Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun Dec 04, 2011 11:07 pm

I've never thought any of Elvis' jokes in 1969 had homosexual influence. Someone really thought like this over the funny "Bob Dylan slept in my mouth" joke? I didn't and I never heard that RCA was nervous about this humor. I'd might be a bit embarrassed about the "Wooley Boogar" jokes but none of the jokes made it onto RCA releases of the day.

If Elvis layed an egg in ASIB, it couldn't have hurt his future in film making any more than not doing it. He was nowhere at the time. There was nothing but upward potential for Elvis to accept a high profile role by 1975.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Sun Dec 04, 2011 11:48 pm

stevelecher wrote:If Elvis layed an egg in ASIB, it couldn't have hurt his future in film making any more than not doing it. He was nowhere at the time. There was nothing but upward potential for Elvis to accept a high profile role by 1975.

Absolutely correct.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 12:38 am

stevelecher wrote:I've never thought any of Elvis' jokes in 1969 had homosexual influence. Someone really thought like this over the funny "Bob Dylan slept in my mouth" joke? I didn't and I never heard that RCA was nervous about this humor. I'd might be a bit embarrassed about the "Wooley Boogar" jokes but none of the jokes made it onto RCA releases of the day.

If Elvis layed an egg in ASIB, it couldn't have hurt his future in film making any more than not doing it. He was nowhere at the time. There was nothing but upward potential for Elvis to accept a high profile role by 1975.


Uh, "homoerotic" jokes are not necessarily about actual homosexuality: they merely cross a social line and, at least in the '60s, have a bit of shock value. A kind of mischief. Just checking out an audience to see what will knock them askew. Not even necessarily "conscious": one just looks at the audience and guesses what kind of things would get 'em to sit up take notice. And then all kinds of odd things come out. What I mean is that it is much more about the audience than the performer.

"Wooley Booger" is a reference, like "squirrel," to a socially unacceptable person, particularly in school. It refers to nasal products looking icky. And thus the person is considered an icky-looking nasal product. Elvis was called all sorts of names: this one is particularly southern. As is something else he was called, which is really ugly, and refers to being called a "sissy" but refers to one's mother. Only for boys to call other boys. "Wooly booger" is, I guess, gender-free.

In case you were wondering, none of these have racial conotations, at least not in the south. I know that when I was real little and still lived in the New York area, my dad said not to say "boogie man" because it was a racist thing to say. Well, I dunno. I know in the south, I generally never heard such a conotation.

It all really varies by time and region.

A "homophobic" joke was Elvis and Charlie dancing. That was stupid and potentially offensive. But since homoerotic imagery was so forbidden, such imagery would almost automatically pop into one's mind if trying to shock (mostly the RCA recording people moreso than the actual audience).

The Dylan joke has been interpreted to death: only when I heard the "frog-meat" joke did I realize it was a "cleaned-up" version of a joke that was toooo bad. I am NOT saying he was fantasizing about a night with Bob!! Golly! NO. no. no. "Oh Mercy," indeed.

rjm
P.S, Oh, and it was on this very board about RCA had a difficult time compiling an album because of all the stuff he was saying, much of which was unacceptable in 1969 on a mainstream release. Kerkorian was on his back, and was tellng Esposito to tell him. And finally, on Aug. 22, the Col. issued directly to Elvis a "memo" (??) regarding the matter of the dinner shows "at which children may be present" and how they wouldn't want to destroy "all the good" that had been built up thus far. Elvis got the memo and kept on saying pretty raw stuff for the time.
Why couldn't his own manager just talk to him? Why a memo? Anybody have a copy handy? My scanner is connected to my crashed computer: the one with the crashed hard disc, and I don't wanna switch cords around to my old Win 98SE computer just now. I would like to move the scanner, actually. So if anyone has a copy of the memo they could post .

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 8:34 am

If you do a Goggle search of the term "Wooly Booger", you'll find several definitions, but none of which having anything to do with "nasal products looking icky". You'll even be able to listen to Johnny Cash's song "Little Wooly Booger" (and he's not singing about snot). What definition of the term Elvis had in mind when he used it in 1969 (someone lower than a redneck?) can be subject of debate but it had nothing nasal about it.

