View Full Version : Love him or hate him - Col. Tom Parker was always on Elvis' side!
presley31
07-11-2008, 10:08 AM
Big Boss Man - Col. Tom Parker
Elvis thought he owed it all to Colonel Tom Parker. Other's aren't so sure.
Andreas 'Dries' Cornelis Van Kuijk was born on 26 June 1909 in Breda, Holland. He was the fifth of nine children. His father, Adam, was a liveryman who met his mother, Maria, while he was in the army. When Andreas was 16 years old, his father died, and he moved to Rotterdam. He worked as a borgeman but was entranced by the ocean-going ships in the port. It wasn't too long before he was on board a ship to New Jersey. It was thought he stowed himself away.
He was then enlisted with the US Army - they didnt really care about papers back then - and was stationed in Hawaii. When he finally wrote home, it was in english and it was signed ' Thomas Parker'. The name was given to him by the Captain who interviewed him at the time of his enlistment.
Years later Elvis's friend Lamar Fike asked parker ' how come you never told us you were a Dutchman?' Parker looked at him and said ' Son, you never asked me'.
Parker spent several years with a touring carnival called The Johnny J. James Exposition. His special act was dancing chickens, which he achieved by hiding a hot plate under the straw of the cage! After marrying Marie Mott in 1935, Parker left the carnival to work for the Tampa Humane Society ( I bet he never told them about the dancing chickens!) he then moved to Nashville and became the manager to country singer Eddie Arnold.
Parker was given an honorary commission, from an old friend called Jimmy Davis. He became Louisana Governor and then Parker was known as the Colonel from that day onwards. Funnily enough, in March 1961, Governor Buford Ellington of Tennessee made Elvis an honorary Colonel. Elvis didn's deem it necessary to use his title.
In 1953, Eddie Arnold fired Parker for unknown reasons. Parker then hooked up with Hank Snow and created Jamboree Attractions, which became the biggest booking agencies in the South. Yet that partnership broke up acrimiously when Parker, without Snow, signed a new young talent. His name was Elvis Presley.
Parker first met Elvis in February 1955, in a Memphis Coffee Shop. Parkers first words to Elvis were ' You got a manager, son?'. He signed Elvis onto the Jamboree Attractions and was ready to pounce on him. Elvis was still under-age in 1955, so Parker knew the contract had to be signed by his parents. Vernon was a push over but Gladys didnt trust Parker. So to get her into his good books, backstage at one of her son's shows, she met a close friend of Parker's who told her ' Parker is a good Christian gentleman'.
Then Elvis's parents signed the contract on 15 August 1955.
Soon Parker set up a deal with RCA records company and Hill and Range, his own music publishers. Steve Scholes, RCA's Director of Country music, put his neck on the line by offering $23,000. Hill and Range offered a further $15,000. So with $40,000 offer in place, Parker paid Sam Phillips an agreed $35,00 and give Elvis $5,000. Elvis signed with RCA on November 21 1955. The next day he sent a telegram to Parker in which he promised to stick with him through thick and thin, and he also loved him like a father.
On January 8, 1956, Elvis turned 21 years old and was given a new contract - To sign as an adult. It ratified all previous contracts and gave the Colonel 25% of all Elvis's earnings. Once Parker became his full time manager, he never wanted anyone esle. He told the press ' I'll live and breath Elvis 24 hours a day'.
Parker showed his nerve when he demanded $100,000 for Elvis to star in Love Me Tender. When the Producer said even Jack Lemmon didn't get that kind of money. Parker looked into his eyes and said ' Maybe Lemmon needs a new manager!'.
Parker was also scared once Elvis hit Hollywood, he would see what Parker was really going. So Parker started to lsolated Elvis from the outside world. That's how the Memphis Mafia started. One day songwritter Mike Stroller knocked on Elvis's hotel room door, Elvis greeted him nervously and said the Colonel wouldnt like me doin one to one meetings.
When Elvis joined the Army, Parker told him ' Son, I consider it my patriontic duty to keep you in the 90% tax bracket'.
Parker's view was ' If you want to see Elvis Presley, you buy a ticket!'. Elvis was not allowed to give private shows, in the army or anywhere esle. Also Elvis never did encores, he always left them begging for more.
During the filming of Blue Hawaii, Parker ran shouting and yelling into the middle of a scene, pointing at Elvis's watch and demanded ' If you want the watch in, you'll have to pay another 10 grand!'. No wonder Elvis began to hate making films. In public, Hal Wallis admired Parker, as a supersalesman - Yet in private, he said ' I'd rather try and close a deal with the devil'. Parker really couldnt care less about Presley's acting talent. He wanted a simple film, with cute girls and an album worth of songs. Also Parker wanted alot of money for these films, after all he was making a fortune.
When a TV executive came to Parker offering $50,000 for a single prime time appearance by Elvis, Parker respounded ' That'll be be just fine for me, but how much will you give Elvis?'
The extent of Parker's role in Elvis's wedding is disuted, some say he told Elvis to get married for publicity purposes, but it was a rushed affair with a sevagely brief guests list, which caused a huge ructions among Elvis's entourage. Parker also refused to let the happy couple have the honeymoon in europe they wanted, he said it would upset the fans around the world. Why Elvis didn't insist on the wedding he and Priscilla really wanted is enduring mystery.
Parker was a competent hypnotist. He lked to get staff members to act like chickens and once had the Memphis Mafia barking like dogs. However, theories that Parker kept Elvis hypontised for 20 years should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Elvis stood up to the Colonel on a handful of occasions. One was the 1968 TV Special, which Parker wanted a dull Christmassy show, thank god Elvis did it his way. It give him one of his finest, rawest performances. Then the second time happened when Parker didnt want Elvis to record a particular song due to recording right. That song was ' Suspicious Minds'.
In 1969, Elvis went back on the road and played the International Hotel in Las Vegas. Alex Shoofy, the hotel's general manager, came to see Parker in the hotel dining room and offered a 5 year contract in which Elvis would play the hotel in February and August each year and earn $125,000 a week. Parker scribbled some terms on a red tablecloth, but he ignored inflation and tied Elvis long term. Alex Shoofy signed his agreement on the tablecloth and promptly told the press it ' was the best deal ever made in this town'. Not, perhaps, for Elvis.
Parker had a long term gambling habit and it got alot worse in Vegas. He moved into the hotel in a fancy suite and lost million a year on the tables!
In the 70's, Elvis's income came from touring. In February 1972, he signed away one third of his tour profit to Parker.
In 1973, after a heated row, Elvis fired Parker, but he wouldnt leave - without his million he was still waiting for. Elvis threw a fit and went on a huge drug fuelled week that culminated in a teenage girl almost overdose. Who does Elvis call to sort out the mess and keep the press away?? Parker.
Parker turned down endless offers for Elvis to tour the world. The reason was Parker was an illegal immigrant without a passport.
In 1973, RCA bought the masters - and royalty rights - of all Elvis's previous recordings for $5.4million. Jack Soden of EPE describes the deal as being right up there with the Indians selling Manhatten for 24 dollars. Seven years later, a lawyer for the Presley Estate Blacnchard Tual,concluded that Colonel Parker and RCA were probably guilty of collusion, conspiracy, fraud and misrepresention.
In 1974, Parker set up Boxcaar Enterprises to handle the merchanding business. Parker was on 40% on the income while Elvis only got 15%!
When Joe Esposito phoned Parker to tell him Elvis had died, Parkers first words were ' Oh dear god! then after a long pause ' nothing has changed! This wont change anything!' Within a dat of Elvis's death, Parker got Vernon Presley ( the exector to Elvis's will) to agree to keep al l the deals made with Elvis as they were. He also signed a deal with the merchanding company, Factors Inc, that meant Parker would take 78% of the proceeds of the forthcoming souvenir boom! At Elvis's funeral, Parker wore an hawiian shirt and a baseball cap. At the cemetery he wondered away from the graveside and say by himself on a police motorbike. After Vernon's death in 1979, the courts got involved and after a long battle, a deal was struck whereby Parker was cut from all connections with the Presley Estate for a hefty sum.
Colonel Tom Parker (aka Andreas 'Dries' Cornelis Van Kuijk) died in January 1997.
Opinion on Parker remains divided. Some believe he was a brilliant promoter and tireless manager. Other's think that the career of naive genius was nearly destroyed by his greed.
Unchained Melody
07-11-2008, 10:24 AM
Yeah he sure was on Elvis' side on May 21st 1977 in Louisville Kentucky...all Elvis was to him was a dollar sign thats it !!
presley31
07-11-2008, 10:29 AM
Col loved the money he was getting, not elvis who made him the money in the first place.
Unchained Melody
07-11-2008, 10:31 AM
Col loved the money he was getting, not elvis who made him the money in the first place.
That's what I pretty much said in my post.
presley31
07-11-2008, 10:36 AM
That's what I pretty much said in my post.
I was talking about the whole time col with elvis and nope l didn't mention what you did:blink:
presley31
07-11-2008, 10:39 AM
When Joe Esposito phoned Parker to tell him Elvis had died, Parkers first words were ' Oh dear god! then after a long pause ' nothing has changed! This wont change anything!' Within a dat of Elvis's death, Parker got Vernon Presley ( the exector to Elvis's will) to agree to keep al l the deals made with Elvis as they were. He also signed a deal with the merchanding company, Factors Inc, that meant Parker would take 78% of the proceeds of the forthcoming souvenir boom! At Elvis's funeral, Parker wore an hawiian shirt and a baseball cap. At the cemetery he wondered away from the graveside and say by himself on a police motorbike. After Vernon's death in 1979, the courts got involved and after a long battle, a deal was struck whereby Parker was cut from all connections with the Presley Estate for a hefty sum.
Looks like col didn't waste anytime after elvis died, elvis was getting buried and col was still making money. talk about greedy.
john carpenter
07-11-2008, 10:47 AM
Do you really believe the Colonel cared about Elvis? Elvis I believe felt he owed the Colonel, but not 50% of his money. Elvis was a money making machine to the Colonel, not a friend. And he worked his money making machine into the ground in just 22 years.:angry:(n):king:
Love him or hate him - Col. Tom Parker was always on Elvis' side!
Not according to the very lengthy report by the court appointed guardian for Lisa Marie, and not according to Judge Joseph Evans of the Probate Court in Tennessee, who ordered Priscilla and the other executors of Elvis' estate to sue Parker.
I've always thought the court proceedings after Elvis died established that Parker was completely self-serving and unethical - to the extent that anything about Elvis is a fact rather than an opininion.
Big Boss Man - Col. Tom Parker
Elvis thought he owed it all to Colonel Tom Parker. Other's aren't so sure.
Andreas 'Dries' Cornelis Van Kuijk was born on 26 June 1909 in Breda, Holland. He was the fifth of nine children. His father, Adam, was a liveryman who met his mother, Maria, while he was in the army. When Andreas was 16 years old, his father died, and he moved to Rotterdam. He worked as a borgeman but was entranced by the ocean-going ships in the port. It wasn't too long before he was on board a ship to New Jersey. It was thought he stowed himself away.
He was then enlisted with the US Army - they didnt really care about papers back then - and was stationed in Hawaii. When he finally wrote home, it was in english and it was signed ' Thomas Parker'. The name was given to him by the Captain who interviewed him at the time of his enlistment.
Years later Elvis's friend Lamar Fike asked parker ' how come you never told us you were a Dutchman?' Parker looked at him and said ' Son, you never asked me'.
Parker spent several years with a touring carnival called The Johnny J. James Exposition. His special act was dancing chickens, which he achieved by hiding a hot plate under the straw of the cage! After marrying Marie Mott in 1935, Parker left the carnival to work for the Tampa Humane Society ( I bet he never told them about the dancing chickens!) he then moved to Nashville and became the manager to country singer Eddie Arnold.
Parker was given an honorary commission, from an old friend called Jimmy Davis. He became Louisana Governor and then Parker was known as the Colonel from that day onwards. Funnily enough, in March 1961, Governor Buford Ellington of Tennessee made Elvis an honorary Colonel. Elvis didn's deem it necessary to use his title.
In 1953, Eddie Arnold fired Parker for unknown reasons. Parker then hooked up with Hank Snow and created Jamboree Attractions, which became the biggest booking agencies in the South. Yet that partnership broke up acrimiously when Parker, without Snow, signed a new young talent. His name was Elvis Presley.
Parker first met Elvis in February 1955, in a Memphis Coffee Shop. Parkers first words to Elvis were ' You got a manager, son?'. He signed Elvis onto the Jamboree Attractions and was ready to pounce on him. Elvis was still under-age in 1955, so Parker knew the contract had to be signed by his parents. Vernon was a push over but Gladys didnt trust Parker. So to get her into his good books, backstage at one of her son's shows, she met a close friend of Parker's who told her ' Parker is a good Christian gentleman'.
Then Elvis's parents signed the contract on 15 August 1955.
Soon Parker set up a deal with RCA records company and Hill and Range, his own music publishers. Steve Scholes, RCA's Director of Country music, put his neck on the line by offering $23,000. Hill and Range offered a further $15,000. So with $40,000 offer in place, Parker paid Sam Phillips an agreed $35,00 and give Elvis $5,000. Elvis signed with RCA on November 21 1955. The next day he sent a telegram to Parker in which he promised to stick with him through thick and thin, and he also loved him like a father.
On January 8, 1956, Elvis turned 21 years old and was given a new contract - To sign as an adult. It ratified all previous contracts and gave the Colonel 25% of all Elvis's earnings. Once Parker became his full time manager, he never wanted anyone esle. He told the press ' I'll live and breath Elvis 24 hours a day'.
Parker showed his nerve when he demanded $100,000 for Elvis to star in Love Me Tender. When the Producer said even Jack Lemmon didn't get that kind of money. Parker looked into his eyes and said ' Maybe Lemmon needs a new manager!'.
Parker was also scared once Elvis hit Hollywood, he would see what Parker was really going. So Parker started to lsolated Elvis from the outside world. That's how the Memphis Mafia started. One day songwritter Mike Stroller knocked on Elvis's hotel room door, Elvis greeted him nervously and said the Colonel wouldnt like me doin one to one meetings.
When Elvis joined the Army, Parker told him ' Son, I consider it my patriontic duty to keep you in the 90% tax bracket'.
Parker's view was ' If you want to see Elvis Presley, you buy a ticket!'. Elvis was not allowed to give private shows, in the army or anywhere esle. Also Elvis never did encores, he always left them begging for more.
During the filming of Blue Hawaii, Parker ran shouting and yelling into the middle of a scene, pointing at Elvis's watch and demanded ' If you want the watch in, you'll have to pay another 10 grand!'. No wonder Elvis began to hate making films. In public, Hal Wallis admired Parker, as a supersalesman - Yet in private, he said ' I'd rather try and close a deal with the devil'. Parker really couldnt care less about Presley's acting talent. He wanted a simple film, with cute girls and an album worth of songs. Also Parker wanted alot of money for these films, after all he was making a fortune.
When a TV executive came to Parker offering $50,000 for a single prime time appearance by Elvis, Parker respounded ' That'll be be just fine for me, but how much will you give Elvis?'
The extent of Parker's role in Elvis's wedding is disuted, some say he told Elvis to get married for publicity purposes, but it was a rushed affair with a sevagely brief guests list, which caused a huge ructions among Elvis's entourage. Parker also refused to let the happy couple have the honeymoon in europe they wanted, he said it would upset the fans around the world. Why Elvis didn't insist on the wedding he and Priscilla really wanted is enduring mystery.
Parker was a competent hypnotist. He lked to get staff members to act like chickens and once had the Memphis Mafia barking like dogs. However, theories that Parker kept Elvis hypontised for 20 years should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Elvis stood up to the Colonel on a handful of occasions. One was the 1968 TV Special, which Parker wanted a dull Christmassy show, thank god Elvis did it his way. It give him one of his finest, rawest performances. Then the second time happened when Parker didnt want Elvis to record a particular song due to recording right. That song was ' Suspicious Minds'.
In 1969, Elvis went back on the road and played the International Hotel in Las Vegas. Alex Shoofy, the hotel's general manager, came to see Parker in the hotel dining room and offered a 5 year contract in which Elvis would play the hotel in February and August each year and earn $125,000 a week. Parker scribbled some terms on a red tablecloth, but he ignored inflation and tied Elvis long term. Alex Shoofy signed his agreement on the tablecloth and promptly told the press it ' was the best deal ever made in this town'. Not, perhaps, for Elvis.
Parker had a long term gambling habit and it got alot worse in Vegas. He moved into the hotel in a fancy suite and lost million a year on the tables!
In the 70's, Elvis's income came from touring. In February 1972, he signed away one third of his tour profit to Parker.
In 1973, after a heated row, Elvis fired Parker, but he wouldnt leave - without his million he was still waiting for. Elvis threw a fit and went on a huge drug fuelled week that culminated in a teenage girl almost overdose. Who does Elvis call to sort out the mess and keep the press away?? Parker.
Parker turned down endless offers for Elvis to tour the world. The reason was Parker was an illegal immigrant without a passport.
In 1973, RCA bought the masters - and royalty rights - of all Elvis's previous recordings for $5.4million. Jack Soden of EPE describes the deal as being right up there with the Indians selling Manhatten for 24 dollars. Seven years later, a lawyer for the Presley Estate Blacnchard Tual,concluded that Colonel Parker and RCA were probably guilty of collusion, conspiracy, fraud and misrepresention.
In 1974, Parker set up Boxcaar Enterprises to handle the merchanding business. Parker was on 40% on the income while Elvis only got 15%!
When Joe Esposito phoned Parker to tell him Elvis had died, Parkers first words were ' Oh dear god! then after a long pause ' nothing has changed! This wont change anything!' Within a dat of Elvis's death, Parker got Vernon Presley ( the exector to Elvis's will) to agree to keep al l the deals made with Elvis as they were. He also signed a deal with the merchanding company, Factors Inc, that meant Parker would take 78% of the proceeds of the forthcoming souvenir boom! At Elvis's funeral, Parker wore an hawiian shirt and a baseball cap. At the cemetery he wondered away from the graveside and say by himself on a police motorbike. After Vernon's death in 1979, the courts got involved and after a long battle, a deal was struck whereby Parker was cut from all connections with the Presley Estate for a hefty sum.
Colonel Tom Parker (aka Andreas 'Dries' Cornelis Van Kuijk) died in January 1997.
Opinion on Parker remains divided. Some believe he was a brilliant promoter and tireless manager. Other's think that the career of naive genius was nearly destroyed by his greed.
Amazing-simply amazing-everytime I read it!
MIElvis
07-11-2008, 11:48 PM
Say what you will...these two stayed together for over 20 years, longer than many marriages. I think both got what they wanted out of the arrangement and it's why it lasted so long.
Tony Trout
07-12-2008, 08:29 AM
Do you really believe the Colonel cared about Elvis? Elvis I believe felt he owed the Colonel, but not 50% of his money. Elvis was a money making machine to the Colonel, not a friend. And he worked his money making machine into the ground in just 22 years.:angry:(n):king:
I don't believe for one second that Elvis would have agreed to Parker taking 50% if his earnings if he (Elvis) had been in the right frame of mind at the time.
Say what you will...these two stayed together for over 20 years, longer than many marriages. I think both got what they wanted out of the arrangement and it's why it lasted so long.
I think it lasted that long because Elvis feared making the break. He was snowed into the idea that Parker was a necessity. Parker/Snowman-his self proclaimed title fit him like a glove.
utmom2008
07-12-2008, 03:53 PM
I think it lasted that long because Elvis feared making the break. He was snowed into the idea that Parker was a necessity. Parker/Snowman-his self proclaimed title fit him like a glove.
I agree...100%. Love him or hate him - Col. Parker as always on Col. Parker's side...IMO.:blush::blush:
hounddog
07-12-2008, 06:43 PM
i just wished the Col had have looked passed what he wanted Elvis' image to be and let him spread his wings as a performer. Yes Elvis could have said no but i don't think that was his nature, he believed in the Col.
When you look at the list of movies Elvis was offered and didn't do you just gotta shake you're head.
Brian
07-12-2008, 09:19 PM
i just wished the Col had have looked passed what he wanted Elvis' image to be and let him spread his wings as a performer. Yes Elvis could have said no but i don't think that was his nature, he believed in the Col.
When you look at the list of movies Elvis was offered and didn't do you just gotta shake you're head.
yes hounddog that is a shame about all the movies Elvis didn't get to do
and the Col. should have helped Elvis more realize his dream of becoming a serious actor. Did you know that back then most actors didn't have script approval and played in the movies their producers wanted them to make?
Sonny West and Jerry Schilling have both said that Elvis didn't have script approval written into his contract so he couldn't turn down the crappy mid to late 60's movies and it is well known that Hal Wallis and the other producers of the time didn't think Elvis could bring in big box office in a non singing role.
