Nach hinten gegelte Haare mit einer Schmalzlocke, die lässig ins Gesicht fällt, prunkvolle Outfits, eine göttliche Stimme und ein Hüftschwung, bei dem sogar Heidi Klum erblasst. Der Superstar des Rock ‘n‘ Roll bekommt endlich seinen ersten eigenen Kino-Spielfilm, inszeniert von niemandem geringeren als Baz Luhrmann, der bereits gezeigt hat, wie man eine ganz große Show auf der Kinoleinwand abreißt. Die Erwartungen sind niedrig, die Hoffnungen sind groß, das Ergebnis ist enttäuschend. In zwei Stunden und 40 Minuten schafft es Luhrmann nicht auf den Punkt zu bringen, was er uns überhaupt erzählen will – ob dies ein Biopic sein soll, eine Hommage oder gar ein gewiefter Film über einen schmierigen Manager, der weiß, wie man seine Schäfchen ins Trockene bringt. Statt eines klaren Konzepts stückelt sich eine Handlung zusammen, die sich gerade so noch am roten Faden der Künstler-Vita entlang hangelt und dennoch keine tieferen Einblicke in die Biographie zulässt.

Statt einer musikalischen Explosion, die auch künftigen Generationen eine Musiklegende näherbringen könnte, erleben wir eher eine Diskographievorstellung, die ausschließlich mit der aus dem Internet bekannten Vorschaufunktion hantiert. In einer viel zu langen Spieldauer gibt es wohl keinen einzigen Song, der von Anfang bis Ende Platz findet und bis auf die farrelleske Maske von Tom Hanks dümpelt das gesamte Werk in einer Bedeutungslosigkeit, die einfach nur tragisch ist.

Wie hat Dir der Film gefallen? (3 Bewertungen, Durchschnitt: 6,33 von 10)

Loading...

Elvis ©2022 Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Kane Skennar

Elvis ©2022 Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Kane Skennar

Even though Baz Luhrmann has only rarely made an appearance so far and opinions are always divided regarding his films, he has nevertheless managed to present his works at pretty much every film festival worth mentioning in the world and to fill the showcase for awards abundantly with MOULIN ROUGE!, THE GREAT GATSBY and ROMEO AND JULIA. In his youth, he also tried his hand at acting before developing his first directorial work based on his own play in 1992, thus finding his future talent. His plays are known for being loud and debauched, and for willingly taking detours in order to eventually arrive at their destination. Since music usually plays an important role in his productions and Luhrmann himself is also very interested in Elvis’ work, it seemed obvious that no one else could develop a first feature film about such a musical icon.

Although there are already two feature films dedicated to the musician, these were TV productions that did not make the leap to the big screen. Nevertheless, they are no less noteworthy, because just two years after Presley’s death, horror expert John Carpenter tackled the man who died far too early and even managed to win a Golden Globe with Kurt Russell in the leading role. The second film adaptation was similarly successful, starring Jonathan Rhys Meyers in 2005, who took home a Globe for his outstanding acting. In addition to these two works, several documentaries and parodies were made, not to mention the fact that Presley himself was involved in a total of 31 films during his career.

That’s what it’s all about

Sometimes in life it takes being in the right place at the right time. That’s exactly what happened to Tom Parker, who as a music manager accompanied the career of country musician Hank Snow and one day comes across the young Elvis Presley, who increasingly steals Snow’s thunder. During these performances, Parker closely observes the audience, which was initially sceptical, sometimes even scornful, of the up-and-coming artist. But once Elvis opens his mouth and delivers his great musical talent in combination with an incomparable style of dress and an outstanding stage performance, the women in particular fall for his charm by the dozen. Parker immediately realises that this young man is a great star. The shrewd manager seizes his chance and immediately poaches the rock and pop musician. He promises the barely twenty-year-old a great career, but such a steep rise always brings its challenges.