To find anything sexual in the Dylan joke one really has to have a slight obsession in finding sexual connotations in everything read or heard.

From memory, the only sexual innuendo I remember Elvis saying comes from the pre-Hound Dog intro: "Deeper! Deeper" (intercourse), and "what's that (on the floor)? Oh, sweat." (semen)

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 2:19 pm

rjm wrote:A "homophobic" joke was Elvis and Charlie dancing. That was stupid and potentially offensive. But since homoerotic imagery was so forbidden, such imagery would almost automatically pop into one's mind if trying to shock (mostly the RCA recording people moreso than the actual audience).



As a gay man, I'd be quite interested to know why Elvis and Charlie dancing would be offensive to me? In this politically-correct-obsessed society, it seems that any joke at all, or anyone simply having a bit fun, is deemed as offensive to someone. It's all got just a litte ridiculous (and that's not meant to be offensive to ridiculous people, or people who may be bi-diculous).

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:02 pm

And another thing. EP playing "A Star IS Born " with his shape/mind at the time? I could just imagine hearing Johnny Carson's monologue and getting great laughs (embarrassing to the Presley camp) by stating "A Star Is Almost Dead!"....PS. Yes,EP, could have been nominated to an
academy Award. Easy for him cause he would just have to play himself! And act very little! MY TAKE. The directors dream. One take Elvis. One take Elvis. Just slurs the words and the director would yell "cut and print"! Giving more than enough time for "Babs" to to do her 999th take of "EVERGREEN".... ::rocks :smt006 PS. Parker again knew better to let his sadly fading boy to play against a star that was going to sweep the floor with him. Literally.Streisands "star" would have eclipsed our Sun and Moon!

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 6:39 pm

What a defeatist post Juan. I would like to think the film would have found Elvis cleaning up his game a little. The attitude you display is very cold towards Elvis as a person. If The Colenel cared about his client he would have tried to get him interested in his life and career again. He wouldn't just keep him on the same path to destruction he was clearly on. The movie clearly would have required a little more discipline from Elvis than he was displaying since 1972.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 7:12 pm

There's often a consensus with regards to Elvis that he needed a challenge to truly thrive, and if nothing else, A Star Is Born would have presented a challenge for him. Yes, he was succumbing to numerous fetters by 1975, but one wonders if a change from what had become so very routine would have allowed hitherto untapped facets of Elvis's artistry and talents to surface.

I have my reservations about A Star Is Born as a film, for it's certainly wasn't a great piece of movie-making, but it was a terrific star vehicle for an actress and singer who was at the very top, and whose talent and power in the music business and in Hollywood allowed her to call the shots in ways Elvis should have been able to. And he need not have abandoned movie-making for want only of starring roles, because he could have been more than able in support or as a leading man next to someone like Streisand -- it certainly didn't hurt Kristofferson. A part in this film would have raised his profile considerably, and had Elvis proved capable in the role of John Norman Howard, plenty of doors would surely have been opened, not least of all in the immediate aftermath of the film's success, had the BAFTAs, Grammies, Golden Globes and Oscars also took to nominate the film had Elvis been involved.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 8:13 pm

stevelecher wrote:What a defeatist post Juan. I would like to think the film would have found Elvis cleaning up his game a little. The attitude you display is very cold towards Elvis as a person. If The Colenel cared about his client he would have tried to get him interested in his life and career again. He wouldn't just keep him on the same path to destruction he was clearly on. The movie clearly would have required a little more discipline from Elvis than he was displaying since 1972.


It was not the Colonel's job to keep Elvis interested in his own life and career. That was Elvis' responsibility.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 8:15 pm

I have always thought that Elvis' comment about Bob Dylan had to due with Elvis' opinion that Bob Dylans voice and signing were dry. That's why when he would go take a drink he would say it feels like Bob Dylan has been sleeping in my mouth or whatever it is he said.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Mon Dec 05, 2011 11:32 pm

DEH wrote:I have always thought that Elvis' comment about Bob Dylan had to due with Elvis' opinion that Bob Dylans voice and signing were dry. That's why when he would go take a drink he would say it feels like Bob Dylan has been sleeping in my mouth or whatever it is he said.