I blame four people for Elvis not becoming a serious respected actor Elvis, (for not standing up to the movie producers and the Colonel) the Colonel, the movie producers, the fans (for going to see more of Blue Hawaii and Gi Blues and other musicals and not going to see Flaming Star etc. myself included)
hounddog
07-13-2008, 03:50 AM
yes the Holywood contacts were awful for a lot of actors not just Elvis, and i agree with everything you said. And i've often wondered why Elvis or the Col didn't push for him to have scritp approval written into his contracts.
He seemed to have some say later into his movie career because he he did say no to The Faset Gun Alive
Brian
07-13-2008, 09:26 AM
yes the Holywood contacts were awful for a lot of actors not just Elvis, and i agree with everything you said. And i've often wondered why Elvis or the Col didn't push for him to have scritp approval written into his contracts.
He seemed to have some say later into his movie career because he he did say no to The Faset Gun Alive
Hi hounddog how are you doing my friend?
I believe it's just the way hollywood was back then when Elvis first signed his first seven year contract in 1956 he was new to acting and it would seem out of place for him or the Colonel to demand script approval right off the bat.
When 90% of actors didn't have it. I believe someone like John Wayne or Cary Grant probably had script approval because they were big box draws and had great longevity the studio's and the studio bosses let them do what they wanted.
Hi hounddog how are you doing my friend?
I believe it's just the way hollywood was back then when Elvis first signed his first seven year contract in 1956 he was new to acting and it would seem out of place for him or the Colonel to demand script approval right off the bat.
When 90% of actors didn't have it. I believe someone like John Wayne or Cary Grant probably had script approval because they were big box draws and had great longevity the studio's and the studio bosses let them do what they wanted.
John Wayne did not have script aproval in the 30s and 40s-it was not until he began producing his own movies through his production company, Batjak, that he got script approval. After this he began to add it into contract negotiations when he worked for other producers-sometimes he got it sometimes he did not. I do not know the situtation with Cary Grant but can only assume that in the early years he did not-but as his box office appeal increased so did his power to ask for such things.
yes the Holywood contacts were awful for a lot of actors not just Elvis, and i agree with everything you said. And i've often wondered why Elvis or the Col didn't push for him to have scritp approval written into his contracts.
He seemed to have some say later into his movie career because he he did say no to The Faset Gun Alive
I believe that was prodiced though Four Leaf productions (distrubuted through MGM) so it was not produced directly at MGM. Perhaps that is the reason he was able to turn it down.
Hal Wallis was known for making sure he decided what pictures people he had under contract made. But lets not forget when Elvis signed the deal with Wallis-he was lead to believe that his first film was the big budget quality film "The Rainmaker" with Burt Lancaster and Katherine Hepburn. He said so in an interview right after he signed the contract with Wallis. He said in the interview also that he had not desire to sing in the movies-that he had tested for a strictly acting part. "Someone" convinced him that his first film was "The Rainmaker" and he signed the 7 picture deal-then pulled the rug out from under him. Then Wallis did not even produce his first film he loaned him out "for a fat fee" to another company for "Love Me Tender"
Wallis also decided what films Martin and Lewis made in his deal with them in 47. From 47-56 they made (8 years) they made 16 films for him- with cameos in a couple others.
They also were not happy with all the pictures that he sent them. In 1954 after arguing with Wallis about the scripts he sent him they revolted somewhat over the picture "3 Ring Circus" Dean Martin was unhappy that his he seemed to be a supporting player and Lewis was unhappy with the script in general. It was finally worked out but the team broke up a few years later because of the friction of their personal clashes and business situations like this which added to the tensions between them.
utmom2008
07-13-2008, 11:54 AM
But lets not forget when Elvis signed the deal with Wallis-he was lead to believe that his first film was the big budget quality film "The Rainmaker" with Burt Lancaster and Katherine Hepburn. He said so in an interview right after he signed the contract with Wallis. He said in the interview also that he had not desire to sing in the movies-that he had tested for a strictly acting part. "Someone" convinced him that his first film was "The Rainmaker" and he signed the 7 picture deal-then pulled the rug out from under him.
That will forever be a "what if" question.:blink: "The Rainmaker" was a great story, still is a great story. I wonder how Elvis would have handled the role?? :hmm::hmm::hmm:
That will forever be a "what if" question.:blink: "The Rainmaker" was a great story, still is a great story. I wonder how Elvis would have handled the role?? :hmm::hmm::hmm:
Also where would his acting career have headed if he had acted the "non-singing kid brother role" in this quality film with a much stronger script, cast, direction etc...instead of the Upper B western where he played the "singing kid brother" in a less classy vehicle? But there is no denying Elvis thought that was to be his first film. I wonder if there was a let down for him when he was told-you are not making this movie, instead you are making a film for someone else and you have to sing in it?
Diane
07-13-2008, 12:50 PM
Elvis was rooked in his movie contract, there is no denying that. He should have gotten to do the Rainmaker and I think he would have handled it well. He was naive and endearing in Love Me Tender but it was not at all what he had visualized as his acting career. I'm sure the old Colonel convinced him it was just the first step and that things would change which the Colonel had no intention of doing. I think all through Elvis' career as actor and as stage performer, the Colonel made deals behind his back and convinced him it was all for the best.
Diane
Brian
07-13-2008, 01:18 PM
John Wayne did not have script aproval in the 30s and 40s-it was not until he began producing his own movies through his production company, Batjak, that he got script approval. After this he began to add it into contract negotiations when he worked for other producers-sometimes he got it sometimes he did not. I do not know the situtation with Cary Grant but can only assume that in the early years he did not-but as his box office appeal increased so did his power to ask for such things.
Yes I know Ken that's what I meant no one in hollywood had script approval in the early days but I figured Cary Grant and John wayne did have script approval by say during the 50's, anyway I figure they had more power when it came to scripts than Elvis.
Speaking of "Love Me Tender" I recall the stage and screen actress, Mildred Dunnock, who played the Reno brothers mother being on the Dick Cavatt show in the late 60s or early 70s. He asked her about being in Elvis's first film and she said it was a nice experience that he was a very nice young man and she felt he had done well for a first film.
He asked did she have any storys about his first film and she told him that in one scene riders come to the house and Elvis was suppose to grab a gun and go outside to see who it was-she was suppose say something like:
"Son put down that gun!" when she shouted the line-Elvis stopped in his tracks and put the gun down on the table.
Naturally the director yelled cut and everyone (except Elvis) had a good laugh.
Brian
07-13-2008, 01:56 PM
Elvis was rooked in his movie contract, there is no denying that. He should have gotten to do the Rainmaker and I think he would have handled it well. He was naive and endearing in Love Me Tender but it was not at all what he had visualized as his acting career. I'm sure the old Colonel convinced him it was just the first step and that things would change which the Colonel had no intention of doing. I think all through Elvis' career as actor and as stage performer, the Colonel made deals behind his back and convinced him it was all for the best.
Diane
Hi Diane How are you? I hope you are well
Hal Wallis saw Elvis on t.v. singing and saw the girls screaming and the popularity and that's what made Mr. Wallis offer Elvis a contract not his acting potential which is a shame when you think about it but hollywood is all about money and how much the movies make.
As some have said and I have heard as well that Mr. Wallis led Elvis to believe that his first role would a supporting role in the ''Rainmaker'' with Burt Lancaster and Katharine Hepburn but when Elvis signed the contract Elvis was going to do love me tender instead and character actor Earl Holliman got the role Elvis was promised, Mr. Holliman won the golden globe for best supporting actor. I saw Earl Holliman on t.v. a couple of years ago talking about the ''Rainmaker'' mentioning that Elvis was originally going to do the role before he got it he seemed to scoff a little at the idea that Elvis could have handled the role. I think Mr. Wallis while having no intention of giving Elvis a non singing role thought that Elvis with no acting experience would be blown off the screen by Burt Lancaster and Katherine Hepburn.
Jerry Schilling while promoting his book has said Elvis was dissappointed when he didn't get the role.
I also think that if Elvis didn't sing songs in ''Love me tender'', ''Loving you'',''Jailhouse rock'' or ''King Creole'' even if he did a good acting job in them
they would have bombed it would seem that the fans just wanted to hear Elvis sing new songs and not see him act.
Diane
07-13-2008, 03:12 PM
Now that is a good example of what some of us have been saying Ken about how Elvis was used to listening to his elders of which the Colonel was one.
He didn't hesitate for a moment to put that gun down when Mildred Dunnock told him to from the script instead of running outside with it. It's very hard to react differently when something is ingrained that strongly.
Hi Brian, I'm fine, hope you are as well. I have to disagree with you that Elvis' movies would have bombed had he had not sung in them. Elvis fans would have flocked in hordes regardless even if he had been a horrible actor which he wasn't, just to see him on the big screen and I'm one of them.
Diane
Now that is a good example of what some of us have been saying Ken about how Elvis was used to listening to his elders of which the Colonel was one.
He didn't hesitate for a moment to put that gun down when Mildred Dunnock told him to from the script instead of running outside with it. It's very hard to react differently when something is ingrained that strongly.
Hi Brian, I'm fine, hope you are as well. I have to disagree with you that Elvis' movies would have bombed had he had not sung in them. Elvis fans would have flocked in hordes regardless even if he had been a horrible actor which he wasn't, just to see him on the big screen and I'm one of them.
Diane
I'm pretty sure that all Elvis's movies made a profit-including the ones without music. So even though the acting films did not do as well as the musicals they still made a profit.
I think the shame of it is that someone Wallis, Parker whoever... were more worried about short term profits rather than future potential. Sure the fans who loved him singing wanted to see him sing-but if he had proved he could act in enough films producers would have not worried about his fan reactions they would have worried about what he could have added as an actor to their projects. In deed even without Wallis or Parker being in his corner helping him procure true acting parts- he still was offered serious roles
based on the few real acting roles he was allowed to do. Those offers show many felt he was capable of much, much more and were willing to put up the money to let him try. That is the true shame that the bigger movie offers were ignored or considered not the "proper image"
SleepyJack
07-13-2008, 04:06 PM
I think that the colonel saw the movies as the equivalent of todays music videos,and,not to just bash the colonel(again!!) but I don`t think he understood the art of movies any more than he did the art of music...so,to his mind getting the most money and the best deal for Elvis (and for himself) was the greatest "buzz" he could get.....it`s a shame he didn`t realise the importance of it all to Elvis.I was reading a piece recently where Kathy Westmoreland was saying that Elvis said to her "Do you think I`ll ever be remembered?,I`ve never done a classic film".....I think it remained a major disappointment to him right to the end.
Brian
07-13-2008, 05:41 PM
Now that is a good example of what some of us have been saying Ken about how Elvis was used to listening to his elders of which the Colonel was one.
