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

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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?


Let's not get off-topic. Send them a PM...

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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?


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. :mrgreen:
If Elvis did not like it he could always have fired his manager and go back to driving a truck or something.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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. :mrgreen:
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.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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?


It was just a stipulation Colonel Parker had in his contract that justified him being paid extra money.

A similar situation and example would be that actor Larry Hagman asked for a raise in the late 1980s while he was on Dallas.

CBS said okay to his salary demands but to justify it they added his name in the opening credits as an executive producer even though Hagman did nothing except act.

The only film Colonel Parker could really advise on was Roustabout because of his days of working in the carnival.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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.


My pleasure, happy to set the record straight.

Original research from primary source materials is always better than taking something from a book or the Internet as gospel.

I rarely visit this site now and just saw this topic by chance. If you have a specific movie related question, please send me a message and I'll be glad to help.

Best,
Bob

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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. :mrgreen:
If Elvis did not like it he could always have fired his manager and go back to driving a truck or something.


Thats very short-sighted. I did not like it much sitting in the cinema by the mid-60's and seeing a half empty house at a first run Elvis movie like Double Trouble or PHS and having people laugh when they shouldnt be. My guy's career was spiraling fast and he did nothing to stop it. As for your 90% comment, words fail me.
Last edited by r&b on Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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.


Always? No.

Luckily for the millions without ready access to "primary source materials," the internet does indeed offer the same, if one knows where -- and how -- to look.

Anyhoo, thanks for confirming the prior research I posted about the release date of "Double Trouble."

The 21st Century is pretty cool. ;-)

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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. :mrgreen:
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.

+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.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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.


There's a potential book in answering those questions. Or maybe someone already wrote it.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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.

??

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:15 pm

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.

Re: A Flaw in the Colonel's Formula?

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.

And therein, my friend, is the beauty of Colonel Thomas Andrew Parker.