If you’d asked me early last summer what I thought about Elvis Presley, I would’ve told you his estate at Graceland was amazing to visit. I might’ve even added a bit about my grandma’s fondness for him. That would’ve been all, though. To me, he was nothing but a famous singer with a few great hits.
That was until I saw Austin Butler star in Baz Luhrmann’s 2022 biopic “Elvis.” This film began, for me and many others, an Elvis renaissance. Of course, fans’ love for Presley has never died, but there was a revival of Elvis media after the movie’s release. This includes Sofia Coppola’s newly released film “Priscilla,” which began production just months after “Elvis” premiered. Coppola’s biographical drama covers a similar timeline as that of “Elvis” but focuses on his wife Priscilla’s experiences. With two high-profile films released so closely and with such similar stories, an obvious question comes to mind. Which leading actor, Austin Butler of “Elvis” or Jacob Elordi of “Priscilla,” is the better Elvis?
To start with the obvious, Austin Butler resembles Elvis much more closely. You could chalk it up to a great makeup and hair department, but there were many times during “Elvis” when I couldn’t tell whether I was looking at Butler or Elvis Presley himself. The two are also both 6 feet tall, whereas Elordi stands at a whopping 6 foot 5 inches tall. While watching “Priscilla,” this fact was distracting whenever Elordi’s character was not sitting down. Instead of focusing on dialogue, I was stuck fixating on why Elvis seemed to be a foot taller than all his friends. I also found myself consciously noticing when Elordi looked like Presley. Often, these moments included Elordi donning huge, face-covering sunglasses or being filmed from a side angle. For a second, I would think to myself, “Okay, now I see it.” Just as quick, though, I was back to only seeing Jacob Eldori, not Presley. I was constantly taken out of the movie by Elordi’s unconvincing resemblance to Presley, while Butler’s Elvis was believable and captivating to watch.
The two films have different perspectives on Elvis’s music career. In “Elvis,” music is at the center of the story. Butler is constantly grooving on stage or crooning into a microphone. Watching these performances, it’s clear why teenage girls obsessed over him and how he shot to the top of the charts so often. In “Priscilla,” music is what takes Elvis away from home, Priscilla and the film’s focus. This means Butler does a lot more performing than Elordi. Elordi’s few singing stints, though, were about as convincing as his appearance. When he sounded like Elvis, I noticed, but when he didn’t, I was unconvinced. The same could be said of his speaking voice. Hearing Butler sing and act felt like listening to the King of Rock and Roll himself, while Elordi’s vocals were lackluster and inconsistent.
The final comparison between the two actors comes down to their respective films’ purposes. “Elvis” is sensational in every way. From production to costumes to editing, the film has no greater goal than to amaze its audience. Every scene sparkles theatrically. If you want to see The King at his best, take Austin Butler’s Elvis any day.
“Priscilla” is more subdued. The film is brutally honest in its portrayal of Presley, his flaws and his relationship with Priscilla. It left me deeply uncomfortable with the way the media has portrayed the star and his marriage. Coppola lays bare the man that so many have worshiped with the reality of his humanity. He was no god, no heaven-sent gift. He was a man who caused a lot of pain and a lot of joy. Like all of us, he was not perfect.
Elordi’s performance wasn’t perfect either, though, and I’m not willing to take this as an excuse for forgettable acting. “Priscilla” may be the more truthful story, but it surely doesn’t have the better leading man.