He didn't hesitate for a moment to put that gun down when Mildred Dunnock told him to from the script instead of running outside with it. It's very hard to react differently when something is ingrained that strongly.
Hi Brian, I'm fine, hope you are as well. I have to disagree with you that Elvis' movies would have bombed had he had not sung in them. Elvis fans would have flocked in hordes regardless even if he had been a horrible actor which he wasn't, just to see him on the big screen and I'm one of them.
Diane
Hi Diane
we will have to agree to disagree on this I guess.
I think if Elvis had made ''Love me Tender'' without any songs except the title song sung over the opening credits (which I think is how it should have been made) it would have bomed. ''King Creole'' was being prepared for James Dean when he died and it was a boxer in the book and Dean would have played a boxer. When Elvis got the role it was changed to a singer to capitalize on his singing idol status the soundrack also did well and peaked at #2. I think if Elvis played the role as a boxer as it was originally written (non singing) and lets say he did a good job I believe it would have bombed.
''Flaming Star'' and ''Wild in the Country'' did make a profit but nothing compared to ''GI Blues'' and ''Blue Hawaii'' 20th Century fox was disappointed in the box office performance of the two movies.
and even a non singing role in Charro bombed.
utmom2008
07-13-2008, 07:11 PM
I have to disagree with you that Elvis' movies would have bombed had he had not sung in them. Elvis fans would have flocked in hordes regardless even if he had been a horrible actor which he wasn't, just to see him on the big screen and I'm one of them.
I agree Diane...I would LOVE the chance to see that face on the big screen again. We have a 60 inch TV, which is great, but everytime I'm watching TTWII I can't help but remember how it looked on the GIANT screen.:blush::blink::blush::blink:
and even a non singing role in Charro bombed.
I think one reason that Charro bombed is because by the time it was made no one had any respect for Elvis as an actor in a decent movie. Sad, but true......:sad::blush:
Diane
07-13-2008, 07:18 PM
I will never understand why Charro bombed because when I saw Elvis in that beard in a very serious roll I was completely captivated and enchanted...and utterly turned on...sorry saying that is out of character but wow!:lol::blush:
Diane
utmom2008
07-13-2008, 07:22 PM
I will never understand why Charro bombed because when I saw Elvis in that beard in a very serious roll I was completely captivated and enchanted...and utterly turned on...sorry saying that is out of character but wow!:lol::blush:
Diane
:supriced::supriced: You have been hanging out with the wild bunch too long Diane, we must be a bad influence!:P And....I agree with you, almost made you rush home again to get a shower.:lmfao:
Diane
07-13-2008, 07:24 PM
Lol, I've gathered my wits and I'm ok again. I knew you'd catch this Rosanne:lol:
Diane
utmom2008
07-13-2008, 07:29 PM
Lol, I've gathered my wits and I'm ok again. I knew you'd catch this Rosanne:lol:
Diane
OK...glad to hear it!(y) For a moment I thought we had ALL gone crazy!:lmfao:
Getlo
07-14-2008, 05:07 AM
I will never understand why Charro
Let's see ...
The silly plot; generally poor acting by all concerned; no music (which was generally expected of an Elvis film); it was released after years of pathetic movies from Elvis - his acting career was dead and buried when it came out.
Charro is a B-grade equivalent of the Sergio Leone westerns, and simply can't compare with the genre it was trying to exploit. Elvis was too good-looking and not "rough enough" for the role.
Merry
07-14-2008, 05:43 AM
Must be wonderful being as good looking as you, with your wonderful, magnetic, personality, which puts you in good stead, to run Elvis down, and any other person you feel like having a go at, too.
Your opinion on Elvis is yours alone, I have no idea why you are part of a board such as this. Must be, that this is the only place, that you can talk to people as you do, and get away with it.
Furthermore, Elvis IS all man, and women know it.
Merry
07-14-2008, 05:45 AM
I will never understand why Charro bombed because when I saw Elvis in that beard in a very serious roll I was completely captivated and enchanted...and utterly turned on...sorry saying that is out of character but wow!:lol::blush:
Diane
Elvis is just plain sexy, because he is such a good person. I too, enjoy his acting, always have.
Getlo
07-14-2008, 06:00 AM
Must be wonderful being as good looking as you, with your wonderful, magnetic, personality, which puts you in good stead, to run Elvis down, and any other person you feel like having a go at, too.
Your opinion on Elvis is yours alone, I have no idea why you are part of a board such as this. Must be, that this is the only place, that you can talk to people as you do, and get away with it.
Furthermore, Elvis IS all man, and women know it.
YAAAAAWWWWNNNN ...
Tony Trout
07-14-2008, 07:10 AM
Must be wonderful being as good looking as you, with your wonderful, magnetic, personality, which puts you in good stead, to run Elvis down, and any other person you feel like having a go at, too.
Your opinion on Elvis is yours alone, I have no idea why you are part of a board such as this. Must be, that this is the only place, that you can talk to people as you do, and get away with it.
Furthermore, Elvis IS all man, and women know it.
Where did Getlo 'run Elvis down'? Getlo's right on the mark with his assertions about Elvis's career (movie-wise) by this time. There was no way that Parker was going to let Elvis try out for a 'serious' movie because it wouldn't make Parker any $$$. Parker was always out for the almighty dollar at all times during Elvis's career. And EPE is the same way---with EPE, Parker has been 'resurrected' in a sense because they're only out for the money. They couldn't care less 'bout Elvis's legacy. Heck, they think that Elvis died after 1973. You don't see any reference to Elvis after Aloha on their site at all.
The fact is that Elvis's movie career was at a complete standstill by this time and there was no hope of resurrecting it. Parker's motto (IIRC) was "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!".
Getlo
07-14-2008, 07:17 AM
Where did Getlo 'run Elvis down'?
Thank you, TT. I didn't run Elvis down at all. He was unsuited to the role, but that was hardly his fault.
Tony Trout
07-14-2008, 08:36 AM
Thank you, TT. I didn't run Elvis down at all. He was unsuited to the role, but that was hardly his fault.
Getlo,
You're welcome, dude. (y)(y) And...you're right. A movie like "Charro" would've suited Clint Eastwood better than it did Elvis.
4THEHEART
07-14-2008, 08:59 AM
I have a dream..Getlo will re-design Elvis,his career,his life,his personality etc..and this time everything will be perfect and we all live happily ever after..what about this?..
judging someone's acting by his/her looks..interesting really..
Brian
07-14-2008, 11:43 AM
Getlo,
You're welcome, dude. (y)(y) And...you're right. A movie like "Charro" would've suited Clint Eastwood better than it did Elvis.
Hi Getlo and Tony Trout I hope you are having a good day?
As everyone knows Clint Eastwood was originally offered the part in Charro but turned it down had he accepted the movie Charro it probably would have had a bigger budget and a better script with more fully realized action sequences than what Elvis got. If say after Elvis got the role the studio gave it a bigger budget and got a good director like Don Siegel or Sam Peckinpah and didn't water down the script and made a really cool action shoot em up western it would probably be remembered today as one of Elvis best movies on par with Flaming Star. However like Flaming Star I think Charro still would have performed below expectations. A non singing Elvis equals bad box office. (sad but true)
Thank you, TT. I didn't run Elvis down at all. He was unsuited to the role, but that was hardly his fault.
I never thought he was unsuited for the role-I just thought this movie as a whole was not well done. IMO the fault of this movie was Charles Marquis Warren who wrote the screenplay, directed and co-produced this movie-he wanted to be Sergio Leoni and was not up to it. The movies had a budget of about $1.5 million and much of that was Elvis's salary. It only took about 5 weeks to film and it showed.
Hi Getlo and Tony Trout I hope you are having a good day?
As everyone knows Clint Eastwood was originally offered the part in Charro but turned it down had he accepted the movie Charro it probably would have had a bigger budget and a better script with more fully realized action sequences than what Elvis got. If say after Elvis got the role the studio gave it a bigger budget and got a good director like Don Siegel or Sam Peckinpah and didn't water down the script and made a really cool action shoot em up western it would probably be remembered today as one of Elvis best movies on par with Flaming Star. However like Flaming Star I think Charro still would have performed below expectations. A non singing Elvis equals bad box office. (sad but true)
Compared to his musicals it was bad box office but they always turned a profit. Woody Allens first years in film making were very funny movies like Bananas, Sleeper, Annie Hall etc...they did real good box office but he also made "Interiors" "Stardust Memories" 'Hannah and her Sisters" they were non traditional Allen movies which did not do the business of the out and out comedys-but he did them to expand his boundaries as a filmmaker.
Elvis dramas may not have made the money of the musicals but they let him grow some as an actor-if that had been allowed to continue perhaps a time would have come where the big box office would not have depended on his music fans alone-but on the public in general who wanted to see a good movie-that just happened to have Elvis in it.
Clint Eastwood was an action star whos first real starring role was on TV. If he had not been allowed to go beyond the TV shows, the Leoni films and Dirty Harry roles what a shame that would have been since today he is seen as an accomplished award winning producer, director, actor- of all all type of films not just tough guy roles. But he did not start out with huge box office bonanzas-he worked into what he became and was allowed to take chances in order to do so.
Donut
07-14-2008, 04:18 PM
Woody Allens first years in film making were very funny movies like Bananas, Sleeper, Annie Hall etc...
(y) You forgot "Love and Death" and "Take the Money and Run" :lmfao:
(y) You forgot "Love and Death" and "Take the Money and Run" :lmfao:
Thanks I did. "My wife and I went to see "Love and Death" at a drive-in years ago and we found it pretty funny-so how did I forget that one.
Getlo
07-15-2008, 04:48 AM
judging someone's acting by his/her looks..interesting really..
Yes, interesting in the sense that it never happened!
Try to keep up here:
1. Elvis' acting wasn't his best in Charro. Okay, yes, but not his best.
2. Phyisically, he was unsuited to the role: too good-looking to be taken seriously as "Charro".
Two separate things they are, acting ability and looks. Clear?
A movie like "Charro" would've suited Clint Eastwood better than it did Elvis.
Yes, a movie like Charro. But not the movie itself. It needed a whole lot of work before it could be considered a good western. It was a good attempt at one though.
4THEHEART
07-15-2008, 06:14 AM
he was good looking but a real person and he could have been anyone from any walk of life in reality while still having that good looks of him.. one hasn't to be ugly to fit some roles..it's only a Hollywood excuse for Elvis..in a good production he could've played Quasimodo too..they just didn't want to change the format and his place in movies and that da mn image..
Getlo
07-15-2008, 06:34 AM
As everyone knows Clint Eastwood was originally offered the part in Charro but turned it down
Gonna have to ask for a source on that one, please Brian.
SleepyJack
07-15-2008, 08:17 AM
So...what historical documents should I be searching through for this proof that back in the days of cowboys America was jam-packed with "ugly" cowboys???...Do you mean to tell me that there wasn`t one handsome cowboy in the whole country at the time?...It`s amazing that they ever managed to breed at all!!!.....Or is it how the handsome were not allowed to be outlaws or cowboys?....maybe they became doctors or vets.
So...what historical documents should I be searching through for this proof that back in the days of cowboys America was jam-packed with "ugly" cowboys???...Do you mean to tell me that there wasn`t one handsome cowboy in the whole country at the time?...It`s amazing that they ever managed to breed at all!!!.....Or is it how the handsome were not allowed to be outlaws or cowboys?....maybe they became doctors or vets.
Most of the handsome men of the era were confined to the eastern part of the country.The so called "fancy boys".On the whole the real cowboys were an ugly bunch.The women of the era were also rather homely.Luckily they overcame their ghastly physical appearances and managed to breed with each other.It does get awfully lonely on them long cattle drives.Plus after spending so much time on the trail with other cowboys even the ugliest women back then probably looked mighty fine.
Most of the handsome men of the era were confined to the eastern part of the country.The so called "fancy boys".On the whole the real cowboys were an ugly bunch.The women of the era were also rather homely.Luckily they overcame their ghastly physical appearances and managed to breed with each other.It does get awfully lonely on them long cattle drives.Plus after spending so much time on the trail with other cowboys even the ugliest women back then probably looked mighty fine.
Truthfully facially the young Clint Eastwood had a very delicate look- until about the time he began to fo the Dirty Harry films IMO it was his expressions which gave the menace and tough look I always thought.
Unchained Melody
07-15-2008, 11:39 AM
Thank you, TT. I didn't run Elvis down at all. He was unsuited to the role, but that was hardly his fault.
It kills some to actually talk about elvis in some sort of negative light wheter it be about the film career, concert tours, or his personal life in general. That's what really killed him imo, the fans that thought and still think everything he did was absolutley amazing and he could do no wrongs.
utmom2008
07-15-2008, 11:45 AM
Most of the handsome men of the era were confined to the eastern part of the country.The so called "fancy boys".On the whole the real cowboys were an ugly bunch.The women of the era were also rather homely.Luckily they overcame their ghastly physical appearances and managed to breed with each other.It does get awfully lonely on them long cattle drives.Plus after spending so much time on the trail with other cowboys even the ugliest women back then probably looked mighty fine.
They needed you on those long trail drives Jak. You could have taught them a few of your tricks and opened up a whole new can of worms for those people.:lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao:
They needed you on those long trail drives Jak. You could have taught them a few of your tricks and opened up a whole new can of worms for those people.:lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao:
I just hope we would make it to town in time before the cattle started looking good.
Thank you ladies and gentleman.I will be performing here the rest of the week.
Merry
07-15-2008, 12:34 PM
It kills some to actually talk about elvis in some sort of negative light wheter it be about the film career, concert tours, or his personal life in general. That's what really killed him imo, the fans that thought and still think everything he did was absolutley amazing and he could do no wrongs.
This is someone else's statement, Marty Lacker's to be precise. Wow what a true fountain of knowledge he is :blink:. Life isn't black and white, there is a lot of grey, and as you learn more on your path, you may, or may not, start to think, that there is more to what is being written in a book. Just because it is written, doesn't mean it is true.
I'm not going to argue, or I'll have everyone jump down my throat, and I'm not in the state of mind to handle that at the moment.
utmom2008
07-15-2008, 02:43 PM
I just hope we would make it to town in time before the cattle started looking good.
Thank you ladies and gentleman.I will be performing here the rest of the week.
Hands down the best free entertainment around!(y)(y)(y) :lmfao: :lmfao:
Unchained Melody
07-15-2008, 03:01 PM
you may, or may not, start to think, that there is more to what is being written in a book. Just because it is written, doesn't mean it is true.
.
Did you not just tell us in the World Tour thread to take peoples word for what they are saying because we don't know if they are telling the truth or not when discussing the cameron and the presidents issue....:blink:
It kills some to actually talk about elvis in some sort of negative light wheter it be about the film career, concert tours, or his personal life in general. That's what really killed him imo, the fans that thought and still think everything he did was absolutley amazing and he could do no wrongs.
This is a true statement.I was the exact same way for years.It took a long time before I started to look at things objectively.Elvis inspires that kind of devotion.It's a testament to his broad appeal.
presley31
07-15-2008, 03:03 PM
This is someone else's statement, Marty Lacker's to be precise. Wow what a true fountain of knowledge he is :blink:. Life isn't black and white, there is a lot of grey, and as you learn more on your path, you may, or may not, start to think, that there is more to what is being written in a book. Just because it is written, doesn't mean it is true.
I'm not going to argue, or I'll have everyone jump down my throat, and I'm not in the state of mind to handle that at the moment.
jess l hear where you coming from(y)(y) Hope you ok too.
It kills some to actually talk about elvis in some sort of negative light wheter it be about the film career, concert tours, or his personal life in general. That's what really killed him imo, the fans that thought and still think everything he did was absolutley amazing and he could do no wrongs.
This is a true statement.I was the exact same way for years.It took a long time before I started to look at things objectively.Elvis inspires that kind of devotion.It's a testament to his broad appeal.
Merry
07-15-2008, 03:05 PM
Getlo,
You're welcome, dude. (y)(y) And...you're right. A movie like "Charro" would've suited Clint Eastwood better than it did Elvis.
Just out of interest, here is Clint Eastwood (by the way I am a fan).
25130
Merry
07-15-2008, 03:07 PM
Did you not just tell us in the World Tour thread to take peoples word for what they are saying because we don't know if they are telling the truth or not when discussing the cameron and the presidents issue....:blink:
Ahhhhh Cameron is doing the writing, it is FIRST HAND. Cameron isn't stoned, nor selling anything, nor is he writing here, to make money.
Unchained Melody
07-15-2008, 03:11 PM
Ahhhhh Cameron is doing the writing, it is FIRST HAND. Cameron isn't stoned, nor selling anything, nor is he writing here, to make money.
Ok points taken. Let me guess, your a hater of the MM. Their leeches and all that stuff...mmkay ! ;);)
Merry
07-15-2008, 03:12 PM
Most of the handsome men of the era were confined to the eastern part of the country.The so called "fancy boys".On the whole the real cowboys were an ugly bunch.The women of the era were also rather homely.Luckily they overcame their ghastly physical appearances and managed to breed with each other.It does get awfully lonely on them long cattle drives.Plus after spending so much time on the trail with other cowboys even the ugliest women back then probably looked mighty fine.
They didn't have paper bags back then, just saddle bags to cover their heads. :D
Merry
07-15-2008, 03:26 PM
Ok points taken. Let me guess, your a hater of the MM. Their leeches and all that stuff...mmkay ! ;);)
LOL,
Well, you know, I don't think I hate them. They were part of Elvis' life.
I take strong objection to the fact, that men in their 70's, who should have more maturity, and know better, would run down Lisa and her children, whom one in particular, hasn't even met (by his admission). I take exception to the fact, that he tries to ruin people's good names, because he was squeezed out, because of his behaviour.
I also, in a world full of dreams know, that they would back peddle if faced with Elvis and bow at his feet, as that is the type of person he (they, perhaps) would be, in my opinion, anyway. (Blaaaaaaahhhhhhh). Love to see that.
I object to the fact, that Marty, for one, shares what is private, through his eyes, or Sonny's eyes, to boost his own ego, is non exclusive of other people who were in Elvis' life, to boost his own ego (which can be read in his ego rubbing speel on "Ask Marty", and described by one of his friends as: "why would you want to meet him, he is a mean old b***". They deserve each other. They leave me disgusted in their childish ego rubbing, behaviour.
They never had enough, they always expected more, instead of appreciating what they had.
If Lacker didn't run down Lisa at every opportunity, same as Sonny has done to justify himself in his book, I perhaps, wouldn't be so against them as all happened so long ago. Notice Lisa doesn't say anything? She has taken the higher road (same as Vernon did, when all this blew up in the 70's). They (Lacker and Co.) do. They keep it going.
presley31
07-15-2008, 03:47 PM
LOL,
Well, you know, I don't think I hate them. They were part of Elvis' life.
I take strong objection to the fact, that men in their 70's, who should have more maturity, and know better, would run down Lisa and her children, whom one in particular, hasn't even met (by his admission). I take exception to the fact, that he tries to ruin people's good names, because he was squeezed out, because of his behaviour.
I also, in a world full of dreams know, that they would back peddle if faced with Elvis and bow at his feet, as that is the type of person he (they, perhaps) would be, in my opinion, anyway. (Blaaaaaaahhhhhhh). Love to see that.
I object to the fact, that Marty, for one, shares what is private, through his eyes, or Sonny's eyes, to boost his own ego, is non exclusive of other people who were in Elvis' life, to boost his own ego (which can be read in his ego rubbing speel on "Ask Marty", and described by one of his friends as: "why would you want to meet him, he is a mean old b***". They deserve each other. They leave me disgusted in their childish ego rubbing, behaviour.
They never had enough, they always expected more, instead of appreciating what they had.
If Lacker didn't run down Lisa at every opportunity, same as Sonny has done to justify himself in his book, I perhaps, wouldn't be so against them as all happened so long ago. Notice Lisa doesn't say anything? She has taken the higher road (same as Vernon did, when all this blew up in the 70's). They (Lacker and Co.) do. They keep it going.
so true jess. I doubt very much elvis would like his friends saying things about his daughter, yep elvis wouldn't like Lisa choices either, but its the parents place to say something not friends.
Brian
07-15-2008, 04:04 PM
LOL,
Well, you know, I don't think I hate them. They were part of Elvis' life.
I take strong objection to the fact, that men in their 70's, who should have more maturity, and know better, would run down Lisa and her children, whom one in particular, hasn't even met (by his admission). I take exception to the fact, that he tries to ruin people's good names, because he was squeezed out, because of his behaviour.
I also, in a world full of dreams know, that they would back peddle if faced with Elvis and bow at his feet, as that is the type of person he (they, perhaps) would be, in my opinion, anyway. (Blaaaaaaahhhhhhh). Love to see that.
I object to the fact, that Marty, for one, shares what is private, through his eyes, or Sonny's eyes, to boost his own ego, is non exclusive of other people who were in Elvis' life, to boost his own ego (which can be read in his ego rubbing speel on "Ask Marty", and described by one of his friends as: "why would you want to meet him, he is a mean old b***". They deserve each other. They leave me disgusted in their childish ego rubbing, behaviour.
