There is a lot to unpack about what I did not like about this movie but I also feel I need to 'fess up about my love of Elvis and growing up a fan as a child. I was 11 when he died and it came as a big shock. In rural Norfolk where we lived mostly 20 years in the past so it seemed that he had only just arrived. I spent a long time after following the legend. The Kurt Russel movie, the odd "That's the Way it is / Was" documentaries - stylistically plundered for this movie and of course all the movies. Owning 40 Greatest Hits was pretty much issued to you growing up. Then Punk Rock and New Wave came and Elvis just became the distant past, even if he did shock his audience in a way Johnny Rotten could only dream. Occasionally American Trilogy would come on the radio and I'd crank it up and do an Elvis impersonator sing-along, "Wisha was, inna lanna cotton" I played it on my excited drive to see this movie I had been waiting for, saying to my partner, "If this song is not referenced in the movie, I'll be stunned, it is definitive Elvis".

Once the film started, it was the first track we see enacted by the incredibly brilliant Austin Butler who nails it. Sadly, there is not much else good to say about this movie beyond his performance. It makes sense of course that Baz Luhrmann would open with that. Luhrmann is never one to use a nutcracker when there is a sledgehammer he can bang an idea a few times with until you get it. That's my point. This is not really an Elvis movie. It is a Tom Parker movie that wishes it was an Elvis movie. I am not sure you can be that dark and cynical about Elvis life and hope to get away with it considering what baggage the typical audience are likely to bring to the show. For Elvis to be portrayed as this easily manipulated kid, when anyone who watched the documentaries mentioned above knew The King was always in charge. If you tip the weight of the narrative to Colonel Tom you have to reduce the personality of Elvis. Don't get me wrong when I first heard rumours about this movie I was very keen for a Colonel Tom movie played by Tom Hanks but for that movie to work it needs a less important Elvis, that's a tough trick to pull off.

This movie is only coherent to an Elvis fan. To others not plugged into the folklore, myth and legend, it is long and boring with Luhrmann over egging his point and being cynical and depressive. He either fast forwards too much that is relevant or dwells on insignificance to bolster and pad out the Colonel Tom con artist. There is the art of the conman, the huckster, referenced through this movie. In reality, the biggest card trick is shuffled by the director who promises us a celebration of Elvis but delivers a woeful, tedious tale of a mediocre manager who got lucky clinging to a rocket after it had already launched. Butler is brilliant, no doubt, Hanks is hammy at best. Luhrmann tries to use Elvis to paint Tom Parker which is like I said, using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Fun in places but subtle it ain't. Thang yer verry mush.

Looks like Tom Hanks phoned in his role. His acting, if you can call it that was disgustingly terrible. Austin Butler was the perfect actor to play Elvis. I enjoyed the parts of the movie that he was in without Hanks hovering around trying to steal the scene. The writers needed to delve more into Elvis Presley's early life. Priscilla's character was just a footnote. It was if she was hardly in his life. I would actually watch this movie again if I could delete Tom Hanks from the film. Tom Hanks sucked the life out of the movie as much as Colonel Parker sucked the life out of Elvis Presley and his career.

'Elvis' (2022)

Opening thoughts: Elvis Presley was one of the most charismatic, unique and influential singers/performers in his day and even over forty five years after his untimely death he is a major influence and icon in music history. Even when taking liberties with the truth, this reviewer does like a lot of biopics (ie. 'Amadeus', 'The Elephant Man'). Am also an admirer of Tom Hanks and have liked some of Baz Luhrmann's work, 'Moulin Rouge' for example.

Was really psyched to see 'Elvis', but for me it was a real disappointment. By all means it is not one of the year's worst films, but it is one of the biggest disappointments. A case of one of the best performances of the year deserving a significantly better film and where a few of the main interest points on paper being where the film failed. 'Elvis' to me can never be accused of not trying, in my mind it tried too hard and was too ambitious for its own good.

Good things: There are definitely good things here. The best thing about 'Elvis' is Austin Butler, who is absolutely sensational as Elvis. He brings so much energy, commitment and nuance to the role and succeeds in making Elvis a complex character and a real person rather than just a caricature and icon. Can't fault the music either, which is an absolute delight and is both beautiful and catchy.

A real highlight is the ending and the rendition of "Unchained Melody", which really brought tears to my eyes. The costumes and sets are extravagant and colourful without being overblown.

'Elvis' unfortunately has so much wrong with it. It does try to include too much content and does too little with almost all of it, basically a series of events in short shrift cliff notes form. Elvis had a very interesting and colourful personal life, executed too conventionally and blandly here with nowhere near enough emotion. There are pacing problems throughout, with many scenes dragging and going on for too long. Some very uneventful stretches too confusingly structured, the backing and forthing in timeline feeling disjointed and lacking in cohesion.

Much of the writing is very stilted, with too much of the dialogue not sounding like everyday conversation or flowing smoothly. Too much of it sounded somewhat anarchronistic, was taken too many times out of the setting and it was like bejng yanked back to modern times constantly. While liking the costumea, sets and period detail, the editing was too frenetic and gimmicky which made it look quite unfocused and the photography has too much of an over reliance of in your face close ups.

Luhrmann's direction gets props for visual ambition but fails in making the drama interesting or emotionally investable. The support cast perform gamely but almost all have far too little to do in screen time and how the characters are written (very sketchy excepting Priscilla). While Butler gives one of the year's best performances, Hanks gives one of its worst in a rare horribly off form performance. He never comes over as sinister or real and instead too much like a truly bizarre hammy caricature and it felt very out of place in the film. With it being told from Parker's point of view, this was a massive issue.

Closing thoughts: Overall, didn't care for it.

4/10.