PDA

View Full Version : Cheap Shots on Elvis



Raised on Rock
05-19-2009, 06:08 AM
Got an internet mag and need some more hits? are you an aspiring music critic in need of some public reaction?

Well just throw away some cheap shots to Mr. Presley and you sure get it! (n)

http://www.pastemagazine.com/blogs/lists/2009/03/ten-reasons-why-elvis-is-overrated.html

Anyhow, this article so called about Elvis being "so" overrated, just proves, in the very first lines, how Elvis "Music Making" remains so underrated or simply unknown to main audiences.

Dino78
05-19-2009, 08:02 AM
Well, that's a kind of a typical "I want to put him down" article, isn't it?
Of course can you blame Elvis for some of his movies but what about other vehicle movies? Not every Sinatra, Martin or Crosby movie was an academy award winner!!!
Sure The Beatles had more No. 1's than Elvis but without HIM no Beatles would ever appeared.
The opinion about his Gospel music or his fashion style is redicolous too. It's not objective because the deciding point for liking or disliking is purely subjective - the personal taste. Thepoints about Vegas (I hope the writer ever heard of the Rat Pack) or the impersonators (maybe I'm mistaken but I never heard that Elvis brought some of them - or them all - up by his own/personally).
...
The problem is, that in every point you can find a piece of truth but he wanted it in a way to put him down. Maybe he got his five minutes of fame.

Angeline69
05-19-2009, 06:17 PM
I've found this really disgusting(n)(n)(n)

Raised on Rock
05-19-2009, 06:34 PM
...
The problem is, that in every point you can find a piece of truth but he wanted it in a way to put him down. Maybe he got his five minutes of fame.

A piece of truth all twisted up in a ridiculous way just to put him down with no other propose than what? to show all over that you are witty music critic that is telling what nobody dares to say? give me a F"#$ break!

No, I do not expect Elvis always receiving praise and flowers every time they write an article about him in a mag, I do expect serious criticism biased on facts and aiming to understand from a different perspective the huge phenomena that he represents. This article is not criticism, those are cheap shots based on twisted facts just to get a reaction.

LtCarman
05-19-2009, 08:27 PM
This should be taken with a grain of salt. There are a number of inaccuracies and 99.9% of it is opinion.

laura17
05-19-2009, 09:42 PM
everyone is always better than elvis. if hes not the gold standard,why do they bring him up?

debtdbruno
05-19-2009, 09:52 PM
everyone is always better than elvis. if hes not the gold standard,why do they bring him up?

Here, here, very well put(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)(y)

epmoodyblue
05-19-2009, 11:10 PM
:blink:flack you to the dope head who wrote the articlehttp://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/selenauno/salute.gif

Merry
05-19-2009, 11:15 PM
:blink:flack you to the dope head who wrote the articlehttp://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e160/selenauno/salute.gif



LOL, :lmfao::lmfao::lmfao::lmfao:

We just send him this nice message:

http://alllayedout.com/Comments/Comebacks/graphics/are_you_100_percent_jealous.gif

Getlo
05-20-2009, 01:04 AM
Here we go again ... :rolleyes:

While the article may, indeed, have some "cheap" shots, it's called having an opinion.

Why should it be a crime not to like Elvis? Who gives a crap what some blogger thinks here anyway?

Would you be upset if one of your favourite movies wasn't on the other list featured on the site, the 17 Best Romantic Movies Of This Decade? No, so why care what some insignificant blogger thinks?

Lighten up.

Oh, and putting up the link to the article here means it's going to get seen by many in the Elvis world ... giving the blokes thousands more hits than they would have gotten normally. Nice work! ;)

LtCarman
05-20-2009, 01:12 AM
Here we go again ... :rolleyes:

While the article may, indeed, have some "cheap" shots, it's called having an opinion.

Why should it be a crime not to like Elvis? Who gives a crap what some blogger thinks here anyway?

Would you be upset if one of your favourite movies wasn't on the other list featured on the site, the 17 Best Romantic Movies Of This Decade? No, so why care what some insignificant blogger thinks?

Lighten up.

No one said it was a crime to not like Elvis, nor did anyone say that it was not okay.

Also, this is called having a discussion. No one is going crazy about it.

And us? Lighten up? :lmfao:

Getlo
05-20-2009, 01:30 AM
No one said it was a crime to not like Elvis, nor did anyone say that it was not okay.

Really?

Comments such as "disgusting" and "jealous" would beg to differ.

And as I said, posting the link only gives the authors more publicity and hits.

SeeSeeRider777
05-20-2009, 03:19 AM
Let everyone have their opinion. All that matters is that I know Elvis is King. I really dont care what other people think.

Raised on Rock
05-20-2009, 04:37 AM
Here we go again ... :rolleyes:

While the article may, indeed, have some "cheap" shots, it's called having an opinion.

It is not called an opinion to deliberately twist facts in order to put someone down.


Why should it be a crime not to like Elvis? No, I do not expect Elvis always receiving praise and flowers every time they write an article about him in a mag, I do expect serious criticism biased on true facts and aiming to understand from a different perspective (other than the fan one) the huge phenomena that he represents.


gives a crap what some blogger thinks here anyway? The readers of that blog maybe?


Lighten up. Good boy!


...and putting up the link to the article here means it's going to get seen by many in the Elvis world ... giving the blokes thousands more hits than they would have gotten normally. Nice work! ;) Well thats about individual choice, never said go getlo post.

In other words, the aim of this post, as it is the aim of this forum, is to discuss what's going on here and there related to Elvis, both trascendental issues or just: hey I got an Elvis tatoo on my left ball, you are the one who's giving it more importance to this issue and thread, but oh well, it might deserve it, in that case, thank you, as always, for your enlightened guidance.

Brian
05-20-2009, 05:25 AM
I find it fascinating that Elvis fans will put down people and other artists but other people aren't allowed to put down Elvis.

Having said this I don't think these guys made a very good argument as to why Elvis is overrated I've been to Beatle message boards where they make a better case for why Elvis was overrated than the people here do

I flat out disagree with them saying the Beatles had a bigger influence on popular music than Elvis I could tell by reading that that these bloggers are young Elvis has definately influenced and inspired more people than the Beatles did.

