All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Mon Jan 08, 2007 7:52 am

shanebrown wrote:So THATS why he recorded all those broken heart songs in the 70s - cos he forgot priscilla quickly and moved on within a few months. of course. i understand now!

Well that's great shane... I'm happy to provide that clarity for you.
I'm not sure exactly what I did... but you obviously appreciate logic.

Mon Jan 08, 2007 8:42 am

shanebrown wrote:I just don't feel that, as love songs, they are particularly passionate.

That's because the Priscilla saga hadn't taken place yet. I'll never feel that he had Priscilla in mind during the recording of every "heartbreak" song that came in the 1970's.

Much of it came from the loneliness he felt on a day-to-day basis. Some because of Priscilla and some not. It has to be a lonely feeling living every single day not knowing who your friends are.

The sad songs came all right, but for several reasons. The main being that he obviously liked that kind of music.

I do too. I'd much rather hear "Bitter They Are, Harder They Fall" than "How Would You Like To Be."

Mon Jan 08, 2007 8:50 am

Other songs for other girls that went under the radar during what we thought mistakenly was a Linda Thompson only period. And I Love you So for Sheila in 75 ...

Mon Jan 08, 2007 9:32 am

Wow, what a long thread :roll: and now even longer. :lol: I've finally gotten through it, putting off my plans to get through the various "Chaos in College Park" threads, since I recently got that import. :lol:

I have to say the provocative Steve M (okay, "God") makes a distinct point that I have found myself agreeing with, although he's rather dismissive of the impact and high-points of "Aloha" to the point where I'm not surprised the die-hard "I love Aloha" responses followed. Likethebike also is a bit dismissive of it for my tastes. Still, Steve M. points out things that perhaps have to be said once in awhile:

Steve M. wrote:

I have not implied the performance was less than perfect. You may have implied that from reading my posts, but that's your choice.
Elvis gave a perfect performance, one I didn't like at all (huh? :shock: -Greg), but it was flawless to the degree it was boring.

I would have preferred a more natural performance with the parameters allowing Elvis to be himself more, I recall the brief moments of clips I've seen and I just want him to fall on his ass or trip of forget just one word of a song because it seems so lifeless. Like I've already said earlier, it was a show of studio masters and I can listen to them on CD. Where's the spontaineity (sp?), where's the "show" ?

None of this is Elvis' fault as I said earlier on, it's because of the strict parameters he was given to work within. It's the show itself, the structure of it that causes the problem for me and Elvis is merely the vehicle that shows the problem up.

Very good points...-Greg

What was the point of the show ? What was the reason for doing it ? what were Parker / RCA trying to achieve ? Elvis earnt less out of it than the TTWII and EOT movies although it was only two shows. But a third of a century later I still don't know why it was done.

Ouch. Now it wasn't that bad. C'mon. :lol: And it was a rating hit, wasn't it, and spawned a successful 2-LP set, although he was already maxing out on live albums...

All the same, best wishes with your health, Steve, and thanks for having the courage to say what you're thinking. I know that in recent years, I've shown this to people who really liked it and know others who have it (novice fans) but I want to say: there's more to '70s concert Elvis than this recital! But some of the songs, many of them, are killer and he looks great, so I'll take it...

So I most agree with Cryogenic, although with repeated viewings, I, too, found myself critiquing it at Steve's level.

I'm sure we all agree that thank god we we have it, especially since the great 2004 DVD deluxe set.

Cryogenic wrote:"Aloha From Hawaii" (main show) exhibits a mixture of good and bad.

The good is really good ........ and the bad is ...... not so bad.

There is also nothing else quite like this epic musical event. In some ways: Elvis raised the bar too high. Not just for other performers, but even for himself. Again: this also gives Aloha an impressive scale ...... and a bittersweet feel. There is much to take from it.

Sometimes ............ the feel is subdued; other times, it's practically religious. This show is a testament to who Elvis was when he performed it ........ where he had come from ....... and where he was going. It's supremely entertaining ...... and even more fascinating. I never tire of watching or contemplating it.

For what it's worth: I also like the "business" feel. It was a new facet to Elvis' live performing, and -- as it turned out -- a singular feature. The smoothness sets it apart from his other live material. I think it helps in making AFH feel like more of an "event". Elvis had something to prove here and did so.

"Aloha" has my vote.

Same here. If there was the proverbial house fire (god forbid), I'd grab that DVD set among a few other items if I could, or let me just say, it would be on that proverbial desert island I might be forced to live on... :D