MGM Movie Legends

I wish they would re-release the movies, now on Blu Ray for best video picture and best audio Sound.

I agree with you GEORGE (GK) !

unfortunately the mgm movie legend does not suit two of these movies,clambake was quite dire.

I think "Clambake" was a fun movie. I'm sure a few fans, feel the same way.

Legends? Four pictures with dubious plots & bad acting. Elvis didn't have the body of a boxer & looks ridiculous in Kid Galahad. These would bore the average 12 year old.

Oldscudder. You sound like a great fan who really loves the work of Elvis Presley.

The only movie that stands up is Follow That Dream, and that is a stretch. The others are a Hollywood joke, especially the later two. Who would ever look at these movies but die hard Elvis fans? Can they even sit thru the whole film? Movie buffs dismiss almost all Elvis movies except the 50's ones and Viva. And why is there a re-release? DVD/Video/CD stores are gong out of business left & right and boxsets especially DO NOT SELL! Pick it up at the local pharmacy I guess after getting your cough syrup.

The Old Scudder writes-"Elvis didn't have the body of a boxer & looks ridiculous in Kid Galahad" Really? Thats what bothers "scudder" about the movie ?? Regardless, "Kid Galahad" is a very entertaining movie, that Fans, of all ages, enjoy. The movies in this re-released package, feature a "legend" in some fun movies.

Well, I guess for MGM to distribute these movies must cost very little indeed if they believe they can make a profit by doing so. Perhaps there is still a market out there, but in this age distributing movies on DVD is coming to an end as a tool, perhaps they want to squeeze out the last few bucks. If they really want to make money, give us an Elvis On Tour box set... i guess that's just too much work for them to invest...

Well. most of the pictures that come out are of the same or even less quality! These movies come under the category of entertaining movies. ALso, I think most of the Elvis fans do have these movies OR they don't want them (Scudder(. SO one may wonder why MGM is putting this collection on the market and that under the heading of legends. Obviously there are more people who like to watch them. I'm with GEORGE.

I guess the 'Legend' status refers to Elvis and not the movies!

I suppose this time they have included deleted scenes and the making of each film. Or am I daydreaming?! On a more serious note I would like to say that of all the releases on DVD and which I all own, the Region 1 releases of Clambake and Follow That Dream where the worst picture-wise, so I hope at least they remastered them to a better quality this time. Probably not :(

I don't get it. When videos first came out in the early 80's followed by DVD's the two catalogues that were guaranteed to be exploited were Elvis Presleys and Clint Eastwoods. Bothe stars movies were issued again and again on video albeit with new packaging. The studios knew these were the most popular sellers and rush released them onto the market. Today I'm stunned that neither stars back catalogue has been cashed in on in the blu-ray market ( Sorry, I know this isn't a Clint website ). Is the blu-ray market stalling already? I know there's faults in some players that need extra software and i've found sound issues depending on which player I use. My local Tescos has stopped stocking them in favour of DVDs - is it the price that puts people off ? I think Elvis movies and concerts on Blu-ray is a no-brainer as my friends across the pond say!

gilesm. MGM does not have Elvis On Tour. These are the only movies of Elvis that they have. Hate to tell you guys this but FTD and KG were hit Elvis movies in the early 60's. They still represent Elvis well, especially his great comic work in FTD. Do Elvis movies look dated? Well most movies from the 60's do look dated.

Yes Iray I am an Elvis fan. I have bought every Elvis record from 1956 on & usually on the day they were released. However I do not march in lockstep with the majority of the faithful. Elvis made a lot of good music but the pictures were mediocre at best to down rite moronic. At least that's the way I see it. Let me ask you to compare Kid Galahad to Raging Bull. Both are boxing pictures. What's your opinion ? Which is the better picture? Who was the better actor Elvis or DiNero? Look forward to your reply.

I love Elvis movies for what they are: Elvis movies! They are good escapism movies. I like watching them immensely. There's no mind pollution in them where people are killing each other, verbally abusing each other, and it's just fun to watch. I like them a lot and appreciate that in them. But they should take better care of them and release them in good quality with remastering and restoration. Say what you want about them, but they will be remembered forever. Just don't compare them to anything else. I don't think they are near as bad as people make them out to be.

Hmm escapism movies? Yeah I bet Elvis felt the same way, he wanted to escape making them! The movies started off good just like the music. But as the movies became more lame & silly, so did the music and record releases. For this reason alone I cannot watch these moveis, for to me, they almost killed his once brilliant career. Thats why when you mention Elvis to just a music fan, they will always tell you he peaked in the 50s with a brief comeback in the late 60s, early 70's. Thats the way his career is looked at by most people, like it or not. As for this release, it will probably be like the first time it came out, bad quality.

Oldscudder. I have not seen Raging Bull. Any good songs?

Iray. You should really see raging bull to compare the two movies. To answer your question the one thing the two movies have in common is there are no good songs in either.

OH NO, must be a full moon. I find myself aggreeing completely with dgirl and theoldsccudder . Someone please help me!!!

I am always a bit amused, a bit disappointed and a bit irritated by some of the comments on here. Samcra, Dgirl. Scudder, why do you seem so bitter about Elvis in the movies? You have to realise that Elvis is NOT owned by just rock'n'roll aficianados (or "just music fans" as dgirl calls them). The movies did not "kill off" Elvis' career; he was in the top ten earning film stars for most every year of his Hollywood contracts. He was providing music videos to his international fans before music videos were invented - and most movies had good entertaining songs in them - yes Scudder, even Kid Galahad (Whistling Tune? King of the Whole Wide World?) Elvis may have made some derogatory comments about some of his films, but he was a big boy and if really did not want to do them he could have stopped. As Iray and SanQ said, the movies were hugely entertaining to lots of people - maybe not to you - but as I said, you don't own Elvis! And Scudder, comparing Raging Bull and Kid Galahad - GET REAL - Kid Galahad is not a real life boxing film (like the grinding, miserable, violent, vicious Raging Bull) it is a musical. Elvis was so big a star that his films could only be vehicles for him; for example in 1956, even before his peak of fame, they had to rewrite and rename The Reno Brothers (Love Me Tender) and include songs in it even though it featured supposedly bigger stars than Elvis (eg Richard Egan). And remember, Elvis may not have sung YOUR favourite type of music all his career but he is - 34 years after his death - one of the most recognisable, popular, loved and enduring icons of the 20th century, so maybe he was doing something right after all.

MickeyN I share your sentiment. Though I prefer Elvis and RnR, I also enjoy(ed) his movies. They were light entertainment and I like it as I don't like all this heavy stuff anyway.

Agree with MickeyN - it's ridiculous to compare a gritty, serious drama with a lightweight musical so don't see the point in that. Also, why does Elvis have to be the best actor anyway to enjoy his movies? I like a lot of films by Sylvestor Stallone, Kurt Russell and Clint Eastwood but in no way are they great actors. There are only a handful that are really any good but so what, that could be said about a lot of successful actors.

Mickey N Andy 2. I made the comment comparing the 2 movies tongue in cheek. Mickey N, yes Elvis did something right (the entire 50's made his career that can't be compared to any other). He was in a league miles above anyone else. And for a few years in the early 60's & a few years in the late 60's he was also great. Take away the 50's altogether & the career especially with the movies & the jump suit 70's is just ordinary. The 50's made the man & icon, most of what followed was just a shell of those years & went progressively downhill. I know there are those on this site that just love the 70's. His career was in a holding pattern & the jumpsuit era made him a laughing stock to many. That's the way I see it. I still love the music minus the majority of the movie songs. We see things differently but that makes things interesting.

Personally, I love the 50s as well and absolutely love Jailhouse rock and King Creole. However, his enduring popularity today is not based on those black and white movies but on the period dating from the NBC TV Special to Aloha From Hawaii. Elvis was greater than life in this period and scored huge hits, hundreds of concerts sold out to the last seat consistently and broke television records. This period is touring across the world with a videoshow today and producing remasterd hits like A little less conversation. The 50s were great but absolutely not his basis for enduring popularity today.

TCB, got to disagree with you. Try to picture, the 50's Elvis never happened. Elvis comes out & starts his career in the early 60's with Blue Hawaii. He would not have the same impact because he was not cutting edge as he had been in the 50's. And the 68 comeback would never have happened because that was Elvis reprisal of the 50's. As for Aloha although good doesn't compare to his live 50's shows. My point is he survived the 60's & 70's because the 50's cemented his legend. Nothing he did in the 70's was cutting edge he was just another crooner in a silly jumpsuit to boot. I can say this because I followed his career from 1956 on. But it's ok we disagree.

OldScutter I have to disagree with you. I don't think that Elvis - starting after being drafted - would start with Blue Hawaii. He would have gone into the music first. Moreover, the Comeback Show was more than you credit it for. My brother, a real sixties lover and definitely NOT an Elvis fan, admitted frankly and boldly that he was stunned by Elvis at that time. So I think that IF Elvis had a later start he would have the same effect and career. And would have made movies too (like the stuff the Beatles did - which I did not like by the way). Maybe he would even be a bigger star as the youth of the sixties and seventies were vaster in number.

Sorry Oldscudder but i didn't get the tongue in cheek bit but ok. Also, completely agree with your comments about his career and the enduring popularity being totally down to the 1950's. This is stuff of legend and completely changed the world. The sixties movie star and the 70's crooner are not the stuff of legend. These are the things that people use to ridicule now not celebrate.

As I said before, Elvis was a top ten Hollywood earner for most all of his movie years, pretty remarkable I'd say. The Elvis 70's format is now credited with resurrecting Las Vegas, the 1973 Aloha concert was a broadcasting milestone, Elvis sold out over 1000 gigs in his last seven years. You may not like it, but the jumpsuit image is, to many, enjoyable and fondly remembered - enduring to this day. So what's your definition of "legend"??

Andy 2. You articulated my position better than I did with my Nov 14 post. Agree with you 100% Mickey N I with agree Elvis was a legend. In my opinion without the 50's he wouldn't be one. Just another crooner that made silly movies. But the 50's cemented his legendary status. Enough said.

MickeyN - What you and so many others do on this website do is equate financial success to be everything looking good, I guess just like the Col. did. Of course Elvis was a top Hollywood earner, he was Elvis, icon to millions and this was all due to Elvis of the 50's and early 60's. 2 of the movies in this box should have not been made regardless of their financial success. Financial success does not equate to critical acclaim. I'd rather have 10 Flaming Star duds than 1 Frankie & Johnny profit success. Because of these silly movies and yes the post Aloha jumpsuit era, Elvis does not get the critical acclaim by many . He also became a lazy artist who slid into a comfort zone and did not care about growing artistically or maybe just gave up after not being given proper movie roles or access to good songs. Did he really care as much as we would like to think? I guess we will never know. I personally cannot sit thru one of these movies anymore.

I do not equate financial success with true quality, but I DO realise that a performer's financial success is an indicator of popularity and real acclaim. Critics and cynics scoff and debate "artistic merit" but it is the PUBLIC who parted with their hard earned money who are the real arbiters of Elvis's entertainment value. I love Elvis' 50s stuff, I am entertained by his films and his concerts, I am in awe of the personality and charisma that lasts to this day. Critical acclaim? Critical acclaim? Who the hell are these critics? What have they ever achieved? And who needs their acclaim????

Every Era of Elvis Career featured some amazing moments and career highlights. And, No doubt, the 50s era, is what, established Elvis, as the "King". But, he was much more than, just, a 50s artist, and Elvis, wanted to do "harder edged movies". But in Hollywood, its all about, what makes money. And, musicals, like, Blue Hawaii, Viva las Vegas, made money, while harder edged films like "Flaming Star" didn't do as well. And, its a shame, because, better movies, like "Flaming Star" would have made Elvis Presley's Legacy even stronger. I too, would rather have more films like "Flaming Star" over films, like,"Frankie and Johnny", but it is, what it is, and we have to accept it, and we today, can pick and choose what Elvis films, we like to watch and don't want to watch. When someone tells me that Elvis made nothing but awful movies, I tell them to watch films like "King Creole" & "Flaming Star" and "Change of Habit" among a few more and they always change their way of thinking. When people tell me that Elvis' music wasn't any good after the 50s, I tell them listen to the albums like "Elvis is back" and "From Elvis in Memphis" and "Elvis in Person/Back in Memphis", among others and they again, change their way of thinking. And honestly, I know people who strictly like his movies and nothing more. Elvis worked hard, and left us a large variety, in his legacy to enjoy, and we should just sit back and enjoy the moments that make us smile, regardless of the era and such, and not critcize the man's career. He accomplished a lot more than most do in a 23 year career.

I wonder how many artists could stir such debate 34 years after their death?! I really liked De Niro's Raging Bull and John Wayne's The Searchers and I also really enjoyed (and still do) Kid Galahad and Flaming Star; I like Pink Floyd and I like Elvis; Leonard Cohen is superb and so is Elvis; the Beachboys and the Beatles were/are kings in their own musical worlds and so is Elvis. Why compare, just relax and enjoy.