I also don't see why a bunch of people going to Graceland year after year is a good argument for Elvis being overrated either.

Also there point about Elvis music still being on the charts and the Elvis impersonators is more of an example of how Elvis is overrated rather than why.
that is if you think Elvis is overrated in the first place

rickb
05-20-2009, 05:34 AM
what a load of rubbish

Raised on Rock
05-20-2009, 06:38 PM
I find it fascinating that Elvis fans will put down people and other artists but other people aren't allowed to put down Elvis.


Elvis fans? kind of very generalizing way to put it don't you think?

I actually do not oppose (and I don't think I speak just by my self here) at all to any article that aims to totally disarm Elvis the icon, and to any degree of serious criticism, either of Elvis as an artist or as a social phenomena, in order to understand what's going on there. And that is the big difference between constructive criticism and as Rick put it, just a load of rubbish.

Anyway, yes, this is just a blogger and who may care of that, as Mr. Lighten up Getlo put it. But the point here is how repeatedly the vision of Elvis gets totally polarized by the media, either he is fat *** rubbish, or Jesus Memphis Incarnated Christ, but it is hard to find (apart from Elvis specialized books, or sites like elvis australia, I'm talking about general media) decent articles and reviews about Elvis, and much more hard to find: serious criticism about the icon and the musician.

Although following up your observation, it is also to notice, that contrary to other musicians fans, call it Beatles fans or who ever, tend to be much more fans of music in general terms, while it is a repeated tendency the "I only lisent to Elvis Presley music" among Presley fans (not saying all fans are like that). Wonder if that had to do with the lack of any degree of serious criticism on the Presley field and the both underrated and overrated different aspects of him.

Brian
05-20-2009, 07:13 PM
Elvis fans? kind of very generalizing way to put it don't you think?

I actually do not oppose (and I don't think I speak just by my self here) at all to any article that aims to totally disarm Elvis the icon, and to any degree of serious criticism, either of Elvis as an artist or as a social phenomena, in order to understand what's going on there. And that is the big difference between constructive criticism and as Rick put it, just a load of rubbish.



I don't think so

For example when someone mentions a talented artist like say the Rolling Stones on an Elvis board and they mention their accomplishments Elvis fans will put down and attack the Rolling Stones even though no one was attacking or belittling Elvis and then when someone doesn't like Elvis his fans atleast on the internet will get mad just like people have with this blogger.
Not all internet Elvis fans do this but I'd say the majority do.

As I have said I don't think the guy made a very good argument for why Elvis is overrated I could do a better job.

KPM
05-20-2009, 07:21 PM
I find it fascinating that Elvis fans will put down people and other artists but other people aren't allowed to put down Elvis.Having said this I don't think these guys made a very good argument as to why Elvis is overrated I've been to Beatle message boards where they make a better case for why Elvis was overrated than the people here do

I flat out disagree with them saying the Beatles had a bigger influence on popular music than Elvis I could tell by reading that that these bloggers are young Elvis has definately influenced and inspired more people than the Beatles did.

I also don't see why a bunch of people going to Graceland year after year is a good argument for Elvis being overrated either.

Also there point about Elvis music still being on the charts and the Elvis impersonators is more of an example of how Elvis is overrated rather than why.
that is if you think Elvis is overrated in the first place
I do not mind someone having a differing opinion on Elvis, the Beatles or anything else. But this list of 10 is misinformed and narrow. IMO The guys who made this list-did not really explore Elvis-they posted their uneducated narrow approach to him.
They did not start out saying IS ELVIS OVERRATED-? Not really.
Their intent (as I read it) was just to say "ELVIS IS OVERRATED" They then slammed him for all they perceived to be reasons. (narrowly and with little knowledge of the time, culture and situations of the early 50s)
As for Beatle fans and forums-Beatle fans are generally very respectful of Elvis and give him his due-but they do have very hard core fans who trash Elvis and those hardcore Beatle fans are in the same category as the guys who threw together this list.
I really have thought for years that a subtle rewritting of history in rock has occured by younger writers and music people-putting the beginning of rock with the British invasion and not in the early 50s where it actually started as rock.

Brian
05-20-2009, 07:53 PM
.
They did not start out saying IS ELVIS OVERRATED-? Not really.
Their intent (as I read it) was just to say "ELVIS IS OVERRATED" They then slammed him for all they perceived to be reasons. (narrowly and with little knowledge of the time, culture and situations of the early 50s)
As for Beatle fans and forums-Beatle fans are generally very respectful of Elvis and give him his due-but they do have very hard core fans who trash Elvis and those hardcore Beatle fans are in the same category as the guys who threw together this list.
I really have thought for years that a subtle rewritting of history in rock has occured by younger writers and music people-putting the beginning of rock with the British invasion and not in the early 50s where it actually started as rock.

right these guys are young and aren't very knowledgeable about the era and they didn't make a good case at all for why Elvis is overrated.

Some Beatles fans are respectful to Elvis but they still don't like him and put down his accomplishments and say the Beatles accomplished more and did more for popular culture.

you are correct some of the fanatical beatle fans are mean spirited

you are also right about a rewritting writing of rock history with rock music begining with the Beatles in 1964. I think that's do to the fact that these music magazines like Rolling Stone and Cream had and still have a 60's mentality with the majority of their writers being baby boomers who were just getting into music or got into music when the Beatles came to America in 1964 and they were too young to appreciate 50's rock n' roll.

in 2004 CBS and the Grammy's made a big deal about it being 40 years since the Beatles came to America honoring them for it etc.
meanwhile no mention from CBS or the Grammy's of it being the 50th anniversary of Elvis career.
They should've honored Elvis instead since without him there would be no Beatles

KPM
05-20-2009, 08:04 PM
right these guys are young and aren't very knowledgeable about the era and they didn't make a good case at all for why Elvis is overrated.

