Anything about Elvis
More than 30 Million visitors can't be wrong

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Mon Feb 25, 2013 11:51 pm

I think Parker saw Ann as a rival of Elvis (as she sang "My Rival" in the movie) so he never wanted a so much powerful female star anymore. In Blue Hawaii Joan Blackman is like Elvis' sister (one of the few points Albert Goldman was right). Maybe Nancy Sinatra in Speedway attempted to be an another powerful costar but she didn't succeded. Ironically, Elvis said to the Colonel that he wanted him to manage Ann Margret after Viva Las Vegas. I believe (like Doc sad) Viva Las Vegas was the turning point for Elvis' movie career: from this time on the Colonel wanted low budget movies with low quality soundtracks, and in consequence Elvis entire career became five years later (before the 1968 TV special) a sad joke.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:16 am

Maybe Ann would have persuaded Elvis to get rid of Parker.

Image

How close was it that Elvis got a Swedish wife?

The answer was buried with Elvis. The only one else who possibly could have known is Parker, the one who probably got Elvis on other thoughts, to live up to his promise to Priscilla and her family.

Elvis would have needed a strong woman by his side.

It's a shame it wasn't her.

Image

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:32 am

EPA4368 wrote:Maybe Ann would have persuaded Elvis to get rid of Parker.


Actually, at the time of making "Viva Las Vegas," Elvis tried to get Parker to manage her career as well as his. At first he tentatively agreed, but it was just a ploy. Later on he backed off, giving him the reason that he would not be able to continue doing the great job of Elvis' career if he was busy dealing with Ann's future.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:34 am

Ann was a strong woman, a vivid personality, a talented actress and she could be the perfect wife for Elvis!

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:19 am

Why would Parker have wanted to sabotage VLV? Was it just because he viewed Ann-Margaret as a threat? I thought his philosophy was basically "get as much as you can, as soon as you can," which would argue for a soundtrack release. I mean, it's not as if VLV was a "serious" film.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:25 am

This kind of debate is endless and useless. It's been said zillions of time that Colonel Parker was first a promoter not a manager and as mentionned above: a business man not a visionary. But I think with the years of examining how Elvis's career was handled it's clear that Elvis first was overall satisfied with the way the Colonel managed his talent.
Remember, It takes two to tango. I've made my mind to it and accept that for a good part Elvis's talent was wasted on inferior quality movie and trapped in a gimmick that squeezed him on a limited list of songs that deprived him to record greater songs: all this for an easy profit. You can't have it both way. In life or a career such a his, you come to point where you play for comfort or challenge; money or artistery and Elvis could choose. Well he chose. He did undeniable fantastic recordings, even with the limited material he was offered, but the movie formula after 1964 and the Vegas gigs in the 70's were a dead end zone for his talent. Why did he let the Colonel signed him in so many bad musicals ahead? And so it goes for Vegas. Flaming Star was promising on an artistery level but at the end of the decade came out Stay Away Joe - non scenario story - and what kills me is that they didn't even think of including Too Much Monkey Business in this silly movie: at least we would have get a superb rock n' roll scene to watch today instead of just having an audio track to enjoy. I'm done, it kills me

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 1:30 am

Eggrert wrote:Why would Parker have wanted to sabotage VLV? Was it just because he viewed Ann-Margaret as a threat? I thought his philosophy was basically "get as much as you can, as soon as you can," which would argue for a soundtrack release. I mean, it's not as if VLV was a "serious" film.

Parker moved very quickly to alienate anyone who had an inside creative line to Elvis.

If Elvis came into contact with anyone who might encourage independent thought, they were removed from the circle once they'd outlived their usefulness (to Parker): Leiber & Stoller, Chips Moman, Steve Binder, these are all obvious examples.

It could easily be argued that had EP continued working with these creative people then he (and Parker) would have continued making more money and greater music, but for Parker it was a question of power and influence and not just finance.

Ann-Margaret was a serious threat to Parker because Elvis REALLY LIKED HER and he would possibly have followed any personal and professional advice she might have offered.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:22 am

jurasic1968 wrote:Ann was a strong woman, a vivid personality, a talented actress and she could be the perfect wife for Elvis!


