Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 65

Thread: In Elvis lifetime, who do you suppose was the biggest threat to his crown?

  1. #1

    Exclamation In Elvis lifetime, who do you suppose was the biggest threat to his crown?

    During the British invasion of the 60's, the Beatles seems to have shaken the ground for Elvis and even threatened his crown but after all the shoutings he stood his ground and remain the king. There were contenders before the advent of the Beatles like Fabian, Ricky Nelson, Buddy Holly , Cliff Richards and Richie Valen but somehow they failed to even match the power of the king. Was there a time in Elvis lifetime that someone besides the Beatles post a real challenge to his crown?

  2. #2
    ksimms2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Homosassa, FL
    Posts
    2,408
    I personally don't think so...The Beatles would be my guess....as far as I'm concerned...nobody was better than Elvis....

  3. #3
    Thank you KSIMMS2, you said it right. I also believe only the Beatles earned the right to challenge him and no one else. Yearly here in our place a popularity contest is run fitting the Beatles against Elvis in a whole day program.

  4. #4

    .

    "The real Elvis died when he went into the army" - John Lennon.

    Elvis, for the most part, completely missed what was going on musically in the 60s. And on into the 70s.

    When you talk of artists such as the Beatles "stealing his crown" ... well, no one ever could.

    But from a musical standpoint, Elvis never again regained his place as the most relevant artist out there. Sadly.
    Getlo - cute'n'cuddly

  5. #5
    International Level EDOEP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    UK & Germany
    Posts
    563
    Quote Originally Posted by ricardo b. prospero View Post
    During the British invasion of the 60's, the Beatles seems to have shaken the ground for Elvis and even threatened his crown but after all the shoutings he stood his ground and remain the king. There were contenders before the advent of the Beatles like Fabian, Ricky Nelson, Buddy Holly , Cliff Richards and Richie Valen but somehow they failed to even match the power of the king. Was there a time in Elvis lifetime that someone besides the Beatles post a real challenge to his crown?
    the biggest threat for elvis' crown in the 60s was the colonel's choice of films!

    hugs, ellie
    i don't suffer from insanity - i enjoy every minute of it

  6. #6
    TCB Mafia EnigmaticSun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Beucha
    Posts
    1,754
    No artist came close in those days. But that's just popularity-wise. I don't mean to say there haven't been other great musicians. Or did Elvis steal Mozart's crown?

    The biggest threat was the inhuman American system.
    https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/999022_359272057534723_1223625887_n.jpg

    all the goons I left behind, memories still linger..

  7. #7
    TCB Mafia KPM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,932
    No one stays musically the most relevant for very long. In the mid 1920s Rudy Vallee was most relevant,then in the 30s and into the early 40s it was Bing Crosby next was Frank Sinatra-then Elvis in the 50s into the early 60s. Then the Beatles-its very hard to be the most relelvant because someone new is always being discovered. But as far as sales Elvis has sustained much longer than most. I'm not sure who or what would be considered most relevant today. Music is much more fickle I think.
    But there is no doubting the Beatles are one of the 2 biggest recording artists of the last 100 years the other being Elvis. (But there were 4 of them)

  8. #8
    TCB Mafia
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,039
    Elvis is The King for what he started and who he influenced, not for what he did after that.

  9. #9
    TCB Mafia KPM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,932
    "The real Elvis died when he went into the army" - John Lennon.

    I have always loved that comment by Lennon
    Yet at Madison Square Garden shows Lennon was there. He also in 69 tried to get Elvis to appear with him at the Toronto Peace Festival and later in the 70s he discussed with Phil Spector trying to get Elvis to let them produce an album by him. He may have made this great flip remark after Elvis died, but he must have not felt that deep down if you go by his actions,

  10. #10

    .

    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    He may have made this great flip remark after Elvis died, but he must have not felt that deep down if you go by his actions,
    It was far from a flip remark.

    What it says is that, after the army, the power and influence Elvis had on the charts and in pop culture overall was never as relevant as the pre-army days.

    And Lennon was entirely correct. From the moment Elvis signed on to do G.I.Blues and started releasing stuff like It's Now Or Never (yes, a great song, but it's hardly the stuff of The Hillbilly Cat who tore up the world, is it?) the writing was on the wall.

    Lennon's "actions" regarding Elvis later in life do not nullify in any way the accuracy of his statement about Elvis. Had Lennon, Spector et al got to work with Elvis, then The King's musical legacy would be even greater than it is today.

    Say what you want about Elvis, but face it: the guy spewed out a lot of crap music in the 60s and 70s (whether it was all his fault or not is the subject of another thread), especially when compared to the other artists who were dominating the charts at that time. As I mentioned elsewhere: Sgt Pepper ... or Clambake?

    Sadly, the "real" Elvis (musically speaking at least) died in 1958, as Lennon suggested.
    Getlo - cute'n'cuddly

  11. #11
    TCB Mafia EnigmaticSun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Beucha
    Posts
    1,754

    I love you and I think you're great

    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    I'm not sure who or what would be considered most relevant today. Music is much more fickle I think.
    I don't agree with "music changes every -any given, short period-; you gotta change with it". If you do that, you'll eventually wind up selling your soul to the devil (don't do it) and your integrity. Elvis' character said that in Jailhouse Rock, but this is not the "Real Elvis", so to say. All in all, you may seem like a madman or crazy without having to sell your soul, really. Mr. Yamashita didn't sell his soul, yet people think he's crazy.

    I have tremendous respect for Elvis, but the Beatles don't mean that much to me, really. In some cases I've found them to be arrogant, politically correct shout-a-bouts. So sales don't mean a thing to me. I'm much more interested in Willie Nelson compared to the Beatles.

    The Beatles (and some other bands) were considered to be the "British Invasion". I'm trying to shape the German invasion, of which I will be F?hrer (leader), eventually getting the Endsieg (final victory) - which means inspiring people and filling up the gap present day music leaves behind. I don't have a "get-rich-quick-scheme" or a schedule, though.

    Elvis, you'll never be forgotten. I love you and I really think you're great. Come on, Elvis' love for the Italian opera and German folk songs are just as Presleyssential as "Blue Moon Of Kentucky".
    Last edited by EnigmaticSun; 09-21-2007 at 04:58 PM. Reason: minor error
    https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/999022_359272057534723_1223625887_n.jpg

    all the goons I left behind, memories still linger..

  12. #12
    International Level rhythmknights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    666
    I don't thinkthe army had anything to do with the 'death' of Elvis, I think it was the death of his mother, and her death occured while he was in the army. He didn't want to go into the army to begin with, but he did his duty, I think maybe he blamed his military service for her death in some way. Or maybe not, he did say on more than one occasion that he was proud to have served, & that he was proud to wear his uniforn & he did make it to the rank of sargeant. oh, well, I'm off the track, here, let me go ahead & jump

    Oh, I don't think anyone could give hima run for his money, but probably Jerry Lee Lewis or Ray Charles would come close.
    Last edited by rhythmknights; 09-21-2007 at 04:55 PM. Reason: to get back on track
    All I wanted was a white knight with a good heart, soft touch, fast horse
    Ride me off into the sunset Baby, I'm forever yours


  13. #13

    .

    Quote Originally Posted by rhythmknights View Post
    I don't thinkthe army had anything to do with the 'death' of Elvis.
    You're missing the point.

    Lennon wasn't talking about the death of Elvis as a person (either physically or spiritually).

    He was referring to Elvis as a musical artist and a cultural force.

