by Heath Lynch, Contributing Writer
It has been almost a decade since Baz Luhrmann last directed a feature film. A decade since we’ve last felt his relentless energy and kinetic editing techniques that transform mundane scripts into those of great spectacle. Just when you think you might’ve forgotten all that he can bring to the table, he returns to take on the King of Rock ‘n’ Roll, Elvis Presley. While there may be some moments where the film stumbles, and the two hour and 40 minute runtime doesn’t go unnoticed, Elvis still has a lot to offer. From Austin Butler delivering a transformative jaw-dropping performance, to Luhrmann’s stylings, or from the iconic musical catalog, to the way in which the film handles Elvis’s appropriation of black music, and all the pelvic gyration you could ever hope to see, Elvis is a show that fans of the King won’t want to miss.
In many ways, this is a lot like other biopics based on musical artists, a subgenre that’s seen a real boom as of recent years. In many ways, this is also a beast of its own. Elvis follows the life and career of Elvis Presley (Austin Butler), beginning with the release of his first big record, That’s All Right in 1954. He is quickly discovered by Colonel Tom Parker (Tom Hanks), a showman who considers himself a “Snowman” — someone with the ability to fleece people’s money out from under them. Together, they decide to create the greatest stage show of all time with Elvis’ music, and the Colonel’s marketing ways. But Elvis’s personal views, especially in regards to his ties to the Black community, prevent him from being the clean cut All-American look that the Colonel aims to achieve. As the years and decades go by, a series of events unwinds that brings the artist head to head with the manager with not just a lot of money at stake, but also a sense of freedom and independence.
Let’s not bury the lede here. If you take one thing from this review, know this — this is the Austin Butler show, and we’re damn lucky to have witnessed it. Butler puts on a performance for the ages. He’s not playing Elvis Presley; he is Elvis Presley. From the tone and articulation in his voice, to his mannerisms and the way he carries himself, he’s Elvis. He matches the King’s physicality and is absolutely magnetic when on stage. You see him very clearly wearing passion on his sleeves, and can easily read all of the anguish, joy, and frustration on his face. A few years back, Rami Malek won Best Actor for his portrayal of Freddie Mercury in Bohemian Rhapsody. I’m here to say that, unequivocally, this is a far superior performance — a star-making performance that I wouldn’t be shocked to hear about come awards season.
Tom Hanks is also putting in solid work throughout the film, but that’s to be expected from a two-time Oscar winning actor who has been putting out masterful work for decades. Although his accent is at times ridiculous sounding, it’s consistent and within character. If anything, I wish we had gotten less Hanks and more Butler. The character of the Colonel is arguably the lead of the film, with Hanks getting a large chunk of screen time and the story being narrated from his perspective. I know that this choice was made to create a more interesting narrative spin, and to make the movie stand out in a field of biopics, but to me it more so comes off as a transparent marketing technique. Butler and the rest of the cast are, for the most part, no name up-and-comers or character performers. It’s obvious the movie was hanging its hat on Hanks as a way to bring people into the theater for those who were on the fence and not already die hard fans of the King.
The Luhrmann of it all will be a hit or miss for each of us individually. I appreciated his return to form personally, but even I found myself getting dizzy at a couple of scenes where it’s very clear he needed someone to reign him in a bit. The amount of time this movie spends spinning around the International Hotel in Vegas puts the windmill from Moulin Rouge! to shame. Luhrmann even does his best Brian De Palma impression by splitting up the screen to allow for numerous camera angles all at once, like a graphic novel coming to life. Couple all of this with the fast-paced movement, frantic editing, and overpowering amount of music and sound from Elvis’ ‘50s hits to modern day original songs from rappers like Doja Cat and Eminem and well… there’s a lot being served on this plate. It can easily overwhelm the senses if you’re not ready for it.
But speaking of that editing, man, we have to talk about the pacing and runtime. This movie is inconsistent at best in its tempo, and far too long of a watch. The transition between scenes meant to evoke joy and laughter into those of sorrow and anger is harsh. Even down to the actual timeline of true events that this movie is following feeling poorly represented. The movie can spend 30 minutes lingering on an event that took place in one day, but then skip over five to seven years like it’s nothing. In a matter of minutes. There’s one scene in particular where Elvis confesses that he hasn’t felt like himself in a long time. He is no longer doing the music he loves, and hasn’t been doing it for years. However, in just a few minutes prior to this we saw Elvis singing on stage and making movies, happy as can be. There’s a disconnect between the audience and the film in relation to the passage of time that makes characters experience emotions that the audience isn’t ready to empathize with as not enough time has passed. This happens on multiple occasions. As well, this movie needed to be about 30 to 45 minutes shorter. I really felt the weight of this runtime by the end and was just sitting there counting down to the closing credits. But the movie decides to pull a Return of the King and end the movie several times, implementing freeze frames, fading to black, slowing down the camera speed and swelling up the music, and more. By the time the two hours and 40 minutes was up, I was happy to see it end, and that’s never a feeling I want to walk out of a theater experiencing. If Luhrmann was willing to make more cuts, this could’ve been avoided, and there was plenty worth cutting.
I will say though, I was pleasantly surprised with how Elvis handled the King’s musical career in regards to Black music, and Black culture. If I’m being honest, I have very low expectations for Hollywood these days when it comes to accurately representing race issues. I figured that this film was going to opt to brush it all under the rug and not address Elvis’s musical past at all. To whitewash the issue, like so many other films would choose to do. However, this movie prominently displays these facts, front and center.
Elvis definitively states, right from the beginning, that Elvis Presley stole Black music. He took songs popularized in Black communities, and re-recorded them, marketed, and sold them under his banner without crediting the original Black artists. Sure, he idolized B.B. King and the like, but he never once gave King, or anyone else, recognition while performing these tracks. The movie dives deeply into Presley’s upbringing in a poor Black community, how he was molded by the blues, and spellbound by gospel music. It shows him embracing the culture, and the culture embracing him back, as he learned to let the energy of the music flow through his body as he swiveled his knees and pulsated his hips on stage. It was a lifestyle to Elvis, not a musical choice. I really appreciated how the movie doesn’t shy away from all of this, and a lesser film would have. I find it unrealistic that every single Black person is friends with Elvis, welcoming him with open arms as he profits off of Black music, and I wish we had at least one scene of a Black person calling him out for it, but I do believe that he was popular in the Black community at the time. It’s unfortunate that our country was too racist to allow a Black person to succeed with this music at the time, but at least the music was getting out there to the masses, even if it had to be through a white man. That was a common sentiment, and the friendship Elvis has with the Black community seems to embody that to a degree in this film, so props for that.
Furthermore, the movie, and Elvis himself, take a stand on important social and political issues of the time. It prominently displays the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Bobby Kennedy from Elvis’s perspective. The film very clearly says that the life and career of Elvis has everything to do with the social relations of the era. In fact, the most powerful scene of the movie is about two-thirds the way through the movie after Bobby is murdered in which Elvis famously put together a powerful television protest performance when he was contracted to simply performance Christmas songs. The moments where this movie shows the true nature of Elvis as a human being, and the film decides to be someone more than just a showcase for music, are where it truly shines. Sadly, those moments are few and far between.
When all is said and done, there is more that this film gets right than it gets wrong. The powerful and mesmerizing performance from Butler is nothing short of tremendous. That in and of itself is worth the price of admission. Because of that, despite its flaws, Elvis ends up being a good film. I strongly recommend it for fans of biopics, and especially for fans of the King of Rock ‘n’ Roll.
Score: 7/10
You can follow Heath Lynch on Letterboxd