Are you serious? Yes A-M was a strong woman, vivid personality and just the kind of wife Elvis didnt want. She would not be perfect for him , she would have been a disaster. Yes he loved her, but it never would have worked. Elvis needed to control his wife, like he did with Priscilla. He molded her into what he wanted for a wife. He certainly didnt want his wife to have any kind of independence or career. Once she matured and saw just how ridiculous the whole marriage was, she split.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:47 am

r&b wrote:
jurasic1968 wrote:Ann was a strong woman, a vivid personality, a talented actress and she could be the perfect wife for Elvis!


Are you serious? Yes A-M was a strong woman, vivid personality and just the kind of wife Elvis didnt want. She would not be perfect for him , she would have been a disaster. Yes he loved her, but it never would have worked. Elvis needed to control his wife, like he did with Priscilla. He molded her into what he wanted for a wife. He certainly didnt want his wife to have any kind of independence or career. Once she matured and saw just how ridiculous the whole marriage was, she split.



It's probably not of our business, After all, it's their private lives. But since they are public figures, and lots of litterature have been written- noticably Alanah Nash "Elvis Presley And The Women Who Loved Him" and it hard not to figure things out the way you just wrote. I tend to agree with your point of view. There is the ideal Elvis and the one who lived on this earth with his talents, his human qualities and -like all of us - his flaws and his dark side.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:53 am

This discussion about what Colonel Parker might have thought of Ann Margret is just speculation.

Ann Margret never did try to have the influence that Lieber and Stoller did so i don't really see Colonel Parker having a problem with her.

Ann Margret did some pretty crappy movies in her career after Viva Las Vegas.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 5:52 am

George Smith wrote:
Eggrert wrote:Why would Parker have wanted to sabotage VLV? Was it just because he viewed Ann-Margaret as a threat? I thought his philosophy was basically "get as much as you can, as soon as you can," which would argue for a soundtrack release. I mean, it's not as if VLV was a "serious" film.

Parker moved very quickly to alienate anyone who had an inside creative line to Elvis.

If Elvis came into contact with anyone who might encourage independent thought, they were removed from the circle once they'd outlived their usefulness (to Parker): Leiber & Stoller, Chips Moman, Steve Binder, these are all obvious examples.

It could easily be argued that had EP continued working with these creative people then he (and Parker) would have continued making more money and greater music, but for Parker it was a question of power and influence and not just finance.

Ann-Margaret was a serious threat to Parker because Elvis REALLY LIKED HER and he would possibly have followed any personal and professional advice she might have offered.


Brilliant summary.

And let's not forget Ann-Margret has worked with many great actors and directors, and in her career earned numerous accolades. It would have been a dream come true had Elvis been so lucky.

Ann-Margret Olsson (born April 28, 1941) is a Swedish-American actress, singer, and dancer whose professional name is Ann-Margret.

She is best known for her roles in Bye Bye Birdie (1963), Viva Las Vegas (1964), The Cincinnati Kid (1965), Carnal Knowledge (1971), and Tommy (1975). She has won five Golden Globe Awards and been nominated for two Academy Awards, two Grammy Awards, a Screen Actors Guild Award, and six Emmy Awards. In 2010, she won her first Emmy Award for her guest appearance on Law & Order: SVU.

Ann-Margret
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann-Margret



Oh, and she is as sexy as Elvis ever was ...

phpBB [video]

Ann-Margret, "I've Got the Music in Me"
The Tonight Show, Starring Johnny Carson (NBC-TV, Wednesday, January 22, 1975)

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:17 am

I read in many books that the Double Trouble movie was released in April 1967. So where is the truth? It was delayed or not?


DOUBLE TROUBLE was always scheduled for a summer release. It was reviewed in Boxoffice on April 10, 1967 and slated for a June release.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:32 am

The flaw(s) are quite simple.
He didn't relize that challenging varied projects were what would keep Elvis on top professinally and personally. There are plenty of more details but that's what it boils down to.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:38 am

Great confirmation, HTN, I was hoping you'd contribute to this thread.

The RCA 1967 release schedule makes more sense with this piece of the jigsaw.


___________


And thanks for the kudos, John, much appreciated.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 11:44 am

George Smith wrote:
Eggrert wrote:Why would Parker have wanted to sabotage VLV? Was it just because he viewed Ann-Margaret as a threat? I thought his philosophy was basically "get as much as you can, as soon as you can," which would argue for a soundtrack release. I mean, it's not as if VLV was a "serious" film.

