Elvis
WARNER BROSAfter redefining the Shakespearean tale of Romeo + Juliet, elevating the modern musical in Moulin Rouge and adding the roaring to the roaring twenties with The Great Gatsby, visionary director Baz Luhrmann takes his cinematic sights on an individual many simply believe cannot and should not be touched adapted to the cinematic form in the king that is Elvis Presley. Given Luhrmann’s craft and vivid dynamic operandi behind the camera, the identity and vision of Elvis Presley and the director's aesthetic gelling do not give the most optimistic opinion of what could be. But alas, with the Presley estate fully onboard and a casting call that was more convoluted than the Vatican chamber choosing the next pope, Luhrmann and co opt to once again achieve the impossible in taking the simple and sprinkling a little bit of magic in between, but does the visionary director have another hit on his hands?
The short answer is yes. Anyone wanting to see the simplistic elevated – regarding cinematic style and aesthetic – will be more than impressed in terms of what Luhrmann and co put forward on screen in what convention dictates as a biopic. The problem? It could and should have been so much better, but this needs to be broken down. For starters, Austin Butler, who headlines this piece as the titular character, is more or less fabulous in his performance. Butler is charismatic and immersive, bringing due diligence of fragility and emotional brevity. Butler manages the impossible by taking away the ego, nostalgia and escapism of such an icon to make him human. A simplistic and one-note ideal on paper but dissolves the enigmatic nature of this beloved celebrity, and what is brought to the table is an organic and humanised nature to a person who can feel, who emotes, and has a voice; attributes that are no easy task to bring to something that millions of people appropriate a differing type of character towards and belief. Each small detail of what Butler brings in his performance immerses the audience ten-fold, small but pivotal idiosyncrasies that could so easily swerve the picture and immersion of this character study to an imitation and not an organic creation but are crafted so poetically and brilliantly that they intensify the experience, such as the perfect accent and voice, hair, slight smirk etc. Everything here has a character and life within itself in perfect harmony that has the essence of who Elvis Presley is and was. Granted, the feature does have slight issues with the character itself, in that Butler's character never seems to age in over twenty years of screen-time. Aside from one pivotal epilogue that closes the feature, it is hard to externally see the fall and age that this character undertakes due to the pressures that surround him. Granted, Luhrmann and co introduce these with more or less on-the-nose descriptions and expositions via narration and on-screen cut-aways. However, the sheer focus is on Butler's character's internal struggles, which, as aforementioned, are brought forward spectacularly well, and, if anything, saves this from the rudimentary storyline and character study.
The storyline in itself does not take as many liberties or elevated depictions as one might expect in a Baz Luhrmann tale. Granted, this is an Elvis story through and through, but it is not exactly told through his eyes but through a supporting character narration. This is undoubtedly to secure the faith of Presley's estate and inadvertently create an antagonist – albeit with a certain amount of balance in said depiction – that the audience can gravitate towards and intensify their relationship with the titular character. This comes in the form of an almost unrecognisable Tom Hanks as Colonel Tom Parker, who utilises a strange and often enigmatic accent of southern American mixed with an ambiguous European influence – which is meant to be dutch – that throughout becomes quite the gripe. Casting Hanks, who often portrays the American sweetheart as the antagonist, is a rather electric oxymoronic and effectual decision to twist the bitter knife of the contextual manipulation of Presley feel even more powerful and hurtful. Hanks, in turn, has a lot on his plate, not only forming the bulk of being the narrator of this story and with the accent formed becoming quite a difficult task for the viewer to be in engrossed with, the tone inadvertently becomes unironically humorous when conveying darker and impacting tones and themes. Elements that often feel tonally ridiculous and narrowminded. Alas, Hanks does achieve what is set out by showcasing the lust and hunger for financial manipulation in protecting his asset for economic gain, and seeing that brutal but eventual downfall is still compelling on screen, even if it often feels like a caricature than a living breathing entity with thought or feeling.
Nevertheless, in terms of that very tone and theme, Luhrmann brings a respectable amount of width and balance to this story in terms of what is perceived as good or bad per se. Do not be fooled; Elvis does take a clear side, but that being said, the director is not afraid to showcase a viewpoint of looking in from the outside, which in actual fact, elevates this story once more in that it does not ever feel overly polished or bleached out with showcasing the darker and bitter side of this beloved icon in an honest and organic manner. Presley made bad and poor choices, and this is showcased in this picture with clear intent with the resulting fallout.
The two most consequential aspects of production that feel misguided are both the edit and soundtrack. Starting with the former, the best way to describe the flow and aesthetic is feeling almost like a fever dream of sorts. In the context of this rise to riches and downfall feels aptly appropriate if done consciously. However, time and place feel strangely off with substantial usage of what appears to be blue screen taking precedent, and therefore an artificial plastic look takes centre stage in that of production design, and with its constant usage, it becomes challenging to unsee artificially made backgrounds and settings. The resulting impact of place and setting not feeling real ultimately affects the certitude and brevity of Presley's story – an attribute that caused the demise of Luhrmann’s previous effort in Australia – and understanding of the sheer rise of stardom and frenzy that happened in a place of consequence and not fabrication which this feature unconsciously implies of the latter and not the gravitas of the former. The edit itself flows poorly, at a strong push of over one hundred and fifty minutes and covering decades; Luhrmann and co have a plentiful of narrative to convey and showcase on screen, and there is a lot that Luhrmann successfully produces in terms of spectacle in the life of the titular icon, but such iconic and influential moments are a blink and miss set pieces that have little impact and connection.
Similarly, the more intimate moments are glossed over and fail to find momentum and impacting grit, bar the final sequence between the titular character and his wife Priscilla, played by the wasted talents of actress Olivia DeJonge, which is gut-wrenching but even to that degree could be argued does not quite hit the breadth of emotional decadence that the feature believes itself to have earned between the two. Their initial meeting is not covered, and while the reality of this event is quite controversial in reality, in the cinematic state, it just happens, and without build-up and connection, it leaves much to be desired. Moreover, what hurts the most is that this could easily be the emotional core and connective tissue that forms the picture, but it is left until the second act and cannot build up enough momentum to craft a palette or form.
Nevertheless, the greatest controversy here feels ironically placed in the soundtrack, which is a combination of Presely and contemporary musicians covering The King's discography. Now granted, having a new generation of diverse musicians cover music that, in turn, initially inspired the man himself by blues artists is a neat and delicate homage to not only the titular figure but the grassroots voices and communities these songs and riffs filled. That being said, in classic Luhrmann form, the director is not content in just homage but attempts to redefine and remix of sorts these past and present artists in a manner that hits good or bad at odds fifty/fifty. It almost feels as if it is a catch-22, in a manner of never being able to accommodate the ultra die-hard fanbase and adapt to a new audience that this feature is ultimately hoping to introduce itself upon.
This ultimately is the feeling that has almost engulfed Luhrmann as a director late with The Great Gatsby and now Elvis. Specifically, in terms of taking a woven fabric of international pop culture and trying to update it for modern audiences with a new lick of paint while pleasing those who see the property as untouchable. Either way, Luhrmann cant cater to both types of audiences, but in his praise attempts to accomplish the impossible, and while it may be way off in terms of production design and odd casting choices with an edit that slogs its way through, when it hits it does so in a roaring success, and with anything, Luhrmann touches it has his DNA and passion exploding from the seams and offers an experience that never dulls. One thing, however, that should come out of this in a meteoric rise should be the performance and talent of Austin Butler, who roars in triumph at attempting something that would frighten any actor, but Butler nails something here to such a point in puts Edgerton's Elton John and Malek's Freddie Mercury to absolute shame.
