Post here your Elvis' pictures

For The Attention Of Peter Guralnick

Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:15 pm

Mr Guralnick,

I'm having trouble deciding here. You wrote that Elvis was bloated in one of these performances. Could you please refresh my memory?

Yours Sincerely,
A Careless Lover

Image

Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:39 pm

Bloated? Give me a break.... :shock: :roll:

Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:52 pm

That's the point. :wink:

If you were to say Elvis looks bloated in either, you should, by rights, pick the shot from "If I Can Dream", where the skin is compressed, as would be a common feature later on. I would actually say that Elvis was 4-5lbs heavier at this time than during Aloha! But he's bloated in neither. Guralnick, however, claimed that Elvis was bloated in the Aloha concert.

Mon Nov 13, 2006 12:56 pm

Unfortunately Peter Guralnick doesn't frequent this MB.

Unless he does so under an alias...................

Now there's a thought..................

Likethebike ?

The Doc ?

Pete Dube ?

Sam ?

TINC ?

Geno ?

I think we should be told !

Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:40 pm

Cryogenic wrote:...I would actually say that Elvis was 4-5lbs heavier at this time than during Aloha!


Do you really think so, Cryo? Elvis was very thin for the '68 Special, especially his legs. For the Aloha special, he looked a bit heavier to me. But, don't get me wrong. He was stunning in both! Bloated? No way...

Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:09 pm

I do genuinely think that Elvis was slightly heavier for the Comeback Special. You can't tell how skimpy his legs are in Aloha because of the bell-bottomed suit. Or his general body shape for that matter. But looking at his face and chin, I'd have to say he was slimmer when he gave his global concert. It's a close call, but I'm practically certain of it. I wish I could find an online picture, or the footage, but just flip open the "Aloha From Hawaii" Deluxe Edition DVD booklet and look at the 3rd and 4th pages. You will see one shot on each of Elvis dressed in a white shirt and white pants backstage. He looks like a stick!

Mon Nov 13, 2006 4:54 pm

I can't see the rest of his body, nor do I recall Guralnick saying he was bloated in the face.
Given the structure of the book it maybe that he didn't say it as much as quoted someone elses book as saying it.

What's the page number thids appears on ?

It would be something if he did express an opinion himself because that would be very rare indeed in either book.

Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:06 pm

Steve_M wrote:I can't see the rest of his body, nor do I recall Guralnick saying he was bloated in the face.
Given the structure of the book it maybe that he didn't say it as much as quoted someone elses book as saying it.

What's the page number thids appears on ?


Page 484: "... for all his dramatic weight loss, Elvis appears strangely bloated, his expression glazed and unfocused."

I will give the Guralnick the charge of "his expression glazed and unfocused," as Elvis' eyes are categorically more withdrawn and sullen for the most part, but to say he looks "strangely bloated" is a silly exaggeration. Indeed, I think the latter charge somehow reinforced the former in Guralnick's mind.

Steve_M wrote:It would be something if he did express an opinion himself because that would be very rare indeed in either book.


*SNAP*

In the words of my old friend: just a Kodak moment.

You have much to learn, Steve. Much to learn.

Guralnick's books are full of his opinions. FACT.

FYI: Guralnick also received a payment from EPE when writing "Careless Love". Something for critical minds to process.

Mon Nov 13, 2006 6:36 pm

I wish I was as bloated as EP was for Aloha, the guy looked phenominal!

Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:31 pm

Cryogenic wrote:You have much to learn, Steve. Much to learn.


How can you know this ? Well you'd have to know how much there is to learn and to also know how much of it i already know, or how little of it. Whatever my situation I'm surprised by yours if you know all there is to know.

I'd agree about the strangely bloated bit though. Guralnick does qualify the remark by saying for all his weight loss, and indeed Elvis was lower in weight than he had been for some years, but look at the top of the nose, why does there seem a bloatedness to the skin when Elvis contorts his face, there's more "bulginess" with his skin than 5 years prior. That's not a standard bloatiness as we all know bloatiness, but as Guralnick suggests it's a strange version given how little Elvis weighed.

Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:34 pm

Joe Car wrote:I wish I was as bloated as EP was for Aloha, the guy looked phenominal!


Right on, Joe, and isn't it ridiculous that the so-called "fat Elvis" stamp was based on a shot from the Aloha show? I have always hated that...

Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:39 pm

KHoots wrote:
Joe Car wrote:I wish I was as bloated as EP was for Aloha, the guy looked phenominal!