They never had enough, they always expected more, instead of appreciating what they had.
If Lacker didn't run down Lisa at every opportunity, same as Sonny has done to justify himself in his book, I perhaps, wouldn't be so against them as all happened so long ago. Notice Lisa doesn't say anything? She has taken the higher road (same as Vernon did, when all this blew up in the 70's). They (Lacker and Co.) do. They keep it going.
Hi Jess how are you?
Marty and Sonny run lisa down because she ran them down a couple of times first and they don't like her attitude or her foul language when speaking on television.
presley31
07-15-2008, 04:18 PM
Hi Jess how are you?
Marty and Sonny run lisa down because she ran them down a couple of times first and they don't like her attitude or her foul language when speaking on television.
Isn't sonny and marty foul mouth?? Thats calling the kettle black :blink:
Merry
07-15-2008, 04:24 PM
Hi Jess how are you?
Marty and Sonny run lisa down because she ran them down a couple of times first and they don't like her attitude or her foul language when speaking on television.
Hi Brian,
I'm well, how are you?
LOL, I'm feeling kinda full of negatives from my posts this morning, methinks I've had enough, lol.
Yes, they do, (Lacker in particular) at any given opportunity, over and over (not just a couple of times) in his case, like a spiteful, hard done by child, would do, keeping it going, and going, and going!
Lisa told how it is, in a particular interview, when she was in her 20's, (that is how old she looked in that interview, which I watched a long time ago, to me, anyway).
Wouldn't it be nice, as mature and wordly men and best friends with Elvis, if they looked over her, in a fatherly way, because of their maturity, understanding, and relationship with her beloved father? They would understand, that she loves her father, and would be upset at what they wrote about him, they she has memories too, and they aren't the same as they wrote and write (by the way, I have memories of my childhood, which are accurate, so I don't doubt hers. Lisa is very good at writing, so her strengths in this area, would go along with her recollections).
Whew, where are some M & M's, (chocolates) to add some sweetness? lol
The good thing is, is that more babies are coming into the world. This is something wonderful, to look forward to.
Merry
07-15-2008, 04:35 PM
LOL, years ago, (before my time) he used to write under a woman's name as well, and he'd swear his heart out. The people whom he was arguing with on the board, one of them worked (or knew someone) for a telephone provider, they watched him sign out as the female name, then talk under his name, to support his arguments. They had a ball watching him, thought it hilarious. He had something like three names going, supporting himself, lol.
He originally started on the boards, to sell the book. He used to have starstruck "friends" help him to bully other posters. There was a board on AOL that a lot of people posted on, many years ago, including Elvis' friends, as well (I was told this). I read that he informed other posters that he had Mafia connections, so to be careful how they replied to him. He said that he loved belittling the fans.
I have never been afraid to discuss Elvis's negatives, but I always temper it with the fact that what he went thru was unprecedented as far as the fame.
I also remember he was not Superman-not indestructable, not beyond having the human problems physical and mental. I think some do look at him and do the opposite-because they do not understand the situtations which were unique to the life of Elvis-just as each persons life is unique to them.
Pointing our flaws without acknowledging human weakness-is IMO saying he was Superman to some of us and he let us down-so now we are tougher on him than a regular guy.
Diane
07-15-2008, 05:35 PM
That's about it Ken. Some held him up to a god-like status then couldn't handle it when they found out he was just like everyone else and now go overboard in the other direction.
Diane
utmom2008
07-15-2008, 06:05 PM
I think one reason that Charro bombed is because by the time it was made no one had any respect for Elvis as an actor in a decent movie. Sad, but true......:sad::blush:
Let's see ...
The silly plot; generally poor acting by all concerned; no music (which was generally expected of an Elvis film); it was released after years of pathetic movies from Elvis - his acting career was dead and buried when it came out.
Charro is a B-grade equivalent of the Sergio Leone westerns, and simply can't compare with the genre it was trying to exploit. Elvis was too good-looking and not "rough enough" for the role.
Where did Getlo 'run Elvis down'?
This is pretty funny.:lol: I think he and I basically said the same thing...:lol:....and he was bar-b-que'd.:lmfao::lmfao::lmfao:
utmom2008
07-15-2008, 06:08 PM
Thank you, TT. I didn't run Elvis down at all. He was unsuited to the role, but that was hardly his fault.
"Elvis was too good-looking for the role"....I bet alot of guys on here would LOVE to be hit with that insult.:lmfao::lmfao:
utmom2008
07-15-2008, 06:23 PM
On the whole the real cowboys were an ugly bunch.The women of the era were also rather homely.
Let's just say that when you look up the stories on the real Butch Cassidy, Sundance Kid and Etta Place they didn't exactly look like Paul Newman, Robert Redford or Katherine Ross.;);)
Diane
07-15-2008, 07:00 PM
No they surely weren't good looking when you look at old western pictures but Hollywood is the maker of fantasy, very seldom reality.
Diane
Most of the handsome men of the era were confined to the eastern part of the country.The so called "fancy boys".On the whole the real cowboys were an ugly bunch.The women of the era were also rather homely.Luckily they overcame their ghastly physical appearances and managed to breed with each other.It does get awfully lonely on them long cattle drives.Plus after spending so much time on the trail with other cowboys even the ugliest women back then probably looked mighty fine.
Hence the newer cattle drive movies such as "Brokeback Mountain";):)
utmom2008
07-15-2008, 07:28 PM
Hence the newer cattle drive movies such as "Brokeback Mountain";):)
:lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao: :lmfao:
Diane
07-15-2008, 07:46 PM
Just finally saw that movie two weeks ago.:lmfao::lmfao::lmfao:
Diane
Just finally saw that movie two weeks ago.:lmfao::lmfao::lmfao:
Diane
I have to admit I just can not bring myself to watch it. My daughters wanted me to see it-but I am just not built that way.;):lol:
Unchained Melody
07-15-2008, 08:16 PM
LOL,
Well, you know, I don't think I hate them. They were part of Elvis' life.
I take strong objection to the fact, that men in their 70's, who should have more maturity, and know better, would run down Lisa and her children, whom one in particular, hasn't even met (by his admission). I take exception to the fact, that he tries to ruin people's good names,
.
Well, had Elvis not given them something to write and talk about then their wouldn't have been a problem.
Unchained Melody
07-15-2008, 08:17 PM
Hi Jess how are you?
Marty and Sonny run lisa down because she ran them down a couple of times first and they don't like her attitude or her foul language when speaking on television.
Exactly. We know Elvis used the worst language in the world but never in front of his fans of in public. Most of the time anyways.
Unchained Melody
07-15-2008, 08:18 PM
Hence the newer cattle drive movies such as "Brokeback Mountain";):)
:lmfao::lmfao:
Merry
07-15-2008, 08:45 PM
Well, had Elvis not given them something to write and talk about then their wouldn't have been a problem.
Hiya,
In the context of the above statement, I'm curious, with regard to your thought process. So, you don't:
Look at hot girls your age and would like to date one, or more? In fact have some thoughts?
You don't have fun with your mates and go out with them?
You don't drink?
You don't smoke?
You don't have a sense of fun, to hang out comfortably with your friends, as a young man?
I for one, hope my son does some of the above, and has fun, so he will be well rounded. I hope that my son has some stories, when old enough, that he would like kept private, because they were from his youth, having fun. I would dislike his friends, if they betrayed his trust. I would think that the above, is pretty normal.
Perhaps you and I, have a different outlook on life. To me, life is for living. You have fun with trusted friends, you laugh as much as you can, and you're the best friend that you can be, while being safe, safe, safe, and sensible.
Unchained Melody
07-15-2008, 09:00 PM
First off, we are discussing Elvis not me mmkayy ;)
And that still don't make the things Elvis was involved in o.k.
utmom2008
07-15-2008, 09:06 PM
Just finally saw that movie two weeks ago.:lmfao::lmfao::lmfao:
Diane
I have to admit I just can not bring myself to watch it. My daughters wanted me to see it-but I am just not built that way.;):lol:
I'll be honest....I loved it, I even have it on DVD. The music and scenery alone are worth it.
Ken...I made my husband go with me to see it in the theater. I think he wanted to put a sack over his head until the lights went down.:lol: As it was...he did hide behind his popcorn bucket! :lmfao: :lmfao:
utmom2008
07-15-2008, 09:16 PM
I take strong objection to the fact, that men in their 70's, who should have more maturity, and know better, would run down Lisa and her children, whom one in particular, hasn't even met (by his admission).
I think I must have missed part of this - they run down Lisa's kids???? What on earth do they say about her kids??? I guess they give little care to the fact that those kids ARE their late friend's grandchildren.:sad::sad:
Merry
07-15-2008, 09:38 PM
First off, we are discussing Elvis not me mmkayy ;)
And that still don't make the things Elvis was involved in o.k.
Have you heard the saying:
"People who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones"?
Merry
07-15-2008, 09:41 PM
I think I must have missed part of this - they run down Lisa's kids???? What on earth do they say about her kids??? I guess they give little care to the fact that those kids ARE their late friend's grandchildren.:sad::sad:
Good old Lacker, yes, he uses any opportunity to say something negative.
Unchained Melody
07-15-2008, 09:45 PM
Good old Lacker, yes, he uses any opportunity to say something negative.
I've never heard him talk bad about Lisa?s children but he seem to have alot of anger towards Priscilla. :lol:
Jumpsuit Junkie
07-16-2008, 02:05 AM
IMO Lisa's dislike for the MM comes from her mother, her belief is that the MM were in part responsible for the death of Elvis. Lisa runs these guys down, the guys run lisa down! In general they all defend themselves because deep down they all know (Including Priscilla) that they could have tried a little harder to save Elvis from himself (exluding Lisa of course).
So if you believe what the do-gooders say, everyone and I mean everyone is to blame for Elvis' demise. (I reserve the right to amend this list as appropriate):-
The Colonel - For being a bad manager
Vernon - for not saying 'NO' enough
Priscilla - for being a bad wife and cheating on Elvis
Sonny West - for being a bad friend and writing a book
Red West - for being a bad friend and writing a book
Dave Hebler - for being a bad friend and writing a book
Charlie Hodge - for being too nice and being an enabler
Joe Esposito - for being a tour manager and writing smarmy books
Marty Lacker - for being an all round scum bag
Lamar Fike - for hoofing up the lighting on tour and being the butt of Elvis' jokes
Ricky Stanley - for being an all round scum bag and being related to Dee Stanley
Billy Stanley - for being an all round scum bag and being related to Dee Stanley
David Stanley - for being an all round scum bag and being related to Dee Stanley
Dr. Nick - All round bad guy with the ability to prescribe pills
Jerry Shilling - for being a yes man and being to close to Priscilla
Billy Smith - for being to nice
Gene Smith - for knowing billy and being related...