Review

Of course, Elvis Presley is a music legend who is also a name to today’s generations. But as is the way with human history, names and events sink deeper and deeper into history books over time and therefore lose significance, leaving today’s youth with supposedly few points of contact with the King of Rock ‘n’ Roll, even though his music massively advanced the development of rock and pop culture. Luhrmann now revives the artist’s merits and presents a cross-section of Elvis’ entire career in a musical fireworks display, garnished with a few biographical additions from his youth. All this happens primarily from the perspective of the aforementioned manager Tom Parker, whose role was taken over by Oscar® winner Tom Hanks, who gives us a fabulous performance.

Elvis ©2022 Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Kane Skennar

At the same time, however, this point leads us to the first problem of the film, because instead of a biopic, which would be expected given the title, we get a strange mashup of the most diverse stories, all of which are connected to the star in some way, but which nevertheless do not take a clear narrative perspective. It is always unclear what Luhrmann is actually trying to tell us, because basically we learn almost nothing about the manager, but also nothing about the superstar. Instead, we see more of a kind of musical that somehow wants to carry us over a much too long playing time, but in the process also accepts quite soporific losses. The first half of the film, in particular, is in danger of being sidetracked, because although this part is glamorous, pompous, loud and fast, it also offers the same pacing over and over again, which shimmies along a superficial portrayal of the characters and thus always has a constant, boring dramaturgy.

Sensory overload and presentation tragedy

Since it is not enough that a single screen image with dripping fan worship steals our nerves, split screens and time jumps are used again and again, serving us up to six different perspectives at the same time and often not giving us the opportunity to even perceive what is actually being played. And in order to avoid boredom and to indoctrinate the audience with the concept of the hero, Luhrmann garnishes this chaos with a short, silly comic illustration that does not advance the film one metre and is never taken up again in the later course. It would now be daring to claim that there is an improvement in the second part of ELVIS, but at least a little steam is taken off the boiler as the film progresses and the characters get a little more development time, which also gives them a little more character, even if the titular character in particular has just hit rock bottom at this point.

Elvis ©2022 Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Kane Skennar

It is difficult to find words that do justice to Austin Butler’s performance as the main character, because even though he shows a terrific talent for movement and is able to adopt Elvis’ style, his portrayal comes across as surprisingly pale and unapproachable. Presumably, however, it is not Butler who is to blame for this, but the rather messed-up script, which just can’t seem to find a clear structure. Things look a little better in this respect with Tom Hanks, who, in the style of Colin Firth in THE BATMAN, has completely plastered his face and is hardly recognisable at first glance. The greasiness and the merciless will to succeed come across well, even if both Hanks and Butler mumble their way through it. While with the Elvis character it’s probably due to the speech melody, Hanks is probably just struggling too much with his mask to be able to present the dialogue in his usual clean language, which on top of that is often covered up by the music.

Elvis ©2022 Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Kane Skennar

Preview hits instead of concert feeling

Composer Elliott Wheeler offers us a broad spectrum of the superstar’s musical outpourings, supplemented by other songs from various decades. Although the fan thus gets the hits of Elvis that one wishes for, a clear identity is nevertheless not perceptible and the ecstatic groove that could bring the mood in the hall to a boil does not even arise. Similar to our protagonist sacrificing himself for the audience on stage, the cinema audience also has to go through a rocky marathon in order to experience small moments of artistic brilliance in between. Moreover, Luhrmann never deals with the artist’s work critically or questions it. Instead, ELVIS is always presented as a superstar who, apart from alcohol and drug excesses, is free of any flaws. In particular, the fact that Presley did not write any of his own songs is skilfully swept under the carpet.

Conclusion

So what remains after watching the film? We know that Elvis was a superstar, we know that he also had a problem with drugs, we know that his manager was a sleazy guy with a talent for milking his cows to the last drop and also knows how someone has to be marketed. All this, however, has been clear to pretty much everyone before, because we are not talking about his Hamburg namesake here. Not only do we not learn anything that could broaden our horizons, we also get a lovelessly told story that lacks a spark of creativity and disappoints in both the visuals and the sound. A film that is far too long ensures that the potential for falling asleep is high. ELVIS is unfortunately nothing half and nothing whole and therefore rather to be classified in the waste of time section.