Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:59 pm
EPA4368 wrote: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?
Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:33 pm
r&b wrote: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?
Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:38 pm
zolderopruiming1 wrote:As for liking a job, I would have been very happy making those movies and making that much money in the sixties. Mind you, I would not have minded Parker taking 90%! It would still be more than what I made in my regular job in the sixties and a lot less work a year while fooling around with those starlets, Ann-Margret et cetera cannot be bad either.![]()
If Elvis did not like it he could always have fired his manager and go back to driving a truck or something.
Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:49 pm
jurasic1968 wrote: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?
Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:27 am
George Smith wrote: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.
Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:40 am
zolderopruiming1 wrote:r&b wrote: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?
Whether or not Elvis was happy making this movie I don't know.
In the sixties it was fun to see Elvis' movies in the cinema and that was where they were made for, not for VHS or DVD or TV!
The only one I did not like was The trouble with girls but later on TV it looked like an o.k. movie.
As for liking a job, I would have been very happy making those movies and making that much money in the sixties. Mind you, I would not have minded Parker taking 90%! It would still be more than what I made in my regular job in the sixties and a lot less work a year while fooling around with those starlets, Ann-Margret et cetera cannot be bad either.![]()
If Elvis did not like it he could always have fired his manager and go back to driving a truck or something.
Wed Feb 27, 2013 4:15 am
HoneyTalkNelson wrote:Original research from primary source materials is always better than taking something from a book or the Internet as gospel.
Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:12 am
drjohncarpenter wrote:zolderopruiming1 wrote:As for liking a job, I would have been very happy making those movies and making that much money in the sixties. Mind you, I would not have minded Parker taking 90%! It would still be more than what I made in my regular job in the sixties and a lot less work a year while fooling around with those starlets, Ann-Margret et cetera cannot be bad either.![]()
If Elvis did not like it he could always have fired his manager and go back to driving a truck or something.
Parker taking 50% of the gross was obscene, and unprecedented to this very day, let alone your absurd contention about 90%.
Your excuse-making aside, Elvis' other option was not a return to Crown Electric in Memphis. There were many, many talented and canny agents who would have jumped at the chance to properly and creatively manage Elvis Presley.
But it required our hero taking that step, which he simply could not do. It's sad.
Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:22 am
stevelecher wrote:drjohncarpenter wrote:Parker taking 50% of the gross was obscene, and unprecedented to this very day, let alone your absurd contention about 90%.
Your excuse-making aside, Elvis' other option was not a return to Crown Electric in Memphis. There were many, many talented and canny agents who would have jumped at the chance to properly and creatively manage Elvis Presley.
But it required our hero taking that step, which he simply could not do. It's sad.
+1. I'll never totally understand it. No matter how naive Elvis was, he had to know in the late 1960's and in the 70's, that 50% was obscene. Why did he go for it? I wish he could have recognized that Eddy Arnold's career continued after he fired Parker.
Wed Feb 27, 2013 6:33 pm
drjohncarpenter wrote:stevelecher wrote:drjohncarpenter wrote:Parker taking 50% of the gross was obscene, and unprecedented to this very day, let alone your absurd contention about 90%.
Your excuse-making aside, Elvis' other option was not a return to Crown Electric in Memphis. There were many, many talented and canny agents who would have jumped at the chance to properly and creatively manage Elvis Presley.
But it required our hero taking that step, which he simply could not do. It's sad.
+1. I'll never totally understand it. No matter how naive Elvis was, he had to know in the late 1960's and in the 70's, that 50% was obscene. Why did he go for it? I wish he could have recognized that Eddy Arnold's career continued after he fired Parker.
There's a potential book in answering those questions. Or maybe someone already wrote it.
Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:15 pm
Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:08 am
jurasic1968 wrote:Roustabout, OK, it was the only one he gave some real advises. So the Colonel made 825.000 $ from advising on 33 movies, but in reality on only one?? Not too bad for the Colonel.
Hosted by ElviCities