The Lack of Identity

Terrifyingly unwatchable, somewhat pretentious, yet a film of heart and purpose. The story of ELVIS PELVIS is that of a small Jamaican-British family that is on a downward spiral towards destruction due to the anger and confusion that exists among them due to their lack of identity. It is a relevant story made unnecessary by filmmaking mired by unforgivable flaws which include unreasonably slow pacing and muddy cinematography.

ELVIS PELVIS is about people struggling to find their identity within a world that tries to force them into becoming something that they don’t want to be, yet at the same time obsessed with becoming somebody that they admire. The film consists of two segments, beginning with “The Suit” and following up with “The Messiah”. Elvis is a boy who is forced by his father to dress and behave like Elvis Presley. He is beaten by his father when he disagrees with his daily makeover while his mother, a heroin addict, does nothing. Yet, a tenderness among the family shines through at times. But then comes Elvis’ birthday where he receives an Elvis Presley suit and wig from his father. Elvis, having had enough his father’s desire of objectifying him, destroys the suit. Furious, his father beats him until Elvis decides to fight back and accidentally kills his father. In “The Messiah”, Elvis has grown up and his name has been changed to “Derek”. In this segment of the film, Derek befriends a suicidal, cancer-stricken old man. They share a strange relationship as Derek decides to take on the role of the old man’s estranged son, Jimi, who coincidentally was named after Derek’s own childhood hero, Jimi Hendrix.

Does one’s culture seize to exist because of commercial domination? Is a person not themselves if they take on another identity? Is the influence of one’s parents irreversible? This film, at least in terms of story structure, handles these issues well enough to prove to be thought-provoking and challenging. My dislike for the film lies in that a film about such issues should have better-made.

The film is an example of how even a good story can be ruined with low-level production skills. The image quality is so terrible that I was surprised to discover that the film was actually shot on Super 16 as it looked like it was shot on a Handycam. Many shots were also out of focus. The editing is sloppy, with dozens of scenes cutting to black for scene transitions. Extended sequences of minute actions were also not removed. Do we really need to see Elvis’ father urinating into a sink? One wonders why these scenes were shot in the first place. The split-screen technique employed in certain scenes was also unnecessary. When utilised in the film, they complement each other in only the most superficial of ways and are even occasionally funny.

This film was made over 4,5 years with personal funding from the director and his wife. This was obviously a film made with passion and determination. It is a pity that the final product is so inescapably inappropriate for public viewing.

Lim Lung Chieh

© Berlinale Talent Campus 2007