Ginger Alden - for being a gold digger and not checking on Elvis 24/7
Linda Tompson - for leaving Elvis when he needed her most
Larry Geller - for talking mumbo jumbo to Elvis
I'm sure there are more but these were just off the top of my head. As you can see we do not add Elvis in this category because it wasn't his fault when all the bad people above are to blame....
IMO Lisa's dislike for the MM comes from her mother, her belief is that the MM were in part responsible for the death of Elvis. Lisa runs these guys down, the guys run lisa down! In general they all defend themselves because deep down they all know (Including Priscilla) that they could have tried a little harder to save Elvis from himself (exluding Lisa of course).
So if you believe what the do-gooders say, everyone and I mean everyone is to blame for Elvis' demise. (I reserve the right to amend this list as appropriate):-
The Colonel - For being a bad manager
Vernon - for not saying 'NO' enough
Priscilla - for being a bad wife and cheating on Elvis
Sonny West - for being a bad friend and writing a book
Red West - for being a bad friend and writing a book
Dave Hebler - for being a bad friend and writing a book
Charlie Hodge - for being too nice and being an enabler
Joe Esposito - for being a tour manager and writing smarmy books
Marty Lacker - for being an all round scum bag
Lamar Fike - for hoofing up the lighting on tour and being the butt of Elvis' jokes
Ricky Stanley - for being an all round scum bag and being related to Dee Stanley
Billy Stanley - for being an all round scum bag and being related to Dee Stanley
David Stanley - for being an all round scum bag and being related to Dee Stanley
Dr. Nick - All round bad guy with the ability to prescribe pills
Jerry Shilling - for being a yes man and being to close to Priscilla
Billy Smith - for being to nice
Gene Smith - for knowing billy and being related...
Ginger Alden - for being a gold digger and not checking on Elvis 24/7
Linda Tompson - for leaving Elvis when he needed her most
Larry Geller - for talking mumbo jumbo to Elvis
I'm sure there are more but these were just off the top of my head. As you can see we do not add Elvis in this category because it wasn't his fault when all the bad people above are to blame....
This is the mindset of many fans unfortunately.You would think that after so many years that a dose of reality would set in.Im not saying those you mentioned were angels by any means of course.I just get tired of Elvis being portrayed as the poor innocent victim who would still be here if it werent for those around him.
Merry
07-16-2008, 04:11 AM
So if you believe what the do-gooders say,
....
To whom are you referring to?
Jumpsuit Junkie
07-16-2008, 04:17 AM
This is the mindset of many fans unfortunately.You would think that after so many years that a dose of reality would set in.Im not saying those you mentioned were angels by any means of course.I just get tired of Elvis being portrayed as the poor innocent victim who would still be here if it werent for those around him.
Hi Jak, I agree, what I wanted to illustrate was the fact over the years I have seen many posters on here and other boards say the same thing over and over again about those people who surrounded Elvis! Perhaps I should create a list of those who were the good guys around Elvis. Perhaps it would look a little like this:-
Glady's - Such a great mother
Wanda June Hill - speaks nicely about Elvis
JD Sumner - he had a nice voice and spoke kindly of Elvis
Cathy Westmorland - she said Elvis had bone cancer so she was sticking up for Elvis
Ann Margret - she did the jiggy with Elvis and never spilt the beans
Noticed anything?
Jumpsuit Junkie
07-16-2008, 04:18 AM
To whom are you referring to?
Hi Jess, I'm referring to the 'Do-Gooders'
Jumpsuit Junkie
07-16-2008, 04:59 AM
"People who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones"?
Indeed, very careless, shards of glass everywhere :lmfao:
Hi Jess, just my take here and perhaps you will comment on it....
The MM have for years been cornered by certain elements of the Elvis' fan base for years, they have been accused of many acts, some unsubstantiated as of yet. By that I mean there hasn't been police involvement. They have been accused indirectly of causing the death of their friend Elvis and then it is the turn of the Colonel...
Now the Colonel is dead and can't comment (not that he would have IMO). The MM on the other hand have been forced into a corner to defend themselves. You may say that a good friend wouldn't have betrayed Elvis' trust, Looking from their point of view they are being made into scapegoats and rightly or wrongly are trying to put their point of view across! I agree all the stories don't add up and many books see different stories from different angles (some embellish to sell more book of course).
The point is that many stories although viewed and retold differently have a basis in fact, so Elvis isn't the puritan that some make him out to be. He certainly isn't as bad as some make out either.
Elvis had these guys around him for many years, after his death these guys have been made in to villains, some maybe justified others not. Would you let people view you as a low life when the same stories of Elvis have been exaggerated have been exaggerated about them?
Hi Jak, I agree, what I wanted to illustrate was the fact over the years I have seen many posters on here and other boards say the same thing over and over again about those people who surrounded Elvis! Perhaps I should create a list of those who were the good guys around Elvis. Perhaps it would look a little like this:-
Glady's - Such a great mother
Wanda June Hill - speaks nicely about Elvis
JD Sumner - he had a nice voice and spoke kindly of Elvis
Cathy Westmorland - she said Elvis had bone cancer so she was sticking up for Elvis
Ann Margret - she did the jiggy with Elvis and never spilt the beans
Noticed anything?
That's a short list isnt it?I guess Elvis never stood a chance with so many enemies around him.If people could seperate themselves from their emotions when examining his life they would be able to see things as they were.
Merry
07-16-2008, 07:00 AM
Indeed, very careless, shards of glass everywhere :lmfao:
Hi Jess, just my take here and perhaps you will comment on it....
The MM have for years been cornered by certain elements of the Elvis' fan base for years, they have been accused of many acts, some unsubstantiated as of yet. By that I mean there hasn't been police involvement. They have been accused indirectly of causing the death of their friend Elvis and then it is the turn of the Colonel...
Now the Colonel is dead and can't comment (not that he would have IMO). The MM on the other hand have been forced into a corner to defend themselves. You may say that a good friend wouldn't have betrayed Elvis' trust, Looking from their point of view they are being made into scapegoats and rightly or wrongly are trying to put their point of view across! I agree all the stories don't add up and many books see different stories from different angles (some embellish to sell more book of course).
The point is that many stories although viewed and retold differently have a basis in fact, so Elvis isn't the puritan that some make him out to be. He certainly isn't as bad as some make out either.
Elvis had these guys around him for many years, after his death these guys have been made in to villains, some maybe justified others not. Would you let people view you as a low life when the same stories of Elvis have been exaggerated have been exaggerated about them?
Hi Matt,
Your digs didn't go over my head, in your earlier post, I just ignored them.
You are speculating, with regard to your last sentence. I would like to point out, from one I understand, that some of you vehmently defend the MM, from what you have read, (some are enamoured after interviewing one) as some of us, defend Elvis from what we sense, or some have been told first hand, by people with a very high Emotional IQ, or the older members feel, or know, from their experiences. I have been told some information first hand (I hate saying that I had a source over again, a lot of Elvis' friends are available to the fans, they are good people).
Elvis wasn't a puritan, he was a man who did what he did, in the circumstances given, I feel he handled all extremely well, from what I know, he gave more than anyone else would, and I'm proud of him. He, himself, hated being placed in the light you talk about. I can understand that. I've always said, that I accept him for how he was. A good man, a very good man, a rare man. I just know, from what has been shared with me, that what is said, isn't told as a three dimensional story, specific with details, sharing the story in context, but the story re-told with a hook, to sell a book. When I heard the story about the "Cough Mixture Incident", I was so upset, that those men said what they said. I was really angry, I'd only been on my first board a few weeks, perhaps a bit more. In my opinion, some of these "guys" aren't the deepest thinkers in the world, with the highest Emotional IQ's. They are opposite to Elvis and closed to the world around them.
In my case, I have information that paints them in a worse light, than what I believe is (I haven't been on many boards, so this is speculation on my part) generally known on the boards, and it isn't up to me to share it. Nothing has been exaggerated that I'm aware of, but a lot has been withheld. I have been told specific stories, that have been backed up with horrible attitude, in this present day and time, so it doesn't surprise me, nor have I felt any need to doubt what I was told, as it rang true. Furthermore, I was shocked at what I was told, and felt horrible for the source, for what was experienced.
I haven't shared what I've been told, as I don't have permission to do so.
I'm not speculating. You know a lot of the books written about Elvis, that information came from another book, they aren't from original sources, researched freshly.
SleepyJack
07-16-2008, 07:34 AM
I think that sometimes people forget that all the people involved in the whole thing were just human......and they all found themselves in a very unique and very strange situation living and working with someone with the level of fame and adulation that surrounded Elvis. Even the most loyal and well-intentioned of people on here will have,at some point,made mistakes with relatives and close friends that they would gladly take back if they had the opportunity. Blame is a pretty useless game to play,especially after all these years,even though we all,myself included,are guilty of it from time to time.The people involved did what they did at the time,either for their own reasons,or from being unable to find a good reason not to.
Diane
07-16-2008, 08:18 AM
In just about any situation there is blame on both sides and it leans a little heavier on one than the other.
Diane
Indeed, very careless, shards of glass everywhere :lmfao:
Hi Jess, just my take here and perhaps you will comment on it....
The MM have for years been cornered by certain elements of the Elvis' fan base for years, they have been accused of many acts, some unsubstantiated as of yet. By that I mean there hasn't been police involvement. They have been accused indirectly of causing the death of their friend Elvis and then it is the turn of the Colonel...
Now the Colonel is dead and can't comment (not that he would have IMO). The MM on the other hand have been forced into a corner to defend themselves. You may say that a good friend wouldn't have betrayed Elvis' trust, Looking from their point of view they are being made into scapegoats and rightly or wrongly are trying to put their point of view across! I agree all the stories don't add up and many books see different stories from different angles (some embellish to sell more book of course).
The point is that many stories although viewed and retold differently have a basis in fact, so Elvis isn't the puritan that some make him out to be. He certainly isn't as bad as some make out either.
Elvis had these guys around him for many years, after his death these guys have been made in to villains, some maybe justified others not. Would you let people view you as a low life when the same stories of Elvis have been exaggerated have been exaggerated about them?
This is pretty much how I look at it in general.
I will add that (as you all know) I have many times made the point that each person travels their own road-they all started at different points, some start their travels on the new highways, others start out on dirt roads, some have great new vehicles to drive and others old junkers-some have many breakdowns on the way and others have one long smooth ride.