Some Beatles fans are respectful to Elvis but they still don't like him and put down his accomplishments and say the Beatles accomplished more and did more for popular culture.

you are correct some of the fanatical beatle fans are mean spirited
you are also right about a rewritting writing of rock history with rock music begining with the Beatles in 1964. I think that's do to the fact that these music magazines like Rolling Stone and Cream had and still have a 60's mentality with the majority of their writers being baby boomers who were just getting into music or got into music when the Beatles came to America in 1964 and they were too young to appreciate 50's rock n' roll.

in 2004 CBS and the Grammy's made a big deal about it being 40 years since the Beatles came to America honoring them for it etc.
meanwhile no mention from CBS or the Grammy's of it being the 50th anniversary of Elvis career.
They should've honored Elvis instead since without him there would be no Beatles
Boy thats for sure-I happened upon a Beatle forum years ago and a poll question about Elvis and the Beatles. Of the many many fans of the Beatles only a couple did not understand the importance, talent and legacy of Elvis.
One in particular was out and out-disgraceful-to the point of other Beatle fans telling him he was totally wrong and out of line in his abrasive and disgusting tirade against Elvis. I was amazed at how inconsiderate and impolite this kid was (regardless of his age-he acted like 12) But the many other Beatle fans were Elvis fans also-just liked the Beatles better. Many said comparisons of the 2 were apples and oranges which in many ways is correct IMO.

Raised on Rock
05-20-2009, 08:35 PM
I don't think so

For example when someone mentions a talented artist like say the Rolling Stones on an Elvis board and they mention their accomplishments Elvis fans will put down and attack the Rolling Stones even though no one was attacking or belittling Elvis and then when someone doesn't like Elvis his fans atleast on the internet will get mad just like people have with this blogger.
Not all internet Elvis fans do this but I'd say the majority do.

As I have said I don't think the guy made a very good argument for why Elvis is overrated I could do a better job.

Brian! You don't think so? Read again more carefully my post and tell me where is the disagreement? I think we are going on the same train about this:

I said: "Elvis fans? kind of very generalizing way to put it don't you think?"
You just said: "Not all internet Elvis fans do this but I'd say the majority do."

And yes you got a point, a majority maybe, but Elvis fans just like that?

And yes, I agree with you when you said other artist are usually trashed on Elvis forums, now read again my previews post: "Although following up your observation, it is also to notice, that contrary to other musicians fans, call it Beatles fans or who ever, tend to be much more fans of music in general terms, while it is a repeated tendency the "I only lisent to Elvis music" among Presley fans (not saying all fans are like that). Wonder if that had to do with the lack of any degree of serious criticism on the Presley field and the both underrated and overrated different aspects of him."

Where I do not agree with you is here Brian, I don't oppose to Elvis criticism (In fact I do hope for it), neither I´m opposed to people not liking Presley and expressing their opinions about it, but one thing is that, and another very different thing is to put down Elvis or anyone else by misinformed facts, and that is what going on about that article, not that the article itself is a big issue at all, but an example of the real issue, which is the constant misinformation and narrow view towards Presley in the media, as KMP and you have just expressed.

A question here could be: does the right to express and opinion, gives you the right to perpetuate ignorant and narrow point of views? that's a total different issue, from the right to express that you don't like Mr. Presley.

Raised on Rock
05-20-2009, 08:42 PM
I do not mind someone having a differing opinion on Elvis, the Beatles or anything else. But this list of 10 is misinformed and narrow. IMO The guys who made this list-did not really explore Elvis-they posted their uneducated narrow approach to him.
They did not start out saying IS ELVIS OVERRATED-? Not really.
Their intent (as I read it) was just to say "ELVIS IS OVERRATED" They then slammed him for all they perceived to be reasons. (narrowly and with little knowledge of the time, culture and situations of the early 50s)

I really have thought for years that a subtle rewritting of history in rock has occured by younger writers and music people-putting the beginning of rock with the British invasion and not in the early 50s where it actually started as rock.

That's is exactly my point here KMP, you really get what I was trying to say.

The point here is not a whatever internet mag and some whatever journalists, but that of the phenomena behind, that one you refer to it as the rewriting of rock history, and an uneducated and narrow approach to it. One that I found recurrent on general media which eventually becomes popular misinformation.

Brian
05-20-2009, 11:34 PM
Brian! You don't think so? Read again more carefully my post and tell me where is the disagreement? I think we are going on the same train about this:

I said: "Elvis fans? kind of very generalizing way to put it don't you think?"
You just said: "Not all internet Elvis fans do this but I'd say the majority do."

And yes you got a point, a majority maybe, but Elvis fans just like that?

And yes, I agree with you when you said other artist are usually trashed on Elvis forums, now read again my previews post: "Although following up your observation, it is also to notice, that contrary to other musicians fans, call it Beatles fans or who ever, tend to be much more fans of music in general terms, while it is a repeated tendency the "I only lisent to Elvis music" among Presley fans (not saying all fans are like that). Wonder if that had to do with the lack of any degree of serious criticism on the Presley field and the both underrated and overrated different aspects of him."

Where I do not agree with you is here Brian, I don't oppose to Elvis criticism (In fact I do hope for it), neither I´m opposed to people not liking Presley and expressing their opinions about it, but one thing is that, and another very different thing is to put down Elvis or anyone else by misinformed facts, and that is what going on about that article, not that the article itself is a big issue at all, but an example of the real issue, which is the constant misinformation and narrow view towards Presley in the media, as KMP and you have just expressed.

A question here could be: does the right to express and opinion, gives you the right to perpetuate ignorant and narrow point of views? that's a total different issue, from the right to express that you don't like Mr. Presley.

When you first posted this topic I thought this thread was just you not agreeing with someone not liking Elvis which happens a lot.
It was like the producers of Elvis on Tour not liking Elvis and someone here posted a thread about it then the majority of the posters on this board begin putting down the producer of EOT just for expressing his opinion.

The thing is these bloggers were in their minds not giving an ignorant or narrow point of you about Elvis.

FLASHBOY
05-21-2009, 01:06 AM
Kevin Keller and Kate Kiefer if you look in the 2009 dictionary they are mention as underated and stupid *****!

Raised on Rock
05-21-2009, 05:51 AM
Kevin Keller and Kate Kiefer if you look in the 2009 dictionary they are mention as underated and stupid B....h!

Cool it down and please read the conversation that has been carrying on post by post, you got the right to that opinion, but it would be much more enriching for all to actually add something about what has been discussing during this thread than just reacting with slandering towards slandering, don't you think?

