Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Eve Tushnet

Bright Light City Gonna Set My Soul On Fire: I watch Baz Luhrmann’s “Elvis”

Last updated on: July 25, 2022 at 9:05 pm   by Eve Tushnet

Bright Light City Gonna Set My Soul On Fire: I watch Baz Luhrmann’s “Elvis” 2022-07-25T21:05:06-04:00 Eve Tushnet

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I had to watch this thing, even though I didn’t know what interesting thing there might be to say about the legend of Elvis Presley, because Baz Luhrmann is a man who directs like Yma Sumac sings. His camera is a tiger on a tilt-a-whirl, he whacks anachronistic scraps of music together like a kid with construction paper and paste, his whole mind just seems cartoony. His Romeo and Juliet was neon Jesus as far as the eye could see. These violent delights have violent ends. And that’s what this movie is too, it’s grabby and it prowls; and it does have something to say, even if by the end it’s saying it a little too carefully.

The first half of Elvis is unbearably good. It opens not with the hits, “Heartbreak Hotel” or “Blue Suede Shoes,” and not with the influences–you’ll get them later, don’t worry, Big Mama Thornton will strut between the barstools belting “Hound Dog” because Baz Luhrmann always gives the people what we want, but the opening number is “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.” This collision of Christ and violence, beauty and wrath, this sales pitch (notice how she never says, “We shall kill to make them free”?) and reminder that America is two countries, still–it’s the perfect choice.

This movie’s style is a wrack of ecstasies. It’s comic-booky and color-drenched. It swirls and sprawls and then punctuates with precise cuts. And its subject matter is ecstasy too: all the ways we package and sell ecstasy. Elvis‘s Elvis is a microcosm of his country, of course, and Elvis‘s America is a tent revival on a carnival midway. Everything’s forbidden and everything’s for sale.

And–oh, I didn’t expect this, nobody asked Luhrmann to do this and I’m so glad he did–and the undercurrent of evil at the midnight carnival is mostly about racism. I’m going to write a bit about that, because I want to think about why it worked for me. All these rock’n’roll movies always make their heroes make a choice, the choice is always the wrong one (if it were the right one, we wouldn’t know their names), and in this movie Elvis’s choice is between the Black world that helped form him, and the white world that pays him. The scene where the young Elvis (Austin Butler) writhes on a small-town bandstand singing that he’s evil, evil, evil is the best depiction of how racial injustice warps American moral categories since Huck Finn said well then he’d go to Hell.

Like okay, is it weird to make Elvis the avatar of racial rebellion? Is it a way to make a movie about the white guy and not (say) Little Richard, a man whose life went through all kinds of equally-American twists? Sure of course, you can do that math yourself. But I think in this case I’ll argue that that’s about the context of Elvis–which movies you can sell and which ones you can’t–and not about the movie Elvis, which does so much right with its neon, falsetto wailing, unsubtle racial politics. Butler gives Elvis a genuine ambiguity: he’s femmey and also just strange, his gyrations don’t come across as calculated seduction but as something born of deep discomfort and lostness, he’s lost and somehow wrong and this very hot lost wrongness is what makes him a threatening figure for nice white girls to swoon over. If a man who can’t be a good, normal white boy is hotter than a man who can, then even that uncanny hotness might carry a whiff of treason. This Elvis is a door swinging wildly on his hinges, always opening onto two worlds at once, giving every acceptable girl and boy glimpses of an unacceptable future.

The villain here is the narrator, Tom Hanks (!) as Col. Tom Parker, Elvis’s manager and himself a man of mystery. Luhrmann pulls out all the stops here; Parker, a promoter/con man/genius, is the nightmare carnival in human form. Something Wicked This Way Strums! He’s a Gatsby figure, he’s all-American insofar as he is constantly hiding something and grabbing something, he’s a man with a dream and that dream involves turning Elvis Presley into a human slot machine. He’s got the white suit and the clown-headed cane (!!!) and he’s gonna make Elvis so g-d—- normal, you could use him as a Cuisinart. Against this extremely white man, there are a host of subtler foils for Elvis who flicker in and out of the narrative, always suggesting that other lives are possible, even if they’re only possible for other people: BB King, Little Richard, Mahalia Jackson; and toward the very end a hint at Michael Jackson, to remind you that it could always be worse.

Elvis, as I feel like everybody knows, did not actually choose solidarity against racial injustice. Luhrmann pushes the script ’til you can hear its wheels squeak, trying to make Elvis the tragedy of a man who had good racial opinions. Who cares? Not necessary. The sad right-thinking remarks that burble from Elvis’s lips at the death of Dr. King or Bobby Kennedy are just bad and not the point. The end of the movie, where title cards tell us in white-on-black text what happened to everybody and then, in gold text, that Elvis’s like cultural influence or whatever is yuuge and continues to this day, undercuts the entire moral of the Sweet Smell of Success story we’ve just been told. All that stuff sucks, it’s rote caressing of Baby Boom nostalgia.

But the movie has already shown us Elvis as just a collage of longings, someone in desperate need of self-loss, and the places where he was able to lose himself most gently were always Black spaces. There’s a bit in Lawrence of Arabia (and what a weird resonance that film has with this one, now that I think about it) where somebody asks Lawrence, in re: the desert, “How much nothing does a man need?”

Nothing or everything; face the fire hoses or the fans; jail, maybe, or the International Hotel. Your body’s on the line either way.

Elvis memorabilia via Wikimedia Commons.

Art

Too much is never enough

America

Baz Luhrmann

I believe in ecstasy

nightmare carnival

race

sun sex sin death and destruction

sweet smell of success

Previous Post



July 11, 2022

"Do You Think It's Okay If I Pretend I'm a Zombie?": Short movie notes

Next Post



August 9, 2022 Crouch We Here, And Lurk: Short movie reviews


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Art Best-Of Gay Catholic Whatnot Mackerel-Snapping self-obsessed Too much is never enough Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 August 2022 July 2022 May 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002 February 2002 January 2002


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

According to James, what happens when sin is full-grown?

Select your answer to see how you score.

It separates from God It gives birth to death It hardens the heart It destroys faith

Related posts from Eve Tushnet

Catholic

Goodfellas of the Flower Moon

Eve Tushnet

Catholic

When the Lights Go Out (Everybody Starts to...

Eve Tushnet

Catholic

Punch Drunk Love: I watch "Bottoms"

Eve Tushnet

Catholic

They Flew: I review Carlos Eire's new book...

Eve Tushnet

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic

Rejecting Doom: Christian Hope And Human Action

Christianity is a religion of hope. We are to have hope and...

It’s What Comes From Within Which Matters

One of the most difficult things for us to understand is why...

Why I Choose the Eucharist Over the Sermon

Choose the Eucharist, Not the Sermon What are we supposed to get...

5 Design Elements Found in Spiritually Rooted Homes

Putting Spirituality Into Home Decor Our homes are more than our living...

Credo: A Story of God Told with the...

About 10 years ago, I began to imagine a personal "Credo" that...

The Anatomy of Divine Revelation in Catholic Thought

The claim that God has made Himself known to human beings is...

view all Catholic blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube