CheerupSilver Very Cool!!!

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Kirandeep Yoder The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

TheLittleSongbird Elvis Presley was a hugely influential performer with one of the most distinctive singing voices of anybody. He embarked on a film career consisting of 33 films from 1956 to 1969, films that did well at the box-office but mostly panned critically (especially his later films) and while he was a highly charismatic performer he was never considered a great actor.It is easy to be put off by the rather dreadful and inappropriate title, but giving it a chance 'The Trouble With Girls' while a long way from a great film was much better than its title suggested. Whereas the title indicated another formulaic Elvis set in the 50s-60s with lots of girls and variable thrown in songs it was actually rather a change of pace with a unique 20s setting. 'The Trouble With Girls' is a long way from Elvis' best, but it is equally a long way from being one of his worst as well (it's not even the worst of this particular period of his career).'The Trouble With Girls' has its strengths. The setting is interesting and looks quite handsome, while the photography is a far cry from the garish, cheap look of many of Elvis late 60s outings. Of the songs, the standout is "Clean Up Your Own Back Yard", one of the best songs in an Elvis for a long time. "Swing Down Sweet Chariot" is also lovely.As for Elvis himself, he looks great and while his vocals are underutilised compared to usual he also sounds great. While he has given more enthusiastic performances before he still looks confident and there is not as much a sense that he was not interested like with some of his later films. The supporting cast were a mixed bag, but Dabney Coleman makes for an excellent sleazebag and Vincent Price is suitably distinguished and a lot of fun. Sheree North fares the best of the ladies and Anissa Jones is immensely charming.Quite a lot doesn't work however. John Carradine's only noteworthy bit is the line regarding Romeo and Juliet, otherwise he's wasted, and Marlyn Mason and Nicole Jaffe are similarly given little to work with. Joyce Van Patten is plain obnoxious in alternative to funny. and Edward Andrews' role is too underwritten for him to do much with it. Generally the characters are a mix of bland and annoying, so it's hard to empathise, and they also are saddled with dialogue that felt more at home in a badly out of date sit-com.While Elvis doesn't come off too badly, he is underused and too much like a supporting character. Apart from two songs, while none reach disposable or career-low level, the rest of the songs are not particularly memorable. The weakest element is the story, the slightness may have been more forgivable if the pacing wasn't so lethargic or the storytelling so muddled, as a result of trying to include too much and not knowing what to do with it or who to target it towards. The direction seems at odds with the material, with it being obvious that Peter Tewksbury was more comfortable with cosy and wholesome and not with darker edge and broad.Overall, not as bad as the title suggests but not Elvis' finest hour either. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Michael_Elliott Trouble with Girls, The (1969) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Elvis plays a Chautauqua manager who is struggling to keep the business going. I found this one to be a mixed blessing because there's quite a bit of good things yet there are still some rather bland stuff. Most of the bland stuff is aimed at the music, which I found quite lifeless and dull. The director does a very good job at capturing the look and feel of the show, which is a major plus and even Elvis turns in a good performance here. Vincent Price steals the show with his campy brand of humor and it's nice seeing John Carradine answering a question about Romeo and Juliet and their sex life.

iweise Strictly for fans of the King this movie is one of the worst I have ever seen. It looked as though it was written and directed by Ed Wood without the props falling over. Elvis' hair changes from one camera angle to another, there is no real plot, all of the characters are predictable. The only saving grace was.....well....there was no saving grace. It's bad.

kwbucsfan While this film is not one of his all time best, it is certainly one of his better later films. It's interesting to see Elvis in a film set in the 1920's rather than the psychadelic 1960's. This movie had an interesting plot, but was marred by some rather bad acting. Elvis was okay and the scene with Vincent Price was interesting, but most of the acting was lame.