Raised on Rock
05-21-2009, 05:53 AM
When you first posted this topic I thought this thread was just you not agreeing with someone not liking Elvis which happens a lot.
It was like the producers of Elvis on Tour not liking Elvis and someone here posted a thread about it then the majority of the posters on this board begin putting down the producer of EOT just for expressing his opinion.

The thing is these bloggers were in their minds not giving an ignorant or narrow point of you about Elvis.

Guess you are just not getting the issue Im trying to bring out.

Raised on Rock
05-21-2009, 06:16 AM
O.K. So before this thread ends up in a series of post slandering against that article, and then slandering between us, and then a possible nice piece of conversation ends up on another thread being closed, I might redirect the course of this thread towards this direction:

Does the right to express and opinion, gives you the right to intentionally put down someone (Elvis in this case), that biased on misinformation and narrow minded/ignorant point of views? And do we understand the difference form that, to the right to express that you just don't like any form of art in terms of taste,(Elvis in this case) but with a good understanding of its cultural and historical context.

The first might be connected with intolerance, and the second with tolerance maybe?
How does this apply the other way, I mean Elvis fans that consider any other musical act a piece of shit besides Elvis, making of him and unwanted god, and then creating two poles: The Elvis fundamentalists vs Kevin Keller and Kate Kiefer likes?

And as a footnote: How the so called right to have an opinion will lead us to a situation of allowing to hear all kinds of stupidity under the rules of political correctness, and to let ignorance perpetuate calling it freedom of speech?

P.S. What does all this has to do with E, well from my point of view, that might be quite related to the fact that hardly ever Presley is being considered seriously as an artist, while many other contemporary and related acts does have considered that way. How much does the somehow over the top fanatism that Elvis provoked (by that I don't mean a normal healthy fan) had to do with that? Being that fanatism /fundamentalism the smoke curtain, that prevent a better understanding of Presley as an artist outside the elvis world, and also that same curtain the one that simply causes animosity towards Elvis, one that misses the artist, being this liked or not.

Brian
05-21-2009, 06:39 AM
Guess you are just not getting the issue Im trying to bring out.

I get what your saying

I think you don't understand what i'm saying in response to you

Raised on Rock
05-21-2009, 07:22 AM
The thing is these bloggers were in their minds not giving an ignorant or narrow point of you about Elvis.

Well I will gladly give another try to get you if you kindly reframe this comment on the issues I just pointed out on my last post previous to this one.

Thanks for posting by the way.

Brian
05-21-2009, 07:53 AM
Well I will gladly give another try to get you if you kindly reframe this comment on the issues I just pointed out on my last post previous to this one.

Thanks for posting by the way.

that's what i thought I was doing

paraphrasing

You said does the right to express an opinion give someone the right to put someone down based on bias and misinformantion and an ignorant point of view.

The answer to your question is no, I don't think it should but
I was just pointing out that the bloggers who wrote the piece on Elvis don't think they are ignorant or misinformed

SleepyJack
05-21-2009, 02:11 PM
I think most "fans" of Elvis Presley or of any other artist have had to deal with this many many times...nobody likes to see the people that they admire and look up to belittled or joked about.... it`s a fairly natural thing to be protective of things that you care about.... I`m not saying that people shouldn`t have their opinions,of course they should...and even the most devoted and knowledgable fans have always got something new to learn,or a new angle on that which they already know. When I first became an Elvis fan I got a hard time from the other kids at school,quite hurtful to a ten or eleven year old...and it has happened at varying degrees over the years, from fans of other artists,from people just having a joke...whatever, but the thing is...I never expected Elvis to be perfect,no more than I expected everybody to like him or recognise his talent and his place in history. I do think that if you go public with your opinion,and it is to be seen by a lot of people, then you should at least be in some way qualified to do so.... If Eric Clapton chooses to question Elvis`s abilities or lack of at guitar-playing then fair enough, if Dylan were to be critical of Elvis not writing his own material... then fair enough..they have earned the right to their opinion by being among the best in their field. The only real critisisms that I take seriously anymore are the ones that actually change my opinion on something.... and so far that hasn`t happened too many times with regard to Elvis. I`m still here..I`m still a fan....... until someone convinces me otherwise!

Jumpsuit Junkie
05-21-2009, 06:42 PM
'Opinions are like noses, everybody's got one' ;) Those bloggers are entitled to have an opinion. However their basic arguments are lazy, ill thought out and based on conjecture built around even lazier novels and biography's and tabloid B/S now seen as fact.

As has already been indicated, there are standards to adhere to when presenting your case, when you can't be bothered to research the material to get basic facts right you are basically just expressing your opinion!

So... As I said earlier, 'Opinions are like noses, everybody's got one' and you just can't get angry at something that borders on the ridiculous :blink:

Raised on Rock
05-21-2009, 07:32 PM
I do think that if you go public with your opinion,and it is to be seen by a lot of people, then you should at least be in some way qualified to do so.... to Elvis. I`m still here..I`m still a fan....... until someone convinces me otherwise!


'Opinions are like noses, everybody's got one' ;) Those bloggers are entitled to have an opinion. However their basic arguments are lazy, ill thought out and based on conjecture built around even lazier novels and biography's and tabloid B/S now seen as fact.

As has already been indicated, there are standards to adhere to when presenting your case, when you can't be bothered to research the material to get basic facts right you are basically just expressing your opinion!

So... As I said earlier, 'Opinions are like noses, everybody's got one' and you just can't get angry at something that borders on the ridiculous :blink:

Yep, the funny thing is (going out of topic a bit) how little by little the overall media does gets saturated of fools opinion, until when you can't get angry about that so called right? when the bullshit starts coming from the so called leaders of opinion?

This case is just about a mag that not much people may care, on a not big deal issue like whatever recording artist, but it is step by step, that that kind of train of thought becomes perpetuated, in fact those guys are nothing but a result of that train of though that has always permeated Elvis in the media.

The question might be, as I put it before, What is the reason about why Elvis Presley does rarely receives the amount of serious criticism and analysis as other related artists do on the same media? And how does Elvis fans might be guilty in a way for that, when they go over the top with their fanatism making of him an unwanted god or dogma to the world.

In other words, feelings aside, there is and odd phenomena going on there, so interesting to study, that of as an example: when you say you like (name any artist here) people might say, well I don't like that act at all, then people might express some reasonable thoughts about it. But if you say you like Elvis, somehow there it goes a phenomena that repeats and repeats generation by generation, the one that expresses on instant mockery, and ill thought attacks based on the most ridiculous twisted facts ever!

Who's not doing a good job here, and before blaming Parker o Pricilla, what's wrong with us fans? as fans are usually the best publicity an artist gets.

Brian
05-21-2009, 07:53 PM
The question might be, as I put it before, What is the reason about why Elvis Presley does rarely receives the amount of serious criticism and analysis as other related artists do on the same media? And how does Elvis fans might be guilty in a way for that, when they go over the top with their fanatism making of him an unwanted god or dogma to the world.


You can blame EPE for that

Since Elvis died he has been viewed as an icon rather than a serious musical artist.

The fault lies with EPE marketing Elvis like a product which has overshadowed the good music Elvis made during his lifetime they've turned him into a cartoon character.

Also in the first decade since Elvis died his label didn't do a good of packaging his material for the general public it wasn't until Ernst Jorgensten and Roger Sermon came aboard in the mid 80's that things began to turnaround.
Then in 1992 Ernst compiled all of Elvis 50's material on a box set called The King of rock n' roll. That gained Elvis some respect but again his image and status as an icon has overshadowed the music.

The goofy Elvis impersonators who are fans themselves certainly did not help
Elvis cause.

Raised on Rock
05-21-2009, 07:58 PM
You can blame EPE for that...
...marketing Elvis like a product which has overshadowed the good music Elvis made during his lifetime they've turned him into a cartoon character.


You just made a great point overhere man.

But plus, how many fans are actually fans of the ARTIST or just fans of the character?

And yes, when the cartoon character, overshadows the artist, then obviously that horrendous media creature is seen as overrated, as the foundations of what is Elvis about became became just unknown.

Then articles like that, and just simply that point of view becomes the standard in society, and you'll really be a fool if you dig that act.

KPM
05-21-2009, 10:22 PM
You can blame EPE for that

Since Elvis died he has been viewed as an icon rather than a serious musical artist.

The fault lies with EPE marketing Elvis like a product which has overshadowed the good music Elvis made during his lifetime they've turned him into a cartoon character.

Also in the first decade since Elvis died his label didn't do a good of packaging his material for the general public it wasn't until Ernst Jorgensten and Roger Sermon came aboard in the mid 80's that things began to turnaround.
Then in 1992 Ernst compiled all of Elvis 50's material on a box set called The King of rock n' roll. That gained Elvis some respect but again his image and status as an icon has overshadowed the music.

The goofy Elvis impersonators who are fans themselves certainly did not help
Elvis cause.
Elvis was marketed as a "product" long before EPE took over-do you recall after Elvis died the Colonel got Vernon to sign a deal with him to still represent Elvis- then came deals for "products" like "Always Elvis" wine" and hundreds of other things.
Or when Elvis was alive in the 50s Parkers deal for "Teddy Bear Lipstick" and also hundreds of others "products" with an Elvis likeness or name stamped on it-none of these had anything to do with the "serious music"
The difference as I see it-is that Elvis's estate is making the lions share of the profit on their marketing of Elvis-which goes to Lisa's benefit. Elvis would want that.
EPE has no control over music, no control over movies, they have to wait and see what RCA/BMG/Sony decides to do.... same with the owners of the movies.
Its hard to control the "serious music end" when you do not own it and have little say.
Lets be fair-Elvis was turned into "product" long before EPE came into existence.


One other thing icons happen because people see certain things or individuals as special, great, charismatic etc.....you do not turn someone into an icon..... they are or they arent.

molokai123
05-21-2009, 11:12 PM
you know people,especially people who are jealous,or dont know what there even talking about,the way i see things are anytime sumone takes shot's at Elvis,all their doing is telling us what we all know that Elvis was great,so they see it as hey let's take a cheap shot at Elvis,because hey let's face it people always try to bring down what is great,because there jealous,so i just laugh anytime i see stuff like this,because we know better.(y) plus people have always been talking crap about Elvis ever since he was a kid until the day he died,and till this day,because he'll always be #1 and people always wanna bring #1 down,but like a true icon he always rises to top no matter what people say,write,or say about him.

Brian
05-22-2009, 12:19 AM
Elvis was marketed as a "product" long before EPE took over-do you recall after Elvis died the Colonel got Vernon to sign a deal with him to still represent Elvis- then came deals for "products" like "Always Elvis" wine" and hundreds of other things.
Or when Elvis was alive in the 50s Parkers deal for "Teddy Bear Lipstick" and also hundreds of others "products" with an Elvis likeness or name stamped on it-none of these had anything to do with the "serious music"
The difference as I see it-is that Elvis's estate is making the lions share of the profit on their marketing of Elvis-which goes to Lisa's benefit. Elvis would want that.
EPE has no control over music, no control over movies, they have to wait and see what RCA/BMG/Sony decides to do.... same with the owners of the movies.
Its hard to control the "serious music end" when you do not own it and have little say.
Lets be fair-Elvis was turned into "product" long before EPE came into existence.


One other thing icons happen because people see certain things or individuals as special, great, charismatic etc.....you do not turn someone into an icon..... they are or they arent.

I know all about what Tom Parker did when Elvis was alive
I've said before in my opinion all the products Parker came out with while Elvis was alive weren't as bad as what EPE does now.

I'd say during his career Elvis was treated half as a singer and half as a product. The difference between then and now is when he was alive he was coming out with some fantastic material.

Albums like Elvis Presley, Elvis, Loving You, Christmas album, King Creole, Elvis is Back, FEIM, Back in Memphis, Gospel albums, Elvis Golden records series

All the singles, t.v. specials, t.v. appearances etc.

Elvis was viewed more as a singer/entertainer while he was alive than he is now.

EPE started marketing Elvis as all product after they took over in 1979 after Vernon Presley's death

I gave some blame to Elvis record label for coming out with shoddy products in the first years after Elvis death in my previous posts.

I know EPE has no control over the music but they could still market him better when they market him as all product it takes the focus off of the music and Elvis has been turned into a cartoon character as a result.

