Reply With QuoteThe Dark Side of Col Parker??
Is there a light side then!!
June 26th 2009 is a special date that commemorates four unique events of the Elvis World.
1. The 100th Birthday of Colonel Parker.
2. The 32nd Anniversary of Elvis' final concert in Indianapolis.
3. The 30th Anniversary of the death of Elvis' father, Vernon Presley.
4. The 30th Anniversary of the revelation to Elvis’ estate that Colonel Parker was still fleecing his client.
Although comedian Nipsy Russell stated that "Every entertainer should go to bed at night and pray he finds a Colonel Tom Parker under his bed when he wakes up in the morning" - is that really the truth?
It is a fact that after Elvis' death an official investigation found that "both Colonel Parker (and RCA) acted in collusion against Presley's best interests. Colonel Parker was guilty of self-dealing and overreaching and had violated his duty to both Elvis and to the estate."
While there is no doubt that Elvis and The Colonel's story is extremely complex, in this in-depth Spotlight EIN takes a look at the darker side of Colonel Tom Parker - and includes plenty of insights from Elvis’ colleagues and friends.
. Go here for this fascinating investigation.
(Spotlight, Source;EIN)
The Dark Side of Col Parker??
Is there a light side then!!
my thoughts exactly. I saw an old video of Elvis' bodyguards saying, the Colonel would never tell Elvis that he did a good job. My guess is that the last time Elvis heard encouraging words like that from someone he looked up to, that was part of his daily life was his mother. That might have been the cause of all the bad decisions he made after he got out of the ARMY.Originally Posted by May
Which is crap.
Witness the letter he wrote to Elvis after Aloha; one of many missives and messages from The Colonel giving positive reinforcement.
Getlo - cute'n'cuddly
You make me laugh Getlo. You are so subtle in your answers!!
But life would be so dull without him.You make me laugh Getlo. You are so subtle in your answers!!
Diane
Sure is, but every board taking itself seriously needs an intellectual.You make me laugh Getlo. You are so subtle in your answers!!
The thing that bothers me is that I can't post a word like !d!ot or d@mn, while crap is completely acceptable.
Anyway.. there's no doubt that Parker was a very sick and dangerous man (his address is on the back of this photo). Almost makes me ashamed to have come from Holland!
all the goons I left behind,
memories still linger..
good article
Play it James!
IMO he's always been vilified, as an excuse for lack of personal responsibility on Elvis part. I suspect thats why Elvis was willing to pay him so well too, because it allowed Elvis an out for things he really didn't want to do where he never had to be the bad guy . The Colonel is complicated and imperfect like the rest of us but if he was as evil as he's played up to be he wouldn't have been able to close as many deals as he did, Elvis or no Elvis they wouldn't have delt with him. They (music and movie industries) would have just said Sorry Elvis no deal ditch the Colonel and come back and talk with someone more reasonable.
All too often fans like to lay all the blame at the Colonels door and make him out to be this big bad monster who controlled Elvis.
For people who think like that I always wonder.....how can you be an Elvis fan if you assume Elvis was that weak to allow himself to be dominated.
Elvis had the Colonel as his manager it was Elvis Presley's choice. Like or loath the Colonel - Elvis kept him
I have been an Elvis fan since 1962 and IMO Elvis was weak and insecure on many fronts- contracts/business/money, older women, wondering if friends liked him or his celebrity etc-and he was strong in others.
That is no condemnation of him-that is understanding he was not a superman who could do it all and understood it all.
Work in Progress!
As I've said many times before, I truly believe that in the beginning, I think The Colonel and Elvis made a very powerful pair in the entertainment business! Who else could have brokered the kinds of deals that The Colonel did for Elvis, such as the Sullivan show deals (in terms of the amount of money he was able to secure for Elvis' appearances), the movie contracts, etc. And I think The Colonel did a masterful job of keeping Elvis' name and music in the public eye while he was in the Army. I mean, let's face it....with another manager, Elvis could have very well slipped out of the public eye while he was away in the Army. But The Colonel was savvy in releasing just the right single or album at just the right time, or release just the right press release when it was needed to keep Elvis' name constantly in the headlines!!!
And of course, the first couple of years following Elvis' release were basically a continuation of the powerhouse coupling of Elvis & The Colonel with the movie deals, the Frank Sinatra show, the Hawaii Benefit, etc.
