Re: Some Vegas Questions???
to have to take a sabbatial year,turn them more loudly for a world tour it i believe that to have been very important since to want,but Elvis always to be big as that more.THE KING FOREVER.
Re: Some Vegas Questions???
Quote:
Originally Posted by
eap1977
Hi everybody on TCB World! ;)
First of all I want to thank you so much for all of your hard work and effort in helping keep the memory of Elvis alive and prospering! :cool: This is an awesome sight! I was wondering if I could ask everyone some questions: :hmm:
#1 Why after summer 1974 season at Las Vegas did things change (end of the 5 year napkin contract)? Why did Elvis start off in April of 75' (for the new building?) in stead of January? Things were never the same in Vegas, less shows, only appeared once in 76' and none in 77'.
#2 If he had lived was Vegas no longer a option for him? Was he just sick of Vegas or did he simply need to be challenged?
#3 Why is it so hard to get sound boards from the 73',75',76 seasons? (n)
#4 Finally (in your opinion) if Elvis had lived, would he still be as great in life as the image has grown to in death?
Thanks so much!
Greg
As far as I read:
#1 January 1975 Elvis was ill so it was moved to March of that year. I think Parker made a deal (starting January 1974) for less shows with the same pay (or something like that). I think that Elvis was going to Vegas Septemebr or October of 1977.
#2 I think that having to perform twice a night for a month in the same place with the same routine: Suite - Elevator - Stage - Elevator - Suite, decreased his enthusiasm as early as 1971 (as many said before me in this thread). If Elvis performed one engagement a year,for a week, once a night, then he could have managed.
#3 I don't know, but I think:
1. Either the engineer / technician which was on duty during those engagements was not instructed / interested in recording the shows; or
2. Soundboard recordings exist but have not surfaced.
#4 That's a difficult one. Talent wise, if he was motivated I think yes. Poularity wise, any pop artists that came from the 1950's and 60's had a hard time to maintain their popularity (maybe exceptions are Cliff Richard and Paul McCartney). When an artist dies young his /her image becomes iconic - Buddy Holly, James Dean, John Lennon, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison. They did not experience the inevitable fading away or downfalls in their careers. So in the public eye they are still great. If they had lived no one knows what could have happed to them.
To keep the popularity at high levels, talent is not the most important thing. There are artists which are very good in their area (songwriting, singing, playing, acting) but are unknown. Today, more than ever, the media makes you or breaks you. If the media were still behind Elvis (which I doubt) then he would still be popular. However, the media is interested in image creating rather than talent. Notice album reviews in many magazines (not all of them). Certain artists always get rave reviews, others, especially if these have been around for some time, are given bad reviews. Fashion is the word!!