elvis would have benefitted a lot more if Luhrmann applied more of a critical lens to his legacy. There's nothing wrong with acknowledging the fact that Elvis changed music forever and influenced so many generations of artists, but I think that it would have been much better if it also asked questions about the many controversies surrounding him such as whether or not he's to blame for the fact that we missed out on decades of potentially great black rock music. Not to mention the fact that he met Priscilla when she was only 14. Instead, Luhrmann willingly chooses to ignore these flaws and present a much more idealised version of what he (and presumably the majority) think Elvis was like, and that is why I felt greatly disappointed by this film

[neverfeartruth]

I finally watched this movie after avoiding it for a few minor reasons, I am NOT ashamed to admit as a man, that I severely teared up near the end of the movie which seemed rushed. I've been a die-hard fan of Elvis for over 40 years & knew going in that no one even Baz Lurhmann could tell the 20 year once in a century career Elvis Presley had & Also tell the true to life story of a once in a century human being that Elvis Presley truly was. There was SO MUCH of Elvis's career & life that couldn't be told, not because it was bad per se, But Baz Lurhmann would have to make sequels to tell the true story of Elvis's 20 year career & life story because so much more than anyone can imagine happened. I personally loved the movie. Do I think certain things could've been done/told differently or included several more aspects & details? Of course, but I believe Baz, Austin & the entire cast & crew did an superb job representing Elvis Presley to the masses, primarily the younger generations to ensure Elvis Presley's legacy will never die. I believe the King would've been proud.

[lucypreece]

Luhrmann is known for the slightly bonkers and more fantastical style of movie making with a kind of opulent aesthetic. Like legit the first time I watched Moulin Rouge I literally went "wtf did I just watch" because it was trippy as hell so I deffo see it as a case of Luhrmann changing the story and skewing from historical accuracy to fit with his opulent and fantastical style of making movies. I feel if the movie had been given to a different Director and if people linked to Elvis were involved the story would be better. We need something like Rocketman. While yes that does bend the truth in some areas and uses dramatic licence for movie purposes we know that Elton John was heavily involved in the making of the movie and signed off on it and everything so while yes it's a sleek and flashy movie with all the Hollywood magic you expect it also tells most of the truth of Elton's life including the darker aspects like his struggles with addiction and his strained relationship with his parents. We saw Elton as a fully rounded and imperfect person and we were able to understand that all those things don't take away from his exceptional musical talent.

[amyfly]

Cool video! My grandparents were around for Elvis, but never listened to him much. It was all Jazz, Classical, R&B and Gospel for them. I doubt it was resentment (4:40), they just wanted to support our Black artists. I don't recall either of them ignoring Elvis, they just preferred other genres of music. I'd like to see this biopic after watching this Take tbh.

[wallycola]

Can you do one of these on musical Hamilton vs actual Hamilton? Huge difference

[thefriesofLockeLamora]

If you ever do director breakdowns like you used to can you do Baz as a feature please

[MarkRogersVOCFB]

They definitely didn't hit on what Elvis did for the black community, his generosity, and his influence on the generations of artists after him.

[heyidaroo]

Get On Up did a really good job of portraying (at least some of) the very ugly sides of James Brown (beating his wife, pulling a gun on someone for using his bathroom, his high speed chase & arrest, firing the only person who stuck by him, etc) without trying to add empathetic context immediately after. In fact there’s a jarring ugliness to all of those scenes.

Sure empathetic scenes exist, like the poverty, parental abandoning, dehumanizing racism especially as a child, but they’re spaced out far enough, so instead of those excusing his problematic behavior, a broader picture of him is painted, and as an audience, you’re more conflicted than inspired.

Yes I know that movie still left a lot out, as all biopics do, and disclaimer, I haven’t yet seen Elvis

[patriciamcpherson]

Elvis was a giving person. If someone was in need he helped them. He came from nothing so he understood had it was to be in need. He was a good man a spiritual man. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

[GoddybagLee]

If you look deep into the history of the south of USA when blues, jazz, country and bluegrass was created, and how the white rich guys in power of what media liked you see a totally different story. Elvis Presley was the only person who could tare the wall down. He still employed black people who was with him on stage up until the very last concert. He took most of his singing style from his ideal ways to make music. The American South in the 1950's was not a lot different from the apartheid system of South Africa. I'm amazed that Americans don't know this. The first black child who went to an all white school was escorted by bodyguards. The 1950's was truly a vile era. Elvis Presley didn't believe in rasism. But he lived in an era where the rasism was so bad that even the way he had to operate (and to the modern eyes looks rasist) was the least rasist one could be.