MovieChat Forums > Cadillac Records (2008) Discussion > Elvis: lies, lies and more lies

Elvis: lies, lies and more lies

posted 14 years ago by gillianzz-1
12 replies | jump to latest

I got as far as the part of the movie when they showed the film of Elvis in 1956, with a recording of Elvis singing a one-off version of 'My Babe' live on stage in 1969, implying that Elvis was responsible for ripping off Little Walter, before I turned it off in disgust. Elvis sang that song a couple of times onstage because he loved it. The Chess brothers were well known for ripping off their artists - why try to pin it on Elvis who was also getting ripped off by his record company and manager?

Elvis NEVER claimed to have invented the music he sang and went out of his way from the start to give credit to those artists he loved, black and white, at a time (the 50's) when it wasn't safe, let alone 'cool' to do so. The few times he was asked about his music, he spoke about Arthur 'Big Boy' Crudup, Big Bill Broonzy and his all time favourite gospel artists like the Golden Gate Quartet and the Harmonising Four - names all but forgotten today.

The black musicians who met Elvis were astounded at what he knew and the way he treated them. BB King said Elvis was the first white guy to call him 'Sir'!!! James Brown went to his house to pay hommage to Elvis after he died - JAMES BROWN!!! - do you think he would've gone near Elvis if he'd been a rip off artist? BB King, Muhummud Ali likewise. I'm not making any of this up - go do a google search with any of those names.

The no. 1 case against Elvis is always 'Hound Dog', the Big Mama Thornton song which incidentally was written by two white Jewish guys Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, who also wrote lots of songs for black vocal r'nb groups like The Coasters, The Drifters, etc. 'Hound Dog was a hit for Big Mama in 1953, Elvis' version was recorded in 1956 and was a complete re-vamp of her version, not a note for ntoe copy.

One last thing: The Rolling Stones, who are held up in the movie as being the 'good white guys' did something Elvis NEVER did. They covered Bobby Womack's hit "It's All Over Now" and released it while Bobby's version was still in the charts, killing it. Bobby still got the writing royalties, but is understandably still miffed about it today...

[–] bpmct 14 years ago

I know really, Elvis gets too much crap for this from racist idiots that know nothing about music! The fact is is blues and R&B are only a tiny part of his output. Early on, he was mixing in country music (Blue Moon Of Kentucky), and eventually moved on to gospel, and even opera (It's Now Or Never, Surrender). The funny thing is, these idiots that say all this don't even listen to blues music it's self, it's full of people "ripping people off". Whole verses are taken from other blues songs, so much so that it's hard to tell who really wrote what! If you want to go after someone for "ripping off black music" go after Pat Boone. At least with Elvis he was trying to match the energy of the original, Boone was sugar coated crap! Better yet here's an idea stop being a bunch of racists and allow people to enjoy the music they want to enjoy. Music is univeral, it isn't black or white, everyone can enjoy it! Also th OP is right:

"The no. 1 case against Elvis is always 'Hound Dog', the Big Mama Thornton song which incidentally was written by two white Jewish guys Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, who also wrote lots of songs for black vocal r'nb groups like The Coasters, The Drifters, etc. 'Hound Dog was a hit for Big Mama in 1953, Elvis' version was recorded in 1956 and was a complete re-vamp of her version, not a note for ntoe copy."

but I should say Elvis' version of 'Hound Dog' doesn't even come from the Big Mama version, his version comes from a white group named "Freddie Bell & The Bell Boys" an act he saw the first time he went to Vegas! Their record is more of a novelty type of record, they sing it in a silly type of way, Elvis added a hard edge to THAT version.

Check out my blog: http://briantheoldmovieguy.blogspot.com

[–] kamarya89 14 years ago

i agree, the way this movie dealt with the music history was disgusting. i think many movies are following that trend of "the white man stole from the black man" to give an edge to their plot and nothing more.

the thing is black people have always been very innovative with their music and it was very hard not to admire it and steal from it.

the subject of artists stealing from each other is a whole different movie, and it shouldn't be race-based.

that's coming from someone who isn't black or white.

[–] gillianzz-1 13 years ago

"talent borrows, genius steals"

- Oscar Wilde

That applies to ANY creative field and is necessary for innovation whether we're talking about the arts, science, What-EVER!! Without it we'd all still be living in caves.

[–] activista 12 years ago

@kamarya89

The point is that the black artists back in those days,innovative as they were, rarely reaped the financial rewards of their creations. Back in the 50's radio was still heavily segregated, so a black artist would rarely get any airtime for their songs beyond the R&B stations, but a white artist would cover that same song and get more airplay,ore fame and more money,period, than the black artist did. Even Etta James talked about how commonplace that was at the time in her bio RAGE TO SURVIVE, which is definitely worth reading to find out exactly how unjust the recording business was to the black artists it got rich off of. And, yes, some white artists DID steal sings form the black artists without giving them any credit or royalties---so "the white man stole form the black man" isn't a trope or a trend--it's based on something that actually HAPPENED in the time period the movie's is set in. Because it's TRUE. And, NO, you can't ignore race because racism was a huge part of why the black artists didn't get what was due to them financially in the first place,so how the hell could it NOT be race-based? It WAS, and your statement makes absolutely NO sense---you need to read up on some of the unethical ways in which black artists were robbed of their royalties form jump, even by other black folks in the business.

[–] kamarya89 12 years ago

I apologize I perhaps haven't chosen my words wisely.

i didn't mean to say that it is a trend as if it didn't happen. what i mean by trend is movies delving into that subject with no regard to the fact that it is very sensitive and should be handled delicately.

i just feel in this movie they didn't make any effort to discuss that subject with integrity, they just wanted to throw something that will charge people's emotions.

forgive me, my country's history isn't fueled with racism so i might be looking at things too simply. there a lot of stealing when it comes to creativity, artists stealing from other artist, not black or white just artists.

[–] bpmct 12 years ago

You can't blame the artists like Elvis for something the industry did,kgreene12_248. The notion that white artist "stole" from the black man is complete BS. Take for example the case of Georgia Gibbs covering 'Tweedlee Dee'. Gibbs had the bigger hit and Lavern Baker actually attempted to get her congressman to introduce legislation to prevent the copying of black arrangements by white artists but was unsuccessful. This all for something that was essentially the label giving the artist a song to sing, so the label could make money. White artists didn't have it so easy either. Elvis had a a good manager, but take Buddy Holly as an example. His producer started putting his name on the records for writing credit, and then withheld money form him which caused Buddy to have to go on that last tour (he was out of cash). You have to look at the whole picture, everyone had it rough in those days. The industry was based on payola, the mob got a kick back much of the time, it sucked for everyone.

Check out my blog: http://brians-things-that-are-cool.tumblr.com/

[–] hatr 12 years ago

Well said about Elvis' covers of My Babe. He loved and helped spread the word about that style of music.
And yes the film stuffed up big time with its timelines

[–] activista 11 years ago

@bpmct

Wrong,wrong,wrong. The truth is, if a black artist and a white aritst put out the same song at the same time, the white artist's version would get pushed a lot more, and get more airplay, while the black artist's version, because of that, wouldn't even make it to the charts. This also happened to singer Ruth Brown, and ore than one black artist in that era. Do some research---that was the norm back then. It kills me when people keep wanting to deny that race has nothing to do anything when it was so obviously a huge part of how the business was in those days.

[–] bpmct 10 years ago

Actually, most artists got screwed over back then and airplay had more to do with payola then it did skin color. White artist Eddie Cochran didn't hit as big as other artist because his label Liberty refused to pay for play. Whereas an artist like Ray Charles got play because Atlantic records bought Alan Freed a swimming pool (among other things).

Check out my blog: http://briansthingsthatarecool.blogspot.com/

[–] nutzerwutzer 11 years ago

"One last thing: The Rolling Stones, who are held up in the movie as being the 'good white guys' did something Elvis NEVER did."

I wouldn't say Elvis never recorded stuff that was currently in the charts. Songs like Blue Suede Shoes, Long Tall Sally, Tutti Frutti and Rip It Up were brand new, cutting edge rock 'n' roll when Elvis did them in '56. If they had been any newer he wouldn't have been familiar with them, let alone able to record them and release them while they were still charting. I'm sure he wasn't trying to kill the songs but rather to promote and popularize the whole genre. Man, Womack's record must have been a real smash to give the Stones enough time to kill it off. Even though it never made the top 40.

[–] burgundychampagne 10 years ago

I don't remember anyone in the film saying he ripped off Little Walter.

[–] bsharporflat 10 years ago

I don't remember anyone in the film saying he ripped off Little Walter.

Right. The OP just has his panties in a twist. It wasn't even a recording. Why should Elvis doing a live, on-stage homage to a blues legend be considered a bad thing? What's wrong with keeping Little Walter's memory alive?