Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nickperkins

Homework: Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)

Recommended Posts

Available for digital rental.

 

I reserved a copy at the library. I'm not willing to pay to rent this because 20 years ago I couldn't make it more than a half hour through this film. I thought Audrey Hepburn's character just needed a good slap. Hopefully I'm more mature now