HOWEVER...by the time Elvis was locked into the endless stream of movie contracts and silly soundtrack recordings in the mid-to-late 60's, it was clear to everyone (but Elvis, I suspect) that perhaps The Colonel had outgrown his ability to present Elvis the kind of challenges and changes that Elvis needed as an artist, an actor, a musician and as a human being. Yes, there were moments where The Colonel could still pull off a sweetheart of a deal, like the '69 Vegas engagement, but those moments were becoming fewer and farther between.
But sadly, because of Elvis' insecurities (as Ken pointed out so eloquently) in regards to his career and his huge sense of loyalty to The Colonel for all that he did accomplish to get Elvis to where he was, Elvis wasn't about to fire The Colonel. And unfortunately, THAT is the truly sad part of the Elvis Presley story. Elvis simply couldn't say to The Colonel "Thank you for all you've done, but it's time for me to move in a new direction." Why didn't Elvis do that? There are many speculations and rumors, but for whatever reason, it just didn't happen and by the mid 60's or the early 70's, it CLEARLY needed to be done. Would it have changed the course of history for Elvis? Maybe...maybe not, but sadly we'll never know what could have been and we're left with what TRAGICALLY happened.
So, basically, while I think Elvis and The Colonel were a formidable duo in the beginning, in the later years, it became increasingly clear that The Colonel's focus was solely on how much money Elvis could make for The Colonel....and all of the clearly one-sided deals that The Colonel made on Elvis' behalf to increase The Colonel's wealth, while making Elvis work harder and harder, is truly a sad tale...and one that really makes me angry every time I think about it...
TCB!
Mike
R.I.P. Tommy
We will miss you dearest friend
Because some of us don't think Elvis was a perfect human being, but still enjoy his music. He made some really bad decisions, just like everyone else. I didn't think acknowledging that meant you can't be an Elvis fan.For people who think like that I always wonder.....how can you be an Elvis fan if you assume Elvis was that weak to allow himself to be dominated.
And it is a fact that music history is filled with artists being ripped off by managers and business agents. The Beatles, the Stones, and Sam Cooke, to name just three - and Sam Cooke, Paul McCartney, and Mick Jagger all had good business sense, which Elvis didn't.
It's also a fact that the probate judge (Joseph Evans) in charge of Elvis' estate refused to approve a continuing relationship with Parker. There's a very long and detailed report presented to the Court by Lisa Marie's guardian ad litem (Blanchard Tual) documenting Parker's (and RCA's) less than ethical behavior. That report led to the EPE v. Parker and RCA litigation, which was settled by RCA paying off everyone to make the negative publicity go away, not by Parker being vindicated in court.
So the people who think Parker in the end was taking Elvis for a ride aren't pulling things out of thin air. They have plenty of evidence to back them up, starting with Tual's report and Judge Evans ordering EPE to terminate the relationship with Parker.
Yeah Parker was taking advantage - thing is Elvis was allowing it. I don't hold Parker responsible anymore than I do hold Elvis responsible.
It was a strange partnership.
I have been an Elvis fan since 1962 and IMO Elvis was weak and insecure on many fronts- contracts/business/money, older women, wondering if friends liked him or his celebrity etc-and he was strong in others.
That is no condemnation of him-that is understanding he was not a superman who could do it all and understood it all.
Well put Ken
"NO-ONE, BUT NO-ONE,IS HIS EQUAL, OR EVER WILL BE. HE WAS, AND IS SUPREME".Mick Jagger
Parker was a paid consultant to RCA, and he negotiated contracts for Elvis with RCA (RCA got the best of the deals) conflict of interest.
There was also some conflict of interest with the Hilton contracts which the judge investigated, and most definitely the deal with Vernon to continue as before was not fair to the estate.
Elvis and Vernon were just not business men-Parker was and he used his "Snowman" abilities to make deals seem fair I'm sure.
I do think its fair to hold Parker responsible-for deals which were not in Elvis's best interest because his job was to look out for Elvis's best interest in negotiations. Elvis surely began to figure it out in the mid 70s-but was simply to insecure on such matters to really make the break. Parker made sure Elvis was dependent on him-by playing on his insecurities.
I posted parts of a letter in another thread Parker sent Elvis in the early 70s warning him of listening to others concerning new songs or music, and about them trying to get into his good graces and playing up to him-which Parker in the letter was doing for himself. In between the lines of the message was-You can't trust others-but you can always trust me. Parker was smart at reading people and he read Elvis like a book IMO
Work in Progress!
EXCELLENT POINTS KEN!!!
TCB!