Finally someone who gets Elvis' humor.

Yes, its as simple as that.

Some people forget alll about context when trying to decipher Elvis.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:26 am

ekenee wrote:
DEH wrote:I have always thought that Elvis' comment about Bob Dylan had to due with Elvis' opinion that Bob Dylans voice and signing were dry. That's why when he would go take a drink he would say it feels like Bob Dylan has been sleeping in my mouth or whatever it is he said.



Finally someone who gets Elvis' humor.

Yes, its as simple as that.

Some people forget alll about context when trying to decipher Elvis.

I think most of us got that. Very few of us found any sexual entendre there. I thought it was a funny comment.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 2:30 am

DEH wrote:
stevelecher wrote:What a defeatist post Juan. I would like to think the film would have found Elvis cleaning up his game a little. The attitude you display is very cold towards Elvis as a person. If The Colenel cared about his client he would have tried to get him interested in his life and career again. He wouldn't just keep him on the same path to destruction he was clearly on. The movie clearly would have required a little more discipline from Elvis than he was displaying since 1972.


It was not the Colonel's job to keep Elvis interested in his own life and career. That was Elvis' responsibility.

Yes, ultimately it was up to Elvis but the Colonel seemed to do his best to stifle Elvis' growth. He should have seen his client was in trouble and declining and if he cared at all, as a human being, he might have tried to steer him to change course. The career decisions had been his job.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 3:08 am

Urban Dictionary defines "wooly booger" as a "hillbilly step-mother's term for a curly overgrown hair outside of a female's vaginal area."

"You cain't wear that to the pool. Everbody's gonna see your wooly booger from a mile away."

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 5:56 am

poormadpeter wrote:
rjm wrote:A "homophobic" joke was Elvis and Charlie dancing. That was stupid and potentially offensive. But since homoerotic imagery was so forbidden, such imagery would almost automatically pop into one's mind if trying to shock (mostly the RCA recording people moreso than the actual audience).



As a gay man, I'd be quite interested to know why Elvis and Charlie dancing would be offensive to me? In this politically-correct-obsessed society, it seems that any joke at all, or anyone simply having a bit fun, is deemed as offensive to someone. It's all got just a litte ridiculous (and that's not meant to be offensive to ridiculous people, or people who may be bi-diculous).


----------
To Pete or whomever is interested in the concept of "PC" . . .
I have heard of people, dunno if they were gay or not, who were quite offended.
You think everyone has become too sensitive? Hmmm. I prefer not to offend, if I can. This topic has taken an interesting turn. But only cause we were talking about a late 60s film, that Elvis had a shot at, that the media went all Victorian over and gave it an X rating. And today, it would be silly. At the time, I think, they wanted the controversy. So are we more sensitive now, or then?
Not that easy a question. I saw the Blair Witch Project this afternoon, and EVERY OTHER WORD was the the four-letter one beginning with "F." With embellishments. IN BETWEEN words, even. So the 69 controversy over a perception of a homosexual act was just so silly. They didn't even curse, as I recall.
------
To any others, who think I want to hear Elvis say naughty things (!!!!!?????) :oops: :

As for the "meaning" of those jokes in '69, to anyone who would think I'm demented or something, they generally had a sexual connotation. That should be clear! Sheesh! Not all, but quite a few. Quite a few. And I am not the only one to hear the jokes being of a sexual nature. Like I said, the Dylan remark has been so overanalyzed, it resists analysis. So all I could think is that it was in the exact same context of the "frog-meat" joke and so it was a "cleaner" version. You gotta admit, all must admit, that the "only meat I had all day" does have a sexual connotation. Otherwise, what exactly IS it about? That he is hungry? {rolling eyes}

If you hear something different, what exactly do you hear in the remark?? When I first heard it, I was like "what on Earth"??
Did he he really say what it sounds like? On a stage with all those 60-somethings in the audience, in 1969?!? And then, the Dylan joke seemed to be a "cleaner" version of this, that was much more vague, and could mean whatever you wanted it to.

And yeah, I know about "Wooley Booger" and the lower than a redneck (or "trash" connotation) definition, and since, in school, "booger" refers to a hardened-up piece of nasal product, well . . . the point is saying that someone lower than a redneck is like something that comes out of one's nose. And looks like it has hair on it: "woooly." What else could it have meant? {OOPS: I stand corrected: it was really bad. I heard it in person when I was in Junior High! That's how I understood it then: being "lower than a redneck," if you will, is described . . . in this way, which I thought was a reference to, uh, nasal productions.

If he hadn't been talking like this, WE wouldn't be talking like this! But he did. I mean, he did.

Like I said, I don't think it was the actual audience he wanted to shock, but Kerkorian, who had an interest in the recording because it would lure even more visitors to the hotel in his upcoming engagements. It was fun. And so Kerkorian got upset about these jokes, and the difficulty they were having in recording. As I said, it's right here on the archives of this forum about the problems.

And it's in Day-By-Day by Peter and Ernst about Parker's memo.

So, I am not a weirdo for hearing then-inapropriate comments! Besides, they mentioned the dinner shows. As though he were free at midnight. But they were recording the whole time from about the 22nd to the 26th, so I think it was a general concern.

rjm
Last edited by rjm on Tue Dec 06, 2011 6:15 am, edited 2 times in total.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 6:08 am

elvisjock wrote:Urban Dictionary defines "wooly booger" as a "hillbilly step-mother's term for a curly overgrown hair outside of a female's vaginal area."

"You cain't wear that to the pool. Everbody's gonna see your wooly booger from a mile away."


Ok. I lose on this one. Except I heard it that other way when I was like 12 or 13!!!!!!!! Never thought it meant THAT!!

Good Grief!

rjm
P.S. -- And the most wholesome TV special in World History is on in a few minutes here on the left coast: "A Charlie Brown Christmas." And we are going so low down!! I'm typing this right near the beautiful Tree, which has Elvis all over it. And he's not saying anything naughty.
Well, he's hanging from a tree, so who knows what he said? Poor guy: smt195 :smt005

::rocks

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 6:34 am

stevelecher wrote:What a defeatist post Juan. I would like to think the film would have found Elvis cleaning up his game a little. The attitude you display is very cold towards Elvis as a person. If The Colenel cared about his client he would have tried to get him interested in his life and career again. He wouldn't just keep him on the same path to destruction he was clearly on. The movie clearly would have required a little more discipline from Elvis than he was displaying since 1972.


That's the 64,000 question: would he have actually seemed like the character? If he did the film, could he have gotten back in fighting trim after so much damage had been done?

Was he able at this time to just "get in shape"? Because, if you read "The Death of Elvis," when Dan Warlick is holding his colon in his hands, he says he thought that "no amount of dieting" (almost exact quote: from memory) could have helped him when this problem was present. It was in 75 that they considered removing part of his colon. So, if no amount of "getting in shape" was going to fix a problem like this, what was he going to do? He had this problem, was also taking steroids for several years, which distorted his facial appearance, and would have had to "clean up" a serious narcotic addiction, very quickly.

Could simple "discipline" have done the job? Or was this movie just not going to happen? Perhaps, if he had started in with the picture, and then discovered that he just couldn't undo this damage overnight or at least in time for the shoot, he might have missed the picture. But he might have taken the time, with the missed film as a mirror, to realize that he needed time, and a lot of help.

But in his situation, there really was nowhere to turn. Which is why it was ultimately turned down and things kept apace unto death.

rjm

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 7:48 am

That was the condition of Elvis' colon in 1977. Perhaps it wasn't as bad in spring 1975. We'll never know what could have been done if Elvis cared again. He didn't really lose his looks until 1976 when his health seemed to go into freefall.

Elvis' "deeper, deeper" joke certainly had sexual connotations as did his tangled cord jokes but I don't think the "frog in his throat was the first meat he's had today" means anymore than that. That was a more common expression then which has gone out of fashion today, much like the term "gay" for happy, because those terms have become more sexualized since then. And I still doubt anyone saw sexual. double entendre meaning in the Bob Dylan gag. I still don't.

I'm unaware that the hotel or Colonel Parker issued a memo or noted any discomfort with these tame jokes. In Las Vegas? RCA was concerned? This is news to me. Is there any documentation of this?

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 8:07 am

stevelecher wrote:I don't think the "frog in his throat was the first meat he's had today" means anymore than that.

You're right. It's simply an example of Elvis using a figurative expression (for having a hoarse voice) in a literal sense (having an actual frog in his throat) for comedic effect. It's as simple as that.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:00 am

stevelecher wrote:
ekenee wrote:
DEH wrote:I have always thought that Elvis' comment about Bob Dylan had to due with Elvis' opinion that Bob Dylans voice and signing were dry. That's why when he would go take a drink he would say it feels like Bob Dylan has been sleeping in my mouth or whatever it is he said.



Finally someone who gets Elvis' humor.

Yes, its as simple as that.

Some people forget alll about context when trying to decipher Elvis.

I think most of us got that. Very few of us found any sexual entendre there. I thought it was a funny comment.


It was only when I heard the other joke, that I thought of it as "cleaned-up" version of the frog-meat joke, which I gather he had to eliminate. The Dylan joke is funny. But the larger context is not just "Vegas Throat" but that they were struggling to get him to tone down the humor. That's all.

Of course, the context of either joke is the need to aid his Gator. It's just the Dylan joke was cleaner, and actually funnier.
(The truth, according to latter day interview with Charlie, is that Elvis "wore out" Nashville Skyline . . . which is the album when Bob temporarily stopped smoking. Well, it continued for a little while, but the critics practically shot him for "Self-Portrait" which has A LOT of Elvis-oriented material on it. Which is interesting. Since the Doc is "on holiday," I'll venture that Elvis's marathon "Don't Think Twice" functions nicely as an "answer song" to "Went To See the Gypsy," if you really give 'em both a listen. "The Gypsy's door was open wide, but The Gypsy was gone . . . so I watched that Sun come risin' . . ." and Elvis sings only a few selected lines, over and over, so the song is "Dylan-length": "Look out your window, baby; I'll be gone . . .")

All that makes the little joke all clean and tidy. It really did come out funny. Better than saying "Oh whas that? Whas that? Oh. Sweat."

rjm

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 10:12 am

stevelecher wrote:That was the condition of Elvis' colon in 1977. Perhaps it wasn't as bad in spring 1975. We'll never know what could have been done if Elvis cared again. He didn't really lose his looks until 1976 when his health seemed to go into freefall.

Elvis' "deeper, deeper" joke certainly had sexual connotations as did his tangled cord jokes but I don't think the "frog in his throat was the first meat he's had today" means anymore than that. That was a more common expression then which has gone out of fashion today, much like the term "gay" for happy, because those terms have become more sexualized since then. And I still doubt anyone saw sexual. double entendre meaning in the Bob Dylan gag. I still don't.

I'm unaware that the hotel or Colonel Parker issued a memo or noted any discomfort with these tame jokes. In Las Vegas? RCA was concerned? This is news to me. Is there any documentation of this?


Yes. Absolutely. As I said. It's in "Day By Day." And I believe some other sources as well. It is well documented.

Gosh. Elvis was not exactly an Eagle Scout or whatever during that Vegas session. I thought people got a kick out of it! He had a good time, and was the fox in the chicken coop once again. It was a little fun for him to be a little mishchief-maker again. What's the big deal? One reason we love those monologues. Every one of 'em. It's just fun. And since it upset the "authorities," such as they were, more's the better!

The larger point is that this was the perfect time for him to enter the contemporary world in the entertainment biz, particularly in the more daring films of the era. By the mid-seventies, as short a time as it seems now, things were not only different for him, but in the business as well. I like the films of '69 and '70 better than something like the '70s remake of ASIB.

rjm

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Tue Dec 06, 2011 6:22 pm

rjm wrote:To Pete or whomever is interested in the concept of "PC" . . .
I have heard of people, dunno if they were gay or not, who were quite offended.