KPM
05-22-2009, 03:04 AM
I know all about what Tom Parker did when Elvis was alive
I've said before in my opinion all the products Parker came out with while Elvis was alive weren't as bad as what EPE does now.

I'd say during his career Elvis was treated half as a singer and half as a product. The difference between then and now is when he was alive he was coming out with some fantastic material.
Albums like Elvis Presley, Elvis, Loving You, Christmas album, King Creole, Elvis is Back, FEIM, Back in Memphis, Gospel albums, Elvis Golden records series

All the singles, t.v. specials, t.v. appearances etc.

Elvis was viewed more as a singer/entertainer while he was alive than he is now.

EPE started marketing Elvis as all product after they took over in 1979 after Vernon Presley's death

I gave some blame to Elvis record label for coming out with shoddy products in the first years after Elvis death in my previous posts.

I know EPE has no control over the music but they could still market him better when they market him as all product it takes the focus off of the music and Elvis has been turned into a cartoon character as a result.
Exactly right-but there is no way that EPE, or the record company can now make up for the fact that he is not here to come out with new great material. So the music in the vaults (and how it is presented) is the only thing which represents Elvis the artist.
A couple hundred reissues is part of the problem I think every other Valentines Day -a new Greatest Love Songs ! Every Christmas a new reissue of Christmas songs with a new cover! Every other Easter-new gospel collection!
Overkill-also leads to less serious look at the music/artist and more of an impression of "product"
As you have agreed the music and most films are not in EPEs hands-and they are not likely to ever own them.
I do not agree with every product that EPE has come out with-but I am just as certain that "they are not the inventors of selling junk with Elvis's name on them" that started in 1956-so its apples and oranges he was marketed with little regard for taste since day one.
Boxcar Records is an example-"Having Fun With Elvis on Stage" no music Elvis talking only album the Colonels idea-just horrid-did this add to promoting the serious music of Elvis the artist?
Descriptions of this record:
Having Fun with Elvis on Stage has been described as the worst album of Elvis's career. A review by AllMusic Guide likened it to "an auto wreck that somehow plowed into a carnival freak show."
Rock critics Jimmy Guterman and Owen O'Donnell, writing in their 1991 book The Worst Rock and Roll Records of All Time, named it the worst rock album ever, although one could easily note the lack of "rock and roll" in the record.

Brian
05-22-2009, 04:01 AM
Exactly right-but there is no way that EPE, or the record company can now make up for the fact that he is not here to come out with new great material. So the music in the vaults (and how it is presented) is the only thing which represents Elvis the artist.
A couple hundred reissues is part of the problem I think every other Valentines Day -a new Greatest Love Songs ! Every Christmas a new reissue of Christmas songs with a new cover! Every other Easter-new gospel collection!
Overkill-also leads to less serious look at the music/artist and more of an impression of "product"
As you have agreed the music and most films are not in EPEs hands-and they are not likely to ever own them.
I do not agree with every product that EPE has come out with-but I am just as certain that "they are not the inventors of selling junk with Elvis's name on them" that started in 1956-so its apples and oranges he was marketed with little regard for taste since day one.
Boxcar Records is an example-"Having Fun With Elvis on Stage" no music Elvis talking only album the Colonels idea-just horrid-did this add to promoting the serious music of Elvis the artist?
Descriptions of this record:
Having Fun with Elvis on Stage has been described as the worst album of Elvis's career. A review by AllMusic Guide likened it to "an auto wreck that somehow plowed into a carnival freak show."
Rock critics Jimmy Guterman and Owen O'Donnell, writing in their 1991 book The Worst Rock and Roll Records of All Time, named it the worst rock album ever, although one could easily note the lack of "rock and roll" in the record.

The thing is though I'm saying EPE could promote the music more and focus more on the promotion of the music of Elvis rather than the image.

Having Fun on Stage with Elvis was bad but thankfully it's been out of print for many many years and I don't think it was ever put on CD.

Yes, Sony BMG has always had a problem with releasing the same type of compilations over and over.

Getlo
05-22-2009, 01:46 PM
Having Fun on Stage with Elvis was bad but thankfully it's been out of print for many many years and I don't think it was ever put on CD.

It was indeed, and some time ago too.

I actually play it from time to time. I have six different versions of the original LP and a copy of the original Boxcar version as well.

And the bootleggers have extended the series on CD ("Boxcar" label). They're up to Volume 5, IIRC.

jak
05-22-2009, 04:10 PM
I brought a copy of the Boxcar version home after seeing Elvis perform in 74.Talk about a letdown after that lp hit the turntable.I still cant believe somebody thought that was a good idea.My copy is still safely tucked away with my other lp's.Having only been played once since 1974.

Brian
05-22-2009, 05:13 PM
I brought a copy of the Boxcar version home after seeing Elvis perform in 74.Talk about a letdown after that lp hit the turntable.I still cant believe somebody thought that was a good idea.My copy is still safely tucked away with my other lp's.Having only been played once since 1974.

I think what made the album bad was it had a bunch of on stage monologues and snippets of interviews running together.
In one interview Elvis would be taking about something and then it would cut away to another interview where he would be talking about something completely different so the comments Elvis was making were taken out of context and didn't make sense which made for bad album.
I think had this album featured complete interviews all in context the album would've been better.

The album was still a hit on the U.S. Billboard Country albums chart peaking at #9

KPM
05-22-2009, 07:18 PM
I brought a copy of the Boxcar version home after seeing Elvis perform in 74.Talk about a letdown after that lp hit the turntable.I still cant believe somebody thought that was a good idea.My copy is still safely tucked away with my other lp's.Having only been played once since 1974.
I also bought a copy back then-but buyer beware I did not pay close attention to it-I thought it was a live album with music-yes indeed what a letdown.

KPM
05-22-2009, 07:27 PM
I think what made the album bad was it had a bunch of on stage monologues and snippets of interviews running together.
In one interview Elvis would be taking about something and then it would cut away to another interview where he would be talking about something completely different so the comments Elvis was making were taken out of context and didn't make sense which made for bad album.
I think had this album featured complete interviews all in context the album would've been better.