    What's he's saying is that after the army, Elvis never set the world of music on fire with as much passion as he did pre-1958.
    Getlo - cute'n'cuddly

  14. #14
    International Level rhythmknights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    666
    Yeah, I got that, I still think that because his mom died, he just didn't have the same heart. She was practically his muse. He did it all for her, for her praise & to make her proud of him. Of course we all know that she was proud of him no matter what he did, she always knew he was meant for bigger things. I get what you're saying, but this is how I see it in my mind.
    All I wanted was a white knight with a good heart, soft touch, fast horse
    Ride me off into the sunset Baby, I'm forever yours


  15. #15
    TCB Mafia KPM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,932
    Quote Originally Posted by Getlo View Post
    It was far from a flip remark.

    What it says is that, after the army, the power and influence Elvis had on the charts and in pop culture overall was never as relevant as the pre-army days.

    And Lennon was entirely correct. From the moment Elvis signed on to do G.I.Blues and started releasing stuff like It's Now Or Never (yes, a great song, but it's hardly the stuff of The Hillbilly Cat who tore up the world, is it?) the writing was on the wall.

    Lennon's "actions" regarding Elvis later in life do not nullify in any way the accuracy of his statement about Elvis. Had Lennon, Spector et al got to work with Elvis, then The King's musical legacy would be even greater than it is today.
    ".

    Say what you want about Elvis, but face it: the guy spewed out a lot of crap music in the 60s and 70s (whether it was all his fault or not is the subject of another thread), especially when compared to the other artists who were dominating the charts at that time. As I mentioned elsewhere: Sgt Pepper ... or Clambake?

    Sadly, the "real" Elvis (musically speaking at least) died in 1958, as Lennon suggested.
    To me the remark was tongue in cheek flip covering his true feeling-according to all those around him Elvis's death sent him into a depression. Instead of saying "he was my idol he'll be missed" or something like
    "I picked up my first guitar because of him" he downplayed his death-with IMO a flip remark which kept up his tough Liverpool hood image. He took Elvis's death hard and this was a hard remark -which he may have believed- but he said it to hide his feelings IMO Elvis did not die musically after 58 he changed-if some did not like the change you can't please everyone can you. Second biggest record seller of the 60s someone was still buying him even when he slumped.
    As far as Elvis continuing to be the "Hillbilly Cat" the Beatles did not continue to be the "Mop Tops" they evolved into something entirely different.
    So did Elvis, now you and others may not have liked the way he evolved, but someone must have since "Its Now Or Never" sold about 9 million copies.
    Elvis was Elvis whether he was the "Hillbilly Cat or in Clambake. I admit I would have preferred if he had not done a lot of the music he did in the 60s but he did. Some hate it, I can find pleasure in some of it it for only the memories I get from hearing it.
    Now we can look back and see rock-n-roll was here to stay- but in 1960 they were already saying it was near run its course. The rough edge had already been rounded off so to speak-Elvis did what he thought was the next step and he worked on ballads and more mature singing. The Beatles took it to the next level after Elvis. For Elvis the next level was after Sinatra. He could not be what the Beatles were-and they could not be what he was. IMO That is a fact of evolution. You may disagree and thats fine.

  16. #16
    International Level Cryogenic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    527
    I think Lennon's comments were and are more prescient than he realised -- I think the army itself and the loss of Elvis' mother changed him more than anything else ever could have. However, Elvis recording "It's Now or Never" is really no slur against his image. He recorded some pretty sryupy ballads in the 50's, too. He was IN LOVE with that style. "Elvis Is Back" is actually the single biggest artistic statement he made on record till that point (IMO). Of course, his 50's recordings are as peerless as they are priceless, but that 1960 album took him to a new level. It's too easy to draw a land in the sand. That said, as I began this paragraph by saying, I think that the army and death of Gladys forever altered Elvis. These two things, as much as they may have made him stronger, also pushed him closer to the Colonel. The wind was knocked out of his sails and he was more malleable after that, even though he dissented more than once. It seems that Elvis became a little more withdrawn from the world and clingier after the double blow of potentially losing his fame and definitely losing the love of his life hit him simultaneously. No disrespect to Charlie (or any of the other guys), but the army is where he picked up Hodge and goodness knows who else; his life to come really took shape in those essential years.