Parker moved very quickly to alienate anyone who had an inside creative line to Elvis.

If Elvis came into contact with anyone who might encourage independent thought, they were removed from the circle once they'd outlived their usefulness (to Parker): Leiber & Stoller, Chips Moman, Steve Binder, these are all obvious examples.

It could easily be argued that had EP continued working with these creative people then he (and Parker) would have continued making more money and greater music, but for Parker it was a question of power and influence and not just finance.

Ann-Margaret was a serious threat to Parker because Elvis REALLY LIKED HER and he would possibly have followed any personal and professional advice she might have offered.


Elvis was a puppet on a string who had no say in this?
Elvis always did what Elvis wanted.
Elvis recorded the songs he wanted to record.
As for the movies, have a look at the different movie companies and their type of movies. MGM is known for quick buck low budget movies. The "serious" ones for Paramount were not as succesfull as the MGM ones, hence no more than 3 Paramount movies and loads of MGM movies.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 12:07 pm

After hearing Elvis' 1972 On Tour interview, I am not at all convinced that he was allowed to take charge when it came to the movies. What Elvis should have done is a lot clearer after the fact, and he seems to have gained self awareness about those years by the time of that interview. He blames himself, which is partly justified, but it is made clear that he was being told what to do. He wasn't going to break a contract, and when the opertunity came to change things around he didn't hesitate. Sad to say that history repeated itself in the seventies. The Elvis of his last four and a half years was very different from the one in 1968-69, no longer strong enough to fight back.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:01 pm

Elvis had no script aproval. I wonder what Colonel's Technical Advisor job at all the movies included. Adviser on what? What he knew about making films?

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 2:22 pm

zolderopruiming1 wrote:Elvis always did what Elvis wanted.
Elvis recorded the songs he wanted to record.

I would honestly suggest that history demonstrates otherwise.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:51 pm

HoneyTalkNelson wrote:
I read in many books that the Double Trouble movie was released in April 1967. So where is the truth? It was delayed or not?


DOUBLE TROUBLE was always scheduled for a summer release. It was reviewed in Boxoffice on April 10, 1967 and slated for a June release.


Thanks for posting HTN.

Interesting they mention, "Old MacDonald Had a Farm" in the review. Don't recalling hearing anything about Elvis singing it till I saw it in the trailer. I do recall DJs saying Elvis's next film is European based and Elvis might be spending time shooting scenes there. Being the era of Bond films, the British invasion and hearing Elvis touring Europe, things were looking fantastic! Unfortunately Elvis never left the MGM lot.

phpBB [video]

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:59 pm

According to Marty Lacker, this movie really disgusted Elvis big time. He hated the whole experince of making it. Its no wonder after seeing this trailer.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:23 pm

I'll bet Elvis surrounded by the Wiere Brothers didn't help either.

Image

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:32 pm

According to Marty Lacker a laminated photocopy of a signed Beatles photo is a rarity worth at least $3,000
He tried to sell it as an original signed photo!
He's no trustable source.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:37 pm

zolderopruiming1 wrote:According to Marty Lacker a laminated photocopy of a signed Beatles photo is a rarity worth at least $3,000
He tried to sell it as an original signed photo!
He's no trustable source.



Maybe, but do you honestly like this film or think Elvis was happy making this and singing these songs?

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:31 pm

George Smith wrote:And thanks for the kudos, John, much appreciated.


I call it the way I see it. ;-)


George Smith wrote:
zolderopruiming1 wrote:Elvis always did what Elvis wanted.
Elvis recorded the songs he wanted to record.


I would honestly suggest that history demonstrates otherwise.


Absolutely. Presley's own words, publicly and privately, refute the claim.


zolderopruiming1 wrote:According to Marty Lacker a laminated photocopy of a signed Beatles photo is a rarity worth at least $3,000
He tried to sell it as an original signed photo!
He's no trustable source.


That is a very short-sighted, foolish notion. Marty Lacker is among the few insiders whose books have enhanced our knowledge and understanding of who Elvis Presley was, and how he created his art.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:55 pm

zolderopruiming1 wrote:According to Marty Lacker a laminated photocopy of a signed Beatles photo is a rarity worth at least $3,000
He tried to sell it as an original signed photo!
He's no trustable source.


When did this happen?