The album was still a hit on the U.S. Billboard Country albums chart peaking at #9
But my point was, was it wise to put it out period-whether on Boxcar or on RCA.
It did nothing to add to his status/perception of as an artist by critics or others-nor as one of the originators of Rock. It wes product to make money.
I just do not see EPE as doing anything that much different as his whole career was handled from 1956-EPE does take it over the top I agree-but what new things would the Col have come up with in 2009 along the same lines?

SleepyJack
05-22-2009, 08:18 PM
I don`t think that Elvis Presley Enterprises give a single thought to the music at this point, I think that pushing the whole Graceland tourism and trinkets angle makes them more money...and that is about their only concern really, why else would they allow some of the rubbish that they do? They seem to see no harm in encouraging the whole Elvis impersonator circus, report-your-sightings, all the cheap,tacky stuff that they put their name to. I wonder if the owners of the rights to Elvis` music ever just see this stuff and go.."How are we meant to sell the music if these people are determined to make a joke of the man who made the music?"... surely it doesn`t make them eager to put all their efforts into providing quality releases.... has it all,knowingly or otherwise,made them give up on Elvis???

Getlo
05-23-2009, 05:40 AM
I think what made the album bad was it had a bunch of on stage monologues and snippets of interviews running together.

The album had just concert banter; there were no interview excerpts featured on the original LP.

Getlo
05-23-2009, 05:41 AM
I also bought a copy back then-but buyer beware I did not pay close attention to it-I thought it was a live album with music-yes indeed what a letdown.

Didn't "A Talking Album Only" give it away though? ;)

Brian
05-23-2009, 06:55 AM
But my point was, was it wise to put it out period-whether on Boxcar or on RCA.
It did nothing to add to his status/perception of as an artist by critics or others-nor as one of the originators of Rock. It wes product to make money.
I just do not see EPE as doing anything that much different as his whole career was handled from 1956-EPE does take it over the top I agree-but what new things would the Col have come up with in 2009 along the same lines?

The thing is though they are in charge now and could do better

Now i'm going to go play with my Elvis and Priscilla barbie dolls.

utmom2008
05-23-2009, 07:26 AM
Now i'm going to go play with my Elvis and Priscilla barbie dolls.

:lmfao::lmfao:(y)(y)(y)

elvia7
05-23-2009, 08:08 AM
what a load of rubbish

(y)(y):notworthyEXACTLY!!!!!!:notworthy(y)(y)

KPM
05-23-2009, 09:21 PM
Didn't "A Talking Album Only" give it away though? ;)
Like I said I just did not notice it Duh! I was so excited to see an Elvis album which I had not expected to find-I just grabbed and headed for my record player. As I said I did not follow the consumer rule-Buyer Beware:)

KPM
05-23-2009, 09:29 PM
The thing is though they are in charge now and could do better

Now i'm going to go play with my Elvis and Priscilla barbie dolls.

Well put some 1956 "Teddy Bear Pink" lipstick on the Priscilla doll and make sure they make a toast with Boxcar Enterprises vintage 1978 "Always Elvis" white wine-the kind of wine Elvis "would" have drank if he liked wine!:lol:
That my friend brings it full circle.

Raised on Rock
05-23-2009, 10:16 PM
Well put some 1956 "Teddy Bear Pink" lipstick on the Priscilla doll and make sure they make a toast with Boxcar Enterprises vintage 1978 "Always Elvis" white wine-the kind of wine Elvis "would" have drank if he liked wine!:lol:
That my friend brings it full circle.

And don't forget background music, let's see, which is tackiest? Christmas duets or the latest remix album by spankox? Or lets just go plain self humiliating as fans with our all time favorites like with Girl Happy or Paradise Hawaiian Style?

It is not surprising then, in a society fueled with media marketing, why Elvis is the mock of the mock for quite a billion dudes out there.

Raised on Rock
05-23-2009, 10:19 PM
Well put some 1956 "Teddy Bear Pink" lipstick on the Priscilla doll and make sure they make a toast with Boxcar Enterprises vintage 1978 "Always Elvis" white wine-the kind of wine Elvis "would" have drank if he liked wine!:lol:
That my friend brings it full circle.

And don't forget background music, let's see, which is tackiest? Christmas duets or the latest remix album by spankox? Or lets just go plain self humiliating as fans with Girl Happy or Paradise Hawaiian Style on our top ten favourites?

It is not surprising then, in a society fueled with media marketing, why Elvis is the mock of the mock for quite a billion dudes out there.

Raised on Rock
05-23-2009, 10:19 PM
Well put some 1956 "Teddy Bear Pink" lipstick on the Priscilla doll and make sure they make a toast with Boxcar Enterprises vintage 1978 "Always Elvis" white wine-the kind of wine Elvis "would" have drank if he liked wine!:lol:
That my friend brings it full circle.

And don't forget background music, let's see, which is tackiest? Christmas duets or the latest remix album by spankox? Or lets just go plain self humiliating as fans with Girl Happy or Paradise Hawaiian Style in our top ten favourites?

The thing is, all the marketing crap people are talking about in the recent posts, from day 1 1956 until now, would be not that billion maker machine if fans won't buy it!!! Presley's movie formula would have not continued for that long if they would have stop being profitable 4 years before 1968, Vegas shows would have not gonne that low if fans would have accepted intents for a change like in Aug '74, and Having Fun On Stage reached #9 on the County chart you said? My God!!! It is not surprising then, in a society fueled with media marketing, why Elvis is the mock of the mock for quite a billion dudes out there.

Are Elvis fans really the best fans ever or was/is it really careless love?
Of course I am not blaming just the fans, but... it takes two for tango, and the fact is: Elvis is Back! His Hand in Mine, movies like Flaming Star and Wild in The Country, singles like Feel So Bad or Little Sister, were outsold by G.I. Blues, Blue Hawaii and their respective soundtracks.

Teddy
05-23-2009, 10:40 PM
Well put some 1956 "Teddy Bear Pink" lipstick on the Priscilla doll

:wub::wub::wub:

Brian
05-23-2009, 11:46 PM
Question

I should know this but I don't

I was wondering if any other albums besides Having Fun on stage with Elvis were released on Boxcar?

Does anyone know.

Getlo
05-24-2009, 04:19 AM
Question

I should know this but I don't

I was wondering if any other albums besides Having Fun on stage with Elvis were released on Boxcar?

Does anyone know.

Having Fun was the only album released by Boxcar while Elvis was alive.

In 1981, they released a series of 8 mini-albums in association with a company called Chubops (see pic). But no other real LPs were released.

As far as I know, although I may be wrong, these were the only albums. The further CDs of the Having Fun series are bootlegs.

Say what you will about Boxcar, they released some great stuff over the years.

Brian
05-24-2009, 04:53 AM
Having Fun was the only album released by Boxcar while Elvis was alive.

In 1981, they released a series of 8 mini-albums in association with a company called Chubops (see pic). But no other real LPs were released.

As far as I know, although I may be wrong, these were the only albums. The further CDs of the Having Fun series are bootlegs.

Say what you will about Boxcar, they released some great stuff over the years.

okay

thanks Getlo

KPM
05-25-2009, 07:07 PM
Question

I should know this but I don't

I was wondering if any other albums besides Having Fun on stage with Elvis were released on Boxcar?

Does anyone know.
RCA had Elvis locked with his contract for any singing albums-the only reason Boxcar could release the talking album which was not evidently covered in the contract.

KPM
05-25-2009, 07:12 PM
And don't forget background music, let's see, which is tackiest? Christmas duets or the latest remix album by spankox? Or lets just go plain self humiliating as fans with Girl Happy or Paradise Hawaiian Style in our top ten favourites?

The thing is, all the marketing crap people are talking about in the recent posts, from day 1 1956 until now, would be not that billion maker machine if fans won't buy it!!! Presley's movie formula would have not continued for that long if they would have stop being profitable 4 years before 1968, Vegas shows would have not gonne that low if fans would have accepted intents for a change like in Aug '74, and Having Fun On Stage reached #9 on the County chart you said? My God!!! It is not surprising then, in a society fueled with media marketing, why Elvis is the mock of the mock for quite a billion dudes out there.

Are Elvis fans really the best fans ever or was/is it really careless love?
Of course I am not blaming just the fans, but... it takes two for tango, and the fact is: Elvis is Back! His Hand in Mine, movies like Flaming Star and Wild in The Country, singles like Feel So Bad or Little Sister, were outsold by G.I. Blues, Blue Hawaii and their respective soundtracks.
Yes we fans have a part in the blame for the marketing-but in 1965 if you wanted to see Elvis the only way was to buy a ticket to one of his movies.
If you liked his voice and wanted new music-you basically had to buy soundtracks of those movies. I never got into buying a lot of things with Elvis's name on them other than music or magazines as a young fan-but many people did (do) so I guess we hold some blame.

Brian
05-25-2009, 08:22 PM
Yes we fans have a part in the blame for the marketing-but in 1965 if you wanted to see Elvis the only way was to buy a ticket to one of his movies.
If you liked his voice and wanted new music-you basically had to buy soundtracks of those movies. I never got into buying a lot of things with Elvis's name on them other than music or magazines as a young fan-but many people did (do) so I guess we hold some blame.

I had a choice between not seeing Elvis at all or going to see Harem Scarem and Girl Happy I chose not to see him at all.

I don't know what was going through fans minds the soundtracks to Harem Scarem and Girl Happy both hit #8 in the U.S. and did just as well in other countries they even made profits at the box office though the profits were getting smaller.

Paradise Hawaiian Style and Spinout both hit the top 20 on the album charts

All 4 of those soundtrack albums and those movies should've bombed badly
but they didn't.

KPM
05-26-2009, 07:35 PM
I had a choice between not seeing Elvis at all or going to see Harem Scarem and Girl Happy I chose not to see him at all.
I don't know what was going through fans minds the soundtracks to Harem Scarem and Girl Happy both hit #8 in the U.S. and did just as well in other countries they even made profits at the box office though the profits were getting smaller.

Paradise Hawaiian Style and Spinout both hit the top 20 on the album charts

All 4 of those soundtrack albums and those movies should've bombed badly
but they didn't.
Good to know!!!
All I can say is I enjoyed seeing Elvis on the screen (and obviously others did also) and it was a different time-people wanted escapism and an Elvis movie was just that. I also enjoyed the mindless "Beach Movies", the "Hot Rod/ Biker Movies" Bob Hope films and they were all escapism.
"But I also enjoyed the serious attempts in film just as much-Flaming Star, Wild in the Country, King Creole etc....so if he had been making only those type films I (and many)would have gone to see them"

beckelvis
05-27-2009, 12:57 AM
Good of first she is a boring and troublesome people,always they say that i do not know Elvis he deserves to be called THE KING.

Nicole Presley
05-27-2009, 01:35 PM
http://www.pastemagazine.com/blogs/lists/2009/03/ten-reasons-why-elvis-is-overrated.html

That article is the bigges shit I´ve ever read! :angry: That person that has wrote that must just be jealous of Elvis. How else could someone write such mean things? Even though he didn´t write all songs people say he would have written... And how can someone say "Amazing grace" would be a terrible song? :cursing: And how can someone say impersonating Elvis would be easy? Only because some people try to be like Elvis even though they´re not like hi at all!!! :angry: I hate impersonaters!!! :cursing:

ricardo b. prospero
05-27-2009, 03:46 PM
I believe the only reason why some people love to write negative things about Elvis is the fact that he is one subject that definitely gets the attention and reaction. Wonder why you seldomly read negative articles about other celebrities? Elvis achievements and recognition is now part of history and history never lie. I think article like this is a healthy sign that Elvis magic is very much around inspite of his absence for more than 30 years. Isn't an honor for us Elvis fans that he serves as the lone barometer of success for all those who came after him. They surely can twist the fact but notdelete it.

debtdbruno
05-27-2009, 04:34 PM
Well said Ricardo. He is the benchmark they all have to live upto.

Deb

Merry
05-27-2009, 09:45 PM
That article is the bigges shit I´ve ever read! :angry: That person that has wrote that must just be jealous of Elvis. How else could someone write such mean things? Even though he didn´t write all songs people say he would have written... And how can someone say "Amazing grace" would be a terrible song? :cursing: And how can someone say impersonating Elvis would be easy? Only because some people try to be like Elvis even though they´re not like hi at all!!! :angry: I hate impersonaters!!! :cursing:


:hug:

That person is just out of his/her mind, simple.