So IMO the MM are no different than us or Elvis-they had a path they traveled before they met Elvis which shaped them mentally-they have their own upbringing and childhoods which had the "cause and affect" I have spoke of. The way in which they reacted - the choices they made were affected by their own personal road (and all that entails from birth to adulthood) I am not making excuses for them nor for Elvis-but they each had their own roads which affected future travel.
Wendy56
07-17-2008, 04:38 PM
I can't even listen or read these words: "Col. Parker"... Not at all. :mad:
franny
07-17-2008, 04:51 PM
This is pretty much how I look at it in general.
I will add that (as you all know) I have many times made the point that each person travels their own road-they all started at different points, some start their travels on the new highways, others start out on dirt roads, some have great new vehicles to drive and others old junkers-some have many breakdowns on the way and others have one long smooth ride.
So IMO the MM are no different than us or Elvis-they had a path they traveled before they met Elvis which shaped them mentally-they have their own upbringing and childhoods which had the "cause and affect" I have spoke of. The way in which they reacted - the choices they made were affected by their own personal road (and all that entails from birth to adulthood) I am not making excuses for them nor for Elvis-but they each had their own roads which affected future travel.
I agree with you KPM. I think upbringing and ones' childhood has a great deal with how someone turns out...
I was curious as to why Elvis just didn't fire the Colonel...You always hear about today's stars firing their manager, was it really so hard for Elvis to do?
franny
presley31
07-17-2008, 04:53 PM
I agree with you KPM. I think upbringing and ones' childhood has a great deal with how someone turns out...
I was curious as to why Elvis just didn't fire the Colonel...You always hear about today's stars firing their manager, was it really so hard for Elvis to do?
franny
Just my opinion franny but l feel there is more to the story about the col and elvis than we know about cause elvis didn't stand up to the col very often:hmm:
I feel that Elvis was 19 when he met the Col. and Parker was a top country manager who knew the business. Elvis put his career into his hands and it worked for the first 7-8 years. But by the time music began to change and Elvis needed to start making changes he felt superdependant on Parkers ability to keep the deals coming and to protect him in the business end of the entertainment world.
But from 62 on I just feel Parker was no longer on top of his game-but that feeling of dependency which Parker had worked to instill in Elvis IMO was pretty much set. The only time Elvis really fired him, Parker sent him a final bill which he knew Elvis and Vernon would not be able to figure out-(nor pay quickly) and that stopped the revolt. Parker knew how to read people and use what he learned to his advantage. IMO
Jumpsuit Junkie
07-18-2008, 12:59 AM
I don't think that Parker didn't like Elvis, he was just a little unable to really connect to Elvis in truly personal way. So Elvis was about a product rather that a human being!
Diane
07-18-2008, 08:50 AM
I agree with that Matt. Their personalities just didn't mesh and the Colonel was always looking out for the buck anyway.
Diane
Donut
07-18-2008, 01:52 PM
I donīt have anything to say about this but I just found a new smilie and wanted to use it here.
:greedy: :greedy: :greedy: :greedy: :greedy:
utmom2008
07-18-2008, 01:59 PM
I donīt have anything to say about this but I just found a new smilie and wanted to use it here.
:greedy: :greedy: :greedy: :greedy: :greedy:
It's a good one too Donut...and very fitting for a thread about Colonel Parker.(y)(y)
Diane
07-18-2008, 02:27 PM
Perfect Donut! As Rosanne said....fits the Colonel to a "T".(y):D
Diane
Unchained Melody
07-18-2008, 02:43 PM
This is the mindset of many fans unfortunately.You would think that after so many years that a dose of reality would set in.Im not saying those you mentioned were angels by any means of course.I just get tired of Elvis being portrayed as the poor innocent victim who would still be here if it werent for those around him.
Agreed Jak. Fans find it so easy to point the blame at the people around Elvis than him himself. It explains why he fired them in the the end, he got tired of listening to them say how he should do this and not take this or that etc. Elvis would be here had he realized he had a problem and actually wanted to help himself. He did neither!
presley31
07-18-2008, 03:21 PM
I donīt have anything to say about this but I just found a new smilie and wanted to use it here.
:greedy: :greedy: :greedy: :greedy: :greedy:
Nice one donut and what a better thread to try out your new smilie (y)
Unchained Melody
07-18-2008, 04:16 PM
The smilie's show what Parker was all about.
Getlo
07-18-2008, 06:55 PM
I don't think that Parker didn't like Elvis, he was just a little unable to really connect to Elvis in truly personal way. So Elvis was about a product rather that a human being!
No. Look at the notes between them. Hear Elvis say "I love him very much" on the Closing Night (February 1970) CD. Look at the letter he wrote Elvis after Aloha.
Yes, Elvis was a product. And when Elvis was screwing up, especially towards the end, The Colonel was right to come down on Elvis hard. Elvis was letting the side down, and not fulfiling his obligations (Parker's rip-offs notwithstanding here).
As much as a bastard as The Colonel was at times, I really don't believe he would have stayed with Elvis all those years if he didn't love the man as a human being, and as his friend, and almost as a son.
Parker was right to say "This changes nothing" when Elvis died. Callous as it may have been, this was a statement from a businessman. And that's exactly what The Colonel was at his core.
Unchained Melody
07-18-2008, 09:22 PM
No. Look at the notes between them. Hear Elvis say "I love him very much" on the Closing Night (February 1970) CD. Look at the letter he wrote Elvis after Aloha.
Yes, Elvis was a product. And when Elvis was screwing up, especially towards the end, The Colonel was right to come down on Elvis hard. Elvis was letting the side down, and not fulfiling his obligations (Parker's rip-offs notwithstanding here).
As much as a bastard as The Colonel was at times, I really don't believe he would have stayed with Elvis all those years if he didn't love the man as a human being, and as his friend, and almost as a son.
Parker was right to say "This changes nothing" when Elvis died. Callous as it may have been, this was a statement from a businessman. And that's exactly what The Colonel was at his core.
I think the same way on this issue. Well put Getlo.(y)
Jumpsuit Junkie
07-18-2008, 11:20 PM
No. Look at the notes between them. Hear Elvis say "I love him very much" on the Closing Night (February 1970) CD. Look at the letter he wrote Elvis after Aloha.
Yes, Elvis was a product. And when Elvis was screwing up, especially towards the end, The Colonel was right to come down on Elvis hard. Elvis was letting the side down, and not fulfiling his obligations (Parker's rip-offs notwithstanding here).
As much as a bastard as The Colonel was at times, I really don't believe he would have stayed with Elvis all those years if he didn't love the man as a human being, and as his friend, and almost as a son.
Parker was right to say "This changes nothing" when Elvis died. Callous as it may have been, this was a statement from a businessman. And that's exactly what The Colonel was at his core.
Love doesn't mean you can connect to someone on their level, I love my mum but we worlds apart on many levels. IMO Parker understood Taking Care of Business but he didn't understand (a) Elvis' creative needs and (b) how to deal with Elvis when he went off the tracks.
Unchained Melody
07-18-2008, 11:23 PM
Had Colonel known how to keep Elvis interested he would've made deals for a good movie, let Elvis tour the globe, or give him any sort of challenge form 73 onwards.
Love doesn't mean you can connect to someone on their level, I love my mum but we worlds apart on many levels. IMO [B]Parker understood Taking Care of Business but he didn't understand (a) Elvis' creative needs and (b) how to deal with Elvis when he went off the tracks.
Exactly right.
Instead of making it easy to get new creative input into Elvis's career through business deals-Parker worked at keeping those possibilites to a minimum. If he felt this was protecting Elvis-he was 100% wrong IMO
It did nothing but show Elvis every time he wanted to do something-there would be some sort of tension and a level of disagreement with Parker.
Straight acting jobs-Parker against them. Songs from outside Elvis and the Col. publishing companys-Parkers was a major roadblock. When a great recording session happened in 67 with Jerry Reed involved-a major argument breaks out as the squeeze was tried on Reed for a piece of his song. The session was ruined on a creative level because of the bad taste the blow-up left in everyones mouth.
68 Special would have been 20 Christmas songs if Steve Bender had not been a strong force who helped Elvis see what the special could be as opposed to what Parker wanted. Parker once again added the tension by not immediatly going along with the new plan-no new song for the end. But the sense Bender made to Elvis gave him the confidence to say,
"No Col. this is what I want to do"
Parker could not have liked ELvis listening to someone else-because that is a threat to Parkers power.
People like Bender are the ones Parker wanted to keep Elvis from being involved with. IMO
What if Bender had suggested to Elvis
"listen Parker is behind the times in his managing of your career. You are being wasted, you need a total new direction in your management to allow creative people -at whatever cost to interact with you"
That IMO is why Parker did not want creative, intelligent people too close to Elvis.
Elvis was his own man-but he did need to be spurred, to gain confidence in new directions, new creative efforts-Parker did not work to nurture that idea- he hindered that idea.IMO
Miss Clawdy
07-19-2008, 05:41 PM
Exactly right.
Instead of making it easy to get new creative input into Elvis's career through business deals-Parker worked at keeping those possibilites to a minimum. If he felt this was protecting Elvis-he was 100% wrong IMO
It did nothing but show Elvis every time he wanted to do something-there would be some sort of tension and a level of disagreement with Parker.
Straight acting jobs-Parker against them. Songs from outside Elvis and the Col. publishing companys-Parkers was a major roadblock. When a great recording session happened in 67 with Jerry Reed involved-a major argument breaks out as the squeeze was tried on Reed for a piece of his song. The session was ruined on a creative level because of the bad taste the blow-up left in everyones mouth.
68 Special would have been 20 Christmas songs if Steve Bender had not been a strong force who helped Elvis see what the special could be as opposed to what Parker wanted. Parker once again added the tension by not immediatly going along with the new plan-no new song for the end. But the sense Bender made to Elvis gave him the confidence to say,
"No Col. this is what I want to do"
Parker could not have liked ELvis listening to someone else-because that is a threat to Parkers power.
People like Bender are the ones Parker wanted to keep Elvis from being involved with. IMO
What if Bender had suggested to Elvis
"listen Parker is behind the times in his managing of your career. You are being wasted, you need a total new direction in your management to allow creative people -at whatever cost to interact with you"
That IMO is why Parker did not want creative, intelligent people too close to Elvis.
Elvis was his own man-but he did need to be spurred, to gain confidence in new directions, new creative efforts-Parker did not work to nurture that idea- he hindered that idea.IMO
That's what I am thinking as well. Here's a short interview with Ed Bonja
talking about Parker. Although Bonja speaks pro-Parker, I think we can
perfectly see how manipulating Parker was.
t2QUE8ligOg
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.