Right on, Joe, and isn't it ridiculous that the so-called "fat Elvis" stamp was based on a shot from the Aloha show? I have always hated that...


I know, some people don't have a clue!

Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:22 pm

No way is Elvis bloated in the Aloha picture :shock:

As for the little extra skin on his brow/nose, everyone knows as you get older your skin loses elasticicty..........as these pictures are nearly 5 years apart thats the only explanation I can give :)

Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:45 pm

There is no way Elvis is bloated in the aloha pic, no one has suggested otherwise.

Cryogenic has quoted Peter Guralnick as saying, "..for all his dramtic weight loss, Elvis appears strangely bloated,.." which is not the same, obviously.

sid, if your skin loses elasticity then it will look excessive and to some people they may describe excess skin as looking "strangely bloated".

Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:13 pm

Forgive me Steve but i am a little confused..........did this thread not start with...and I quote

''I'm having trouble deciding here. You wrote that Elvis was bloated in one of these performances. Could you please refresh my memory?''

Perhaps what I should have said was

The two pictures posted show me what a fine figure of a man Elvis was....... he showed the test of time well.

As for the skin losing elasticity......well that looked like excess skin when he was frowning to me.

Mon Nov 13, 2006 10:48 pm

Elvis was never slimmer than he was in 68 and he wasn`t bloated in 73 but when they are filming him up close in the beginning of "Blue suede shoes" and "What now my love" he could look a little bloated, but who wouldn`t with sweat in the face and the camera right up in his nose :?:

Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:19 am

Cryogenic wrote:Guralnick's books are full of his opinions. FACT.


If his books are indeed full of his opinions then thery would contain nothing else. I didn't think that of his books i have to say, but if you say its a fact then its a fact. And i have much to learn.

Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:13 am

Steve_M wrote:
Cryogenic wrote:You have much to learn, Steve. Much to learn.


How can you know this ? Well you'd have to know how much there is to learn and to also know how much of it i already know, or how little of it. Whatever my situation I'm surprised by yours if you know all there is to know.


Steve_M wrote:
Cryogenic wrote:Guralnick's books are full of his opinions. FACT.


If his books are indeed full of his opinions then thery would contain nothing else. I didn't think that of his books i have to say, but if you say its a fact then its a fact. And i have much to learn.


Your facetious responses that linger on a simple declaration says a lot. "Much to learn" is a film quotation. I was half-teasing. Nonetheless, if you think that "Last Train" and "Careless Love" don't reveal Guralnick's opinions page after page, then you're grossly mistaken.

Steve_M wrote:I'd agree about the strangely bloated bit though. Guralnick does qualify the remark by saying for all his weight loss, and indeed Elvis was lower in weight than he had been for some years, but look at the top of the nose, why does there seem a bloatedness to the skin when Elvis contorts his face, there's more "bulginess" with his skin than 5 years prior. That's not a standard bloatiness as we all know bloatiness, but as Guralnick suggests it's a strange version given how little Elvis weighed.


His eyes and nose both appear differently in Aloha. His nostrils are also very flared during the helicopter dispatch/fan greet. It's like he was either doing it deliberately or had taken some substances that did it for him. I would be very surprised if Elvis was completely "clean" during Aloha. But if a person is going to be brought to task, then the right observations should apply.

Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:56 am

Cryogenic wrote:I wish I could find an online picture, or the footage, but just flip open the "Aloha From Hawaii" Deluxe Edition DVD booklet and look at the 3rd and 4th pages. You will see one shot on each of Elvis dressed in a white shirt and white pants backstage. He looks like a stick!


GOT IT!!!

Image

Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:41 am

Cryogenic wrote:I do genuinely think that Elvis was slightly heavier for the Comeback Special. You can't tell how skimpy his legs are in Aloha because of the bell-bottomed suit. Or his general body shape for that matter. But looking at his face and chin, I'd have to say he was slimmer when he gave his global concert. It's a close call, but I'm practically certain of it. I wish I could find an online picture, or the footage, but just flip open the "Aloha From Hawaii" Deluxe Edition DVD booklet and look at the 3rd and 4th pages. You will see one shot on each of Elvis dressed in a white shirt and white pants backstage. He looks like a stick!


Yes the backstage shots really do show that the guy was skinny as a rake for Aloha. I'm not the biggest fan of jumpsuits, but do quite like the Aloha one. Jumpsuits did succeed in making him look larger than he was though. As for the bloated comment, I think it's largely due to some of the extreme close ups, large sidburns and long hair. Almost everyone looks thinner in the face with shorter hair. If he'd had his 68 haircut in Aloha, such comments wouldn't arise.