Mike
R.I.P. Tommy
We will miss you dearest friend
I think the Colonel made 3 mistakes in his management of Elvis
1. If you look at Elvis movie career it wasn't the early 60's movies that damaged his reputation as an actor nor was it the late 60's movies it was the films being made in the mid 60's like Harem Scarem, Girl Happy, Paradise Hawaiian Style, Spinout, Double Trouble, Easy Come Easy Go, Clambake and Speedway
These 9 films damaged Elvis credibility as an actor and as a serious musical artist very badly. I think Parker should've at least pushed the studio's harder for better roles i'm not saying great dramatic acting roles just some decent one's, what Elvis needed in the mid 60's was another Flaming Star, Wild in the Country, Follow that Dream, Kid Galahad or maybe even a Trouble with Girls or Change of Habit type script or role that would've been a hell of a lot better than the movies Elvis clunked out between 1965-1968.
If Elvis had made some decent films in the mid 60's his reputation would have been a lot better off.
2. I think the decision to stop recording and putting out studio albums after 1962 in favor of movie soundtracks was a big mistake.
I like all of Elvis studio albums from the 60's and think they are all very good to think Elvis didn't put out any between 1963-1967 is mind boggling we probably missed out on some good music.
I could just imagine Elvis experimenting with new songs by new writers and new sounds.
Elvis didn't record any compositions by Mitch Murray, Goffin and King, Mann and Weil, Jeff Barry and Ellie Greenwhich, Burt Bacarach and Hal David or Tommy Boyce and Bobby Hart these writers could've kept him in the game commercially and creatively during his lean period 1964-1968.
3. Not performing overseas: every major recording artist has at least done this to some extent except Elvis.
This seems to be the biggest thing held against Parker not setting up a European or a World Tour for his client.
Let me say I think Elvis career was doing very well from 1968-1973
After the t.v. special you had the shattering of the Vegas attendance records in 1969 and 1970 then you had a sold out U.S. tour, top 10 records in 1969 and 70, The Jaycees award in 1970, The Grammy lifetime achievement award in 1971, EOT winning a Golden Globe for best documentary in 72, He Touched Me album winning a Grammy in 1972, The attendance records he broke all across the U.S., The Aloha Special in early 1973 hit album and huge ratings success. The only thing he needed in this time was a European Tour after the completion of the 1970 U.S. Tour Elvis should've toured Canada in early 71 then in the summer of that year he should've done a tour of the U.K. plus a couple of additional countries like Germany and France to keep his career momentum going.
One of the Colonel best idea's was the worldwide satelite concert Aloha after that was over to again keep Elvis career momentum going he should've set up plans for Elvis to go on a huge ambitious World tour that would include going to every country that saw Aloha plus England. Now if Parker had done this it would've kept Elvis challenged and happy at least for a while and he wouldn't be vilified for never seting up international dates for Elvis.
This would've never have been an issue among the fans and Elvis dream for performing all over the world would've been satisfied.
Colonel Tom Parker is widely regarded as being a great manager in the early years for Elvis but in the middle and in the latter years of his career is thought to be a bad one had he done these 3 things he would've been held in much higher regard as a manager in the latter career of Elvis Presley.
Unfortunately very true Brian..........he should have had the courage to dump him
I don't know if Elvis would've got better roles even if he had fired the Colonel and gotten another manager in the mid 60's for a variety of reasons.
Hollywood had this attitude towards Elvis where they just wanted him to sing in musicals that was his niche where he drawed money in.
Hal Wallis made this comment that he signed Elvis to be a singer not an actor and not the next James Dean.
I think if Wallis was really serious about developing Elvis as a serious actor he would've gave him the supporting role in his 1956 film the Rainmaker instead of loaning him out to 20th century Fox to make Love me Tender.
Wallis could've also gave Robert Redford's 1967 role in Barefoot in the Park to Elvis instead of producing Easy Come Easy Go but he didn't.
MGM had the rights to the movie The Chaquitas (AKA The Trouble with Girls)
in 1959 with Glenn Ford in mind to star in it but it got shelved only to be made in 1968 with Elvis now The Trouble with Girls is a decent film but it could've been better with some script tweaking here and there. I bet if Glenn Ford had starred in the movie it would've been better, the script would've been better.
Charro was meant for Clint Eastwood but was passed on to Elvis I've heard that in the original script there was more violence and grit but once Elvis got the role the script was watered down by the screenwriters and the more gritty elements were removed and it became a milk toast western.
Charro had potential to be a very good western and if Clint Eastwood was the star of it as intended I bet it would've been this really gritty bad *** western but unfortunately it gets watered down and the budget gets slashed when Elvis got involved.
So you see there was more obstacles for Elvis in Hollywood than just the Colonel.
Posting Permissions