You think everyone has become too sensitive? Hmmm. I prefer not to offend, if I can. This topic has taken an interesting turn. But only cause we were talking about a late 60s film, that Elvis had a shot at, that the media went all Victorian over and gave it an X rating. And today, it would be silly. At the time, I think, they wanted the controversy. So are we more sensitive now, or then? Not that easy a question. I saw the Blair Witch Project this afternoon, and EVERY OTHER WORD was the the four-letter one beginning with "F." With embellishments. IN BETWEEN words, even. So the 69 controversy over a perception of a homosexual act was just so silly. They didn't even curse, as I recall. ------
To any others, who think I want to hear Elvis say naughty things (!!!!!?????) :oops: :

rjm


As I mentioned, Elvis was never going to star in Midnight Cowboy as the film ultimately came to be under the direction of John Schlesinger and with Waldo Salt's screenplay -- early drafts of the script, based on James Leo Herlihy's novel, were watered-down versions of the story, and that's what was doing the rounds before production started, and was thought appropriate as an Elvis vehicle. He was never offered a role and was never in line to play Joe Buck, whilst there's a great difference between one being considered suitable for a role and a part being offered. The former, being little more than talk . . .

The film, however, remains a cinematic landmark from an era in which new languages in sex, violence and dialogue were being explored in cinema -- this was one of several films to receive an X rating at the time, but remains the only X rated picture to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards. Yet, despite the content, and the initial rating awarded the film, this was soon reduced to an R rating, as many thought the MPAA was too harsh.

The scene in which Joe Buck gives oral to the older homosexual man, and the encounter with the younger kid in the cinema, are counter-points to Buck's own repressed homosexuality, which allows those scenes to be considered and viewed in an entirely different context to what you may be appreciating . . . Granted, what takes place is tame in comparison to cinema from the following decade and now, in 2011; but consider the era, the content and the subtext. This was daring, brilliant cinema and pivotal movie-making -- you may believe this silly now, but think of some of the furore over Elvis's on-stage gyrations and antics. And if you consider harmless asides and double entendres from the concert stage to have been close to the knuckle in 1969, think how those in the wings felt when the 21 year old Presley with writhing on top of Nipper on stage in 1956.

With regards to the Blair Witch Project, again, if you find the language to have been too coarse for your tastes, the aim here was realism and the dialogue reflects how plenty of people actually speak, or how those characters were perceived to have spoke in such a situation -- and this is what many directors strived to achieve during the mid-late sixties, and with films such as Midnight Cowboy. Plenty of films offered realistic dialogue before 1969, of course, but the envelope was being pushed further than before with regards to artistic freedom in late sixties Hollywood -- this was a rich time for cinema.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Wed Dec 07, 2011 1:45 am

I think the real missed opportunity in making A Star is Born was the money.

Streisand comes to Elvis and reportedly offers him $500,000.00 plus 10% of the gross.

A Star is Born grossed 28 million domestic and 70 million in total so for Elvis that would have been 7 million dollars.

The most Elvis made on any of his own movies was probably 2 million.

Now do i think doing the movie would have gave Elvis any credibility as an actor absolutely not.

The movie while a big box office hit was absolutely trashed when it came out and with Elvis playing a variation of himself once again most people probably make that connection.

The would probably say Elvis is just playing a variation of himself again which is rather easy to do.

I think for Elvis to earn credibility as an actor would be for him to get guest starring roles in popular shows of the era like Hawaii Five-0, The Rockford Files, Mary Tyler Moore, Columbo etc.

These shows had a huge audience where Elvis could come in to do a non singing role and provided that he did a good job he could start to earn a reputation as a good actor.

The t.v. movies in the 1970s were generally better than they are now and if Elvis could find a good project he could show his acting talents to a big audience.

Maybe film producers would then see Elvis on television giving these good performances and start to offer him important movie roles.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Wed Dec 07, 2011 2:37 am

brian wrote:I think the real missed opportunity in making A Star is Born was the money.

Streisand comes to Elvis and reportedly offers him $500,000.00 plus 10% of the gross.

A Star is Born grossed 28 million domestic and 70 million in total so for Elvis that would have been 7 million dollars.

The most Elvis made on any of his own movies was probably 2 million.

Now do i think doing the movie would have gave Elvis any credibility as an actor absolutely not.

The movie while a big box office hit was absolutely trashed when it came out and with Elvis playing a variation of himself once again most people probably make that connection.

The would probably say Elvis is just playing a variation of himself again which is rather easy to do.