    As for this "crown" issue. What, what?!

    Well, no one can ever stop Elvis from being Elvis. He stands alone. But if you want me to move beyond rhetoric, I will move, musically speaking, to the "Elvis is Back" sessions / album once more. His voice was never better, he was fully committed on each and every recording, and he and the band cooked. The sessions were brilliantly productive and resulted in some of the best and most diverse music of his career. The rich sound quality and sultry blues feel also suggested a new direction for Elvis. That he never really capitalised on this high point as he really could and should have is unfortunate, but it doesn't detract from those sessions or the forward-thinking he demonstrated at the time. There were even very serious plans for him to go back to touring in 1960 / 1961! What happened later is sad. Musically, Elvis did drift into irrelevancy with increasing ennui: 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965 . . . each was weaker than the preceding. But there was a gradual upswing beginning in 1966 and Elvis got his mojo working in 1968. In a sense, it is unfair to compare him to The Beatles, Dylan, The Stones and whoever else at the time. The fact of the matter is that Elvis had already enjoyed tons of success in the 50's and beginning of the 60's (with the army potentially depriving him and us of even more!). Back then, those other guys were just beginning to gain inspiration -- from Elvis himself! Y'know, Elvis had already filled his basket and ours quite high; he shouldn't have fallen so low, but he'd earned his stripes and could afford to drift for a while. Then he came back and entered a new -- and, sadly, all too short -- phase of his and our lives. Again, we were changed.

  17. #17

    .

    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    As far as Elvis continuing to be the "Hillbilly Cat" the Beatles did not continue to be the "Mop Tops" they evolved into something entirely different.
    So did Elvis.
    Yes, in their latter years, The Beatles did evolve ... into something better; a group who genuinely kept changing the face of music with each and every new album.

    Elvis didn't do that. After 1960, he was homogenised, slicker, more "Hollywood" if you will. For a variety of reasons!
    Getlo - cute'n'cuddly

  18. #18
    TCB Mafia KPM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,932
    You have an opinion and its fine with me. As I said Elvis could not be the Beatles, and the Beatles could not be Elvis. I also said Elvis evolved and some may have not been happy with the way he did you are not it seems. Thats what makes the world go round. I on the other hand can see Elvis was Elvis. The Beatles were the Beatles. To compare them is apples and oranges.
    They are musical and cultural markers in 2 seperate generations. One led to the other. Elvis was great-one of a kind-for reasons which do not apply to the Beatles and their greatness. The Beatles had each other to work off of-equals to be inspired by. They collaborated. Lennon and McCartney would neither have been as successful alone, Harrison was spurred on by the success of Lennon and McCartney songwriting. Add Ringo and theres the Beatles. Elvis was Elvis.

  19. #19
    TCB Mafia
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,212
    he was one of a kind, he was unique, no threat for him, no way...

  20. #20
    TCB Mafia
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,495
    Quote Originally Posted by KPM View Post
    To me the remark was tongue in cheek flip covering his true feeling-according to all those around him Elvis's death sent him into a depression. Instead of saying "he was my idol he'll be missed" or something like
    "I picked up my first guitar because of him" he downplayed his death-with IMO a flip remark which kept up his tough Liverpool hood image. He took Elvis's death hard and this was a hard remark -which he may have believed- but he said it to hide his feelings IMO Elvis did not die musically after 58 he changed-if some did not like the change you can't please everyone can you. Second biggest record seller of the 60s someone was still buying him <snip>.

    As always, well said, KPM.

    Take care,
    Kim

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Col. Parker and the death threat?
    By Menwithbrokenhearts in forum Elvis Presley
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 07-25-2007, 03:22 PM
  2. suppose you met him...
    By tjs in forum Elvis Presley
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 03-26-2006, 11:28 PM
  3. Most popular album in his lifetime ?
    By dennyelvis in forum Elvis Presley
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 02-06-2005, 02:57 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •