All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Fri Dec 01, 2006 3:11 pm

Got mine a couple days ago, and it is AWESOME. The picture quality was just superb, i couldn't believe they could restore it that much.

Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:02 pm

JamieAKelley wrote:You tell 'em, Brad!

:lol: (I'll tell you to tell 'em and you tell 'em!) :lol:

Why is it that I'm craving a Tonto Bar?

Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:35 am

Joe Car wrote:It was a simpler era, people seemed happier, especially the kids. It wasn't about school shootings, or other problems so much, it was about playing records and grooving to rock & roll, waiting for the next "hot release" with our guy leading the way. Boy, I would have have loved to have been a teenager in that era!

Would you have loved to be a black teenager in Little Rock in 1956-57?

Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:46 am

Was'nt Jaykeisha? :D

Sat Dec 02, 2006 5:19 am

On Elvis Radio tonight on Sirius, George Klein had a nice interview with Andrew Solt about the Sullivan boxset.

So that was some good advertising.

And George said that Elvis used to impersonate Charles Laughton...that'd be funny to hear :D

Rich

Sat Dec 02, 2006 6:06 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
Joe Car wrote:It was a simpler era, people seemed happier, especially the kids. It wasn't about school shootings, or other problems so much, it was about playing records and grooving to rock & roll, waiting for the next "hot release" with our guy leading the way. Boy, I would have have loved to have been a teenager in that era!

Would you have loved to be a black teenager in Little Rock in 1956-57?


Doc, to be honest, race never crossed my mind when I made the above comments.

Sat Dec 02, 2006 7:56 am

Joe Car wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:
Joe Car wrote:It was a simpler era, people seemed happier, especially the kids. It wasn't about school shootings, or other problems so much, it was about playing records and grooving to rock & roll, waiting for the next "hot release" with our guy leading the way. Boy, I would have have loved to have been a teenager in that era!

Would you have loved to be a black teenager in Little Rock in 1956-57?


Doc, to be honest, race never crossed my mind when I made the above comments.

I understand. It's so easy to get caught up in the many fascinating and wonderful things about America in the 1950s, while forgetting that many citizens, men, women and children, still had to endure enormously unfair hardships.

Elvis played a big part in breaking down the walls of race, and the "Sullivan" shows certainly fueled that revolution.

Sat Dec 02, 2006 12:03 pm

Until Elvis started recording, he and his family were among the many left out of the American dream at that time.

I don't think the world was ever particularly innocent. When Elvis made these shows in 1956, the world was only 11 years away from the most devastating war in history and the US was only three years removed from Korea a war that killed more Americans than Viet Nam. Which makes the uproar over Elvis' hips that much more amazing. Men who a little more than a decade before had seen concentration camps first hand, seen an atomic dropped on an occupied, lived with the fear of nuclear annihilation every day of their lives thought that Elvis' swiveling hips would be the end of life as they know it. Maybe railing against Elvis was as much an outlet for them as rallying around Elvis was for their kids. Maybe too Elvis was seen as the absolute end of a progression where not even music and entertainment could be counted on to remain the same.

There is a great line in Marcus' note about Sullivan and his like and how they took it for granted that they were bringing a gift to the world and that they would be remembered forever. The success of Elvis, so different from anything they'd ever known, questioned the legitimacy of that notion.

I don't want to trivialize Elvis and his hips. They symbolized so much in a world that was completely bottled up not only by racism, but by fear sex and the numbing joyless conformity that came out of McCarthy and the Red Scare. And as Pete Townshend described when talking about the doldrums of his country after the war, Elvis and the early rockers made it ok to have fun again. That Elvis at the time was understood only by teenagers was also really important in that, at that time, teenagers were treated like mini-adults to be seen and not heard. Elvis by aligning them as a group also made them individuals. Although, Elvis was considered by most adults to be an extreme in bad taste, he was distinct and adults could no longer pretend that their sons and daughters were mere replicas of themselves.

Elvis represented even more to poor whites and blacks who were completely ignored and dismissed by the culture. Ed Sullivan needing Elvis Presley to score big ratings shifted the balance of power and acknowledged the value of these forgotten groups.

I'd say people are more sophisticated today in general which also makes them more jaded and cynical. We're also a lot more media savvy today. One thing that makes the mid-20th century so attractive in retrospect is that many fields were wide open and in their infancy. Some of the innovations made in the 1950s and 1960s can't be duplicated in our times because you can only invent the wheel once. For instance while there will always be talented actors of genius, no one today can have the impact of a Marlon Brando because once you've heightened the realism of screen and stage acting, it's done and all others can do is embellish that innovation. Once Jackie Robinson breaks the color barrier in baseball, it's done etc.

It's not a mistake to say that there was something lost in translation. With so much of the landscape then open and so much established now it is probably more difficult to achieve rapid upward mobility today. However, the ground for the bottom is definitely higher (although still not high enough) than it was then.

It's also tantalizing to be part of a truly mass culture. Elvis drew more viewers on Ed Sullivan than the American Idol final last year and the country was half as big. At the same time, you can't argue that the niche' culture does not have its benefits. In 1956 if you wanted to watch a Humphrey Bogart movie instead of Elvis that night you'd probably out of luck. Today you have literally thouands of choices in what you want to read, listen to, watch readily at hand. I can go out to a store tonight and buy a movie to watch for about the same price as a movie ticket and a drink.

Less trivially the people who benefitted from stuff like Jackie Robinson's break through are living much better lives than their ancestors did at that time. Plus we all benefit from better medicine and other breakthroughs.

Sorry for the ramble, I just thought this hit an interesting point.

Sat Dec 02, 2006 2:22 pm

Doc, LTB, well said. It's easy as a white male to get caught up in the "Happy Days" scenario where all is well and the biggest concern is whether you have a date for the dance on Saturday night, and EP is blaring from the jukebox. I'm glad that I've been reminded of the difficult times of that incredible decade, and also take comfort knowing that our guy changed the world as we know it, not only for all kids, but the adults as well.

Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:42 am

Just got my copy today. Had ordered it from fan club but when I passed a music-store and saw no less than 5 copies in the window I just had to go in and get me a copy immediately.
Was supposed to go shopping but just had to get back home and watch those long awaited performances.
Just watched the Elvis sections and, Man, this is an incredible package. And an even more incredible restauration. Thank to ALL involved in getting this project out to the fans.
For the first time EVER I could watch the medley from January 6, 1957. Never saw that before. WOW man. Is Elvis great. And just love the way he play the audience.

Also love all the small clips from other Sullivan shows and the private movies. One thing that bothers me with such a truly fine work is that the Magnolia Garden footage is been announced as being from April 1955 when in fact it's from August 7. That´s a bit of a shame.

All that said, is it just my copy that has some white vertical lines in some of the close-up portions?? And even some shadowing in other parts?? Don't know if this could be because I have a VHS-recorder underneath my DVD-player and a Digital-box on top of it. Could this interfere and make those distorsions??

Well, once again, truly love this package and thanks again to everybody involved.

And a very special thanks to you Kevin. Great work man. And you just get on back to your work on the other 1956 TV-shows now. you hear me!!!

Sincerely
Brian
http://www.brian56.dk

Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:55 am

Of all the people on this MB, Brian, I was very curious to read your thoughts. You are a true aficionado of 1956.

Isn't this one hell of a Christmas gift? I already bought two more copies for relatives who watched in 1956 -- they will flip!

bripet56 wrote:All that said, is it just my copy that has some white vertical lines in some of the close-up portions?? And even some shadowing in other parts?? Don't know if this could be because I have a VHS-recorder underneath my DVD-player and a Digital-box on top of it.

I don't get this -- your theory may be correct. Your best best is to do a direct TV-to-DVD connection and play 'em again.

Finally, Brian, is Elvis' hair dyed black in the October broadcast?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 4:52 am

Show #3 is a little variable in terms of brightness (though I took care a fair amount of it)-- there was a power instability somewhere in the orginal kinescope chain that January evening, which actually caused the film recorder to lose image a couple of times over the course of the hour.

-Kevin

Sun Dec 03, 2006 5:37 am

Thanks for the additional information, Kevin.
Last edited by drjohncarpenter on Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

Sun Dec 03, 2006 6:19 am

bripet56 wrote:
All that said, is it just my copy that has some white vertical lines in some of the close-up portions?? And even some shadowing in other parts?? Don't know if this could be because I have a VHS-recorder underneath my DVD-player and a Digital-box on top of it. Could this interfere and make those distorsions??



Is your player converting the native NTSC to PAL.....I'm not sure what system is in use in Sweden??

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:08 am

bripet56 wrote:Also love all the small clips from other Sullivan shows and the private movies. One thing that bothers me with such a truly fine work is that the Magnolia Garden footage is been announced as being from April 1955 when in fact it's from August 7. That´s a bit of a shame.


Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Jerry actually state in his interview on disc 3 that the 16mm was taken in 1954? (not that he is correct but I could have sworn I heard him say 1954)

Sun Dec 03, 2006 7:38 am

Quote: Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Jerry actually state in his interview on disc 3 that the 16mm was taken in 1954? (not that he is correct but I could have sworn I heard him say 1954)
_________________

*****************************
You are correct he does say 1954, but it is unclear of what he is referring to. That is the year he met Elvis and that might possibly be what he is referring to or that he wasn't told the date of the film and just assumed it was 1954. Of course in the documentary the guy shows the date stamp on the kodachrome box. One week after the film was made it was developed.

Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:08 am

elvis-fan wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Jerry actually state in his interview on disc 3 that the 16mm was taken in 1954?

Yes, he does. It reminded me of reading his 2006 biography -- not much there, you know? Jerry was evidently confused about the "April 25, 1955" date of the film footage and his first meeting Elvis at a touch football game the previous fall.

Anyone notice Schilling also said that watching the clip recalled the beginnings of his friendship "forty" years ago? That would place his interview around 1994. Along with all those 1992 interviews on disc 1 makes one wonder if the Sullivan project has been on tap for the last 12 to 14 years.

Maybe Kevin can provide some insight on this? General?

Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:27 am

garydt wrote:Has anyone seen both the Elvis and the Beatles Ed Sullivan shows?

That would be me.

garydt wrote:If so, is it possible to guage and compare the reactions to both artists.

Sure. Both acts in their appearances stole the show, the hysteria of the crowd usually quite audible. One of the Beatles Sullivan dates was done in a special broadcast from Florida, but the response was still much the same as in New York.

garydt wrote:Also how different were Elvis and the Beatles compared to the other acts on the shows? Who, would you say, stood out more?

They stood out like Linus in the pumpkin patch, waiting for the "Great Pumpkin." They both stood out pretty equally -- way, way out.

Sun Dec 03, 2006 9:28 am

My ego told me to order this for my own christmas gift. To me from me'n Elvis!
I can hardly wait to receive it! I hope the quality is like what's been decribed in here!

Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:50 am

Jerry's interview has nothing to do with the Sullivan shows is my educated guess. I think he did this for the documentary about the Magnolia Garden film discovery and they just used that interview.

I am not sure of this since I haven't bought the Sullivan set quite yet, but the remark about him reminded of his meeting with Elvis while playing football sound suspiciously similair.

And that would put the date about right, in the mid 1990's.

Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:27 pm

I got my copy at last a few days ago - I should have just ordered my copies from America as the European releases are NTSC Region free - never mind.

I put on the 2nd show first - WOW!!!!!!!!!!! - First of all the picture quality - SUPERB - Elvis actually looked real to me - not a cartoon figure of the 50's - seeing Elvis in broadcast type quality just made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up - I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I had this footage already in perfect picture quality but with the mastering process the picture had a 3D lifelike quality about it - 50 years ago simpy astonishing - before my parents had even met!!!!!!!!!!

I didn't think Elvis could shock me any more but seeing Hound Dog from the 2nd show was simply OUTRAGEOUS. How is it possible for someone not yet 22 years old to deliver a performance so savage but so controlled, so confident but not big headed, so serious but not taking himself seriously!!!!!!!!!!! GENIUS.

Seeing Hound Dog from the 2nd show demonstrates to me that Elvis never improved but simply changed - what is better this or the 68 sit downs and so on.

Thankyou Kevin for this technology - it will be a crime not to see this mastering treatment applied to everything else kinescope

NB The sound is not bad either :wink:

Sun Dec 03, 2006 1:22 pm

LesterB wrote:First of all the picture quality - SUPERB - Elvis actually looked real to me - not a cartoon figure of the 50's

That's what impressed me the most about this set. The quality makes it look like it was filmed yesterday. It is great to sit down and watch history in the making in such outstanding picture quality. You'd never tell that it was filmed fifty years ago.

Mon Dec 04, 2006 4:54 pm

The show from 1957 appears to be of lesser quality than those from the previous 2 performances. Although it still quite good (for being almost 50 years old!) it is interesting that the 1956 shows appear to be in clearer detail. Must be due to the condition of the original film and how it stood the test of time.

Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:13 am

It seems to me that the October and January sources are far superior to the one from September. Kevin, what's your take on this?

Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:59 am

This is like asking a parent which of their children is their favorite. :)

...so I'll just say that I think each show has its own unique charm, and I love them all equally.

Did I mention that I'm a diplomat in my spare time...? :D

-Kevin