Tue Nov 14, 2006 8:49 am

More backstage shots...


Image

Image

Image

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:36 am

Nice work, TJ!

One wonders why some of these weren't included for the "Aloha" DVD booklet ......... instead, we have two horribly fuzzy, low colour shots; shots that look like they were ripped from a video transfer.

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:09 pm

Cryogenic wrote:
Steve_M wrote:
Cryogenic wrote:You have much to learn, Steve. Much to learn.


How can you know this ? Well you'd have to know how much there is to learn and to also know how much of it i already know, or how little of it. Whatever my situation I'm surprised by yours if you know all there is to know.


Steve_M wrote:
Cryogenic wrote:Guralnick's books are full of his opinions. FACT.


If his books are indeed full of his opinions then thery would contain nothing else. I didn't think that of his books i have to say, but if you say its a fact then its a fact. And i have much to learn.



Your facetious responses that linger on a simple declaration says a lot. "Much to learn" is a film quotation. I was half-teasing. Nonetheless, if you think that "Last Train" and "Careless Love" don't reveal Guralnick's opinions page after page, then you're grossly mistaken.


I was not being humourous at all, so it can't have been a facetious response by me. I was being serious. i don't think his books are FULL of his opinions, just like a bucket is not full of water just because it has splashes inside it, but however much his opinions appear I still say i don't think that of his books whether they are full or only part filled with his opinions. I am not grossly mistaken at all because I just checked again and I still dont think that of his books.
If your comment about my intelligence was based upon a film quotation maybe it could have been better recieved if it had been indicated as such in the first place. That's a bit like me knowing of a film quote where someone calls someone an friend and then just typing it as if it was directed at another poster on here, but using the excuse of it being a film quote after the event. I would expect nothing less than for me to be banned from here even if only for a short few weeks if i was to lower myself to that level for the reason of infringing the guidelines and membership acceptance rules.

Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:22 pm

We're dealing with a major intellect here, guys!

Steve_M wrote:i don't think his books are FULL of his opinions, just like a bucket is not full of water just because it has splashes inside it


I am pretty sure you meant for this to be the other way around. ;)

In any case,.............. >>> the manner of your analogy suggests a "splash" is a noun, when clearly it would be a verb in the context you've written it. Your analogy is not only clumsy, but moot.

Try harder, Steve.

Steve_M wrote:If your comment about my intelligence was based upon a film quotation maybe it could have been better recieved if it had been indicated as such in the first place. That's a bit like me knowing of a film quote where someone calls someone an a-hole and then just typing it as if it was directed at another poster on here, but using the excuse of it being a film quote after the event.


I can't help your ignorance.

And it would seem you are actually calling me an "a-hole" there. Or, at the very least, implying I called you one. UNTRUE.

Steve_M wrote:I would expect nothing less than for me to be banned from here even if only for a short few weeks if i was to lower myself to that level for the reason of infringing the guidelines and membership acceptance rules.


Let me think about that one: banned for quoting a film in jest.

That's a new one!

Love your "logic", Stevie Boy!

Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:06 pm

You didn't quote a film in jest, though you may have meant to. There was no indication given that it was a quote until you decided to say so after the event and nothing in the way of a smiley to suggest it was said in jest. All your subsequent posts to me have suggested to me that it wasn't said in jest.

No, i didn't get the analogy the wrong way around about the bucket. a bucket is full of water when it is full of water, not when it has just a few splashes inside of it.
The guralnick books are built up of quoting other books, see the exhaustive list at the back which gives the page by page breakdown. Many of the opinions in the book are not his. The "strangely bloated" was not expressed as an opinion on second reading, but issued as a if fact, whether it is correct or not is another matter.

The "friend" analogy (read "a bit like...") was not me saying you did or didn't call me that but you could have done and then claim you were justified in saying afterwards that you heard it in a film therefore its okay to say it and claim it as a quote afterwards, just as you did with claiming as a fact that I have much to learn, hah! it wasn't even expressed as an opinion.
If not then I'd like to hear why it is not the same in principal.

If you insist on making demands of me then please forward your proposed offer of payment to me. I don't do demands but often will consider polite requests. If you want me to do as you tell me then pay up like any one else who employs my time. by the way, unless you have won the lottery jackpot at least 10 weeks in a row you wont be able to afford me.