I think for Elvis to earn credibility as an actor would be for him to get guest starring roles in popular shows of the era like Hawaii Five-0, The Rockford Files, Mary Tyler Moore, Columbo etc.

These shows had a huge audience where Elvis could come in to do a non singing role and provided that he did a good job he could start to earn a reputation as a good actor.

The t.v. movies in the 1970s were generally better than they are now and if Elvis could find a good project he could show his acting talents to a big audience.

Maybe film producers would then see Elvis on television giving these good performances and start to offer him important movie roles.


One can only speculate as to what credibility Elvis may have garnered had he appeared in A Star Is Born, but it's certain that his profile would have been raised considerably. Let's also consider how popular the film's soundtrack was, topping the charts globally and selling in excess of ten million copies.

The money Elvis could have earned from his involvement would certainly have been stellar, although you have overestimated his earnings in Hollywood and underestimated what A Star Is Born grossed -- Elvis coined less than $1.5 million tops for a single film, whilst A Star Is Born grossed around $80 million domestically with earnings reaching over $37 million -- and that's not counting international takings. Elvis was offered $500,000 plus 10% of the film's rentals after breaking even, so he would have taken to the bank around $3.6 million.

I do agree that acting on television may have benefitted Elvis, and brief shooting times when considering guest appearances on popular shows of the day would have allowed breaks from touring sans prolonged commitments. The standard of movies made for television was also high during the 1970s, and pursuing a project of his own was an avenue, unfortunately, never explored or realised.

Going back to A Star Is Born, again, one shouldn't underestimate how very popular this film was -- criticts may have been cold, although the film wasn't wholly derided. And let's also consider how stellar Streisand's track record was, both with regards to the quality of her pictures and her box office draw. There was much for Elvis to gain being part of that, even if there were reservations about the production of the film at large.

Re: Elvis and "A Star Is Born" --> A New Mystery!

Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:44 am

greystoke wrote:
brian wrote:I think the real missed opportunity in making A Star is Born was the money.

Streisand comes to Elvis and reportedly offers him $500,000.00 plus 10% of the gross.

A Star is Born grossed 28 million domestic and 70 million in total so for Elvis that would have been 7 million dollars.

The most Elvis made on any of his own movies was probably 2 million.

Now do i think doing the movie would have gave Elvis any credibility as an actor absolutely not.

The movie while a big box office hit was absolutely trashed when it came out and with Elvis playing a variation of himself once again most people probably make that connection.

The would probably say Elvis is just playing a variation of himself again which is rather easy to do.

I think for Elvis to earn credibility as an actor would be for him to get guest starring roles in popular shows of the era like Hawaii Five-0, The Rockford Files, Mary Tyler Moore, Columbo etc.

These shows had a huge audience where Elvis could come in to do a non singing role and provided that he did a good job he could start to earn a reputation as a good actor.

The t.v. movies in the 1970s were generally better than they are now and if Elvis could find a good project he could show his acting talents to a big audience.

Maybe film producers would then see Elvis on television giving these good performances and start to offer him important movie roles.


One can only speculate as to what credibility Elvis may have garnered had he appeared in A Star Is Born, but it's certain that his profile would have been raised considerably. Let's also consider how popular the film's soundtrack was, topping the charts globally and selling in excess of ten million copies.

The money Elvis could have earned from his involvement would certainly have been stellar, although you have overestimated his earnings in Hollywood and underestimated what A Star Is Born grossed -- Elvis coined less than $1.5 million tops for a single film, whilst A Star Is Born grossed around $80 million domestically with earnings reaching over $37 million -- and that's not counting international takings. Elvis was offered $500,000 plus 10% of the film's rentals after breaking even, so he would have taken to the bank around $3.6 million.


Isn't those numbers for A Star Born that you are citing is what it would have earned if you factor in inflation?

80 million domestic seems like a bit much.

I meant to say 42 million domestic and 28 million overseas which would be 70 million worldwide.
That's what always read that it originally grossed and that it came in #2 after Rocky.

That's seems more like it to me.

Are you sure Streisand didn't offer 10% of the gross because if she didn't then that just sucks.

That's just it I have the feeling that Elvis' profile would not have been raised considerably had he done the film.