PDA

View Full Version : Colonel Parker Answers Criticism About Elvis



presley31
12-12-2008, 07:35 PM
Colonel Parker is the devil to many Elvis Presley fans. They hurl a litany of accusations at Presley’s former manager—he took too much of Elvis’s money, he mismanaged Elvis’s movie career, he pressured Elvis to work when he was in poor health, he even tried to capitalize on Elvis’s name after he died.

To what extent Parker was guilty of such sins against Elvis, I’m not qualified to say. I do know that while researching for my book, Elvis’57: The Final Fifties Tours, I became increasingly impressed with how the Colonel managed Elvis during the 1956-57 period. In fact, in my book I included a chapter entitled, “The Parker Propaganda Machine.” It outlines how Parker promoted, marketed, and booked Elvis in ways that undeniably made possible Presley’s meteoric rise in show business. In their rush to denounce him for failing his client in later years, many Elvis fans forget that there may not have been an Elvis Presley were it not for Tom Parker’s work in those early days.

The purpose here is not to recap the relationship between Parker and Presley. That can be found in detail in two Parker biographies published in recent years—Colonel Tom Parker by James Dickerson (2001) and The Colonel by Alanna Nash (2003).

Instead, the focus here will be on sharing some interesting information about Colonel Parker that appeared in a rather obscure source. I offer this information without prejudice or comment, leaving it to the reader to judge whether it reflects good or ill on Colonel Parker.
Colonel Parker tells how the money was split

The article in question appeared in Variety on January 15, 1964. The piece by Michael Fessier, Jr., carried the headline, “Elvis Hits $20,000,000 Gross Jackpot”. The article’s first three paragraphs broke down the various amounts and sources of Presley’s income since 1956, with the total having reached the $20 million mark by the end of 1963.

The article then turned to a lengthy interview with Colonel Parker, who Fessier called the “commander-in-chief of the Presley forces.” Parker started out by explaining how Elvis’s earnings were divided in those movie-making days. Cash was split down-the-line of 75% to Elvis, 25% to the Colonel, with the William Morris Agency taking 10% off of the top of film revenues. According to the Colonel, “We make no picture deals without the great potentate—Abe Lastfogel.” (Lastfogel was the long-time president of the Morris agency.)

Parker admitted he was a bit troubled by the public perception that he was profiting too much from Presley’s work. He claimed that at least 50% of his share went right back into the business of promoting Elvis—“office expenses, advertising and exploitation, etc.” Elvis’s cut, said Parker, “goes straight to the Memphis accountants.”

”Look—you got a product, you sell it.”

The Colonel just shrugged at the perception around Hollywood that Elvis was falling off at the box office due to over exposure. “Look—you got a product, you sell it,” explained Parker. “As long as the studios come up with the loot we’ll make the deal. Those guys complaining—some of them are not working too good. Me—I’m happy being able to buy the groceries.”

As for the reports of declining returns on Elvis’s movies, Parker didn’t believe them. “They keep asking us to do more,” he said. “Somebody must be making a buck. A producer was complaining that an Elvis picture of his didn’t do so well. All I can say is that he must like losing money. Now he’s after us for two more.”

The Colonel went on to tell a story about a producer who wanted to trim down Elvis’s film fee. Less cash to Elvis, claimed the producer, would allow the use of a “great script” to get Presley’s film career back on the right track. “I told him that if we’re doing so badly maybe next year he wouldn’t want us at all,” said the Colonel, “and we better get all we can while we can—and I hiked the price.

“Another guy says he has a script which would cinch an Oscar for Elvis and wouldn’t we do it for less money. I told him pay us our regular fee and if Elvis gets the Oscar we’ll give him his money back. We never saw him again.

No Oscar for Elvis, but lots of money

“So maybe we never win an Oscar—but we’re going to win a few boxoffice awards. Check the list of the 10 top boxoffice stars—Elvis is right there. And here’s a guy who carries his pictures by himself—the rest of the guys on the list have three or four stars to back them up.”

Fessier pointed out that the Presley-Parker partnership was one of the few in Hollywood that confined its demands to money. The writer explained, “Once a deal is made, the studio takes complete control of a film, the Presley camp having no say—so on cast, script or production costs.”

Colonel Parker confirmed that Elvis had no creative say in his films. “We don’t have approval on scripts—only money. Anyway, what’s Elvis need? A couple of songs, a little story and some nice people with him.

“We start telling people what to do and they blame us if the picture doesn’t go. As it is, we both take bows and if it doesn’t hit maybe they get more blame that us. Anyway, what do I know about production?—nothing.”

According to Parker, production costs for the average Presley film ran between $1.5 and $2 million, “and if the studio lets it—maybe a little more.”

Elvis could always go back on the road

The Colonel didn’t seem too concerned that Elvis’s film popularity would dry up someday. Presley had other ways of making money that they could fall back on. “For one,” Parker said, “we can do some of the personal appearances we haven’t been able to. Anytime we want—$75-100,000 a week.”

In the meantime, Colonel Parker had nixed all offers for Elvis to appear on stage, as he had for Presley to appear on TV. One of the offers he turned down was for Elvis to appear on the small screen for $150,000. Presley’s schedule didn’t allow it anyway, according to Parker.

Over the next four years, Elvis’s movie career would indeed play out. Only then did the Presley-Parker partnership make a triumphant return to television and, soon after that, to the concert stage. But in 1964 both men seemed content with the steady and dependable flow of money provided them by the Hollywood studios. — Alan Hanson (May 2008)

source:http://www.elvis-history-blog.com/colonel-parker.html

epmoodyblue
12-12-2008, 07:40 PM
course he was devil to many most of Elvis fans:lmfao:.....:hmm:elvis could of kicked his fat butt a long time ago..he never had the guts to do it..i never liked colonel porker(n):lol::lol::lol:..that fat good for nothing addicted gambler:lol:

Diane
12-12-2008, 07:41 PM
That old fuddy duddy never knew what Elvis needed at all! The man was completely insensitive.(n)(n)(n)

Diane

nyc
12-12-2008, 07:41 PM
Interesting article, but I don't think it makes Parker look very good.


Colonel Parker confirmed that Elvis had no creative say in his films. “We don’t have approval on scripts—only money. Anyway, what’s Elvis need? A couple of songs, a little story and some nice people with him.

I think it supports the theory that Elvis and the Colonel should have gone their separate ways in 1960, at the latest.

dstrattenfan
12-13-2008, 12:48 AM
I watched the last concert special on YT and it shows all the fans getting to there sets and all that, then u constantly hear over the PA system "Elvis Super souvenir stand" I mean just peddling this stuff. Of course I don't expect much else from an old carney like Parker but I just wonder how Elvis felt. I don't know but for some reason it really bothered me

I know that it was Marty Lacker that said Elvis was mad about all the Vegas shows and said "that old S.O.B will have me playing Vegas forever to pay his gambling debuts" Marty also said he sat and watch Parker lose a million and a quarter one night at a roulette table. And when Marty said well u must be rich parker said "It all works out in the end." Well DUH it does when ur ripping money off of ur meal ticket!:angry:(n)

ricardo b. prospero
12-13-2008, 01:19 AM
Whether we like it or not Col. Tom Parker is very much part of the Elvis legend and whatever role he had played in Elvis life and career is now history. I believe it is all part of Elvis destiny and no one can do anything about it, although I personally don't like the man.

Albert
12-13-2008, 06:21 AM
On the business side Parker was a genius and pathed the way for all future managers. On the artistic and human side, well, we all agree on it that that was his weak side.

SleepyJack
12-13-2008, 12:08 PM
"There may not have been an Elvis Presley but for Tom Parkers work"......That`s a joke, there would always have been an Elvis Presley,with or without Parker....quite possibly an Elvis Presley that would have had a more critically-acclaimed career,made fewer mistakes,and was free to follow the road of his career as he pleased.....I make no apology for not liking Colonel Parker...and I doubt if I ever will. In my happy little imaginings there is a place where Parker doesn`t show up,Elvis stays with Sam Philips at Sun for a much longer period and gains great insights into music from one of the great pioneers of Rock`n`Roll, finds the confidence to write and record his own songs, doesn`t sing to a dog...ever, would laugh you out of it if you suggested "Old MacDonald"........ you get the idea..

Diane
12-13-2008, 12:31 PM
I get the idea and am in complete agreement.(y)(y)(y)

Maybe the Colonel helped to jump start Elvis' career sooner than if he had had another agent but with someone else he would still have been as big as he was and probably would have had more chances to pursue his career the way he wanted it to go and have been happier and much more fulfilled.

Diane

Merry
12-13-2008, 04:53 PM
I was protective too, until I heard that the Colonel was "A Good Old Boy".

Playing "Devil's Advocate" here, Sonny said that there are a lot of misconceptions about The Colonel? Sadly, Marty Lacker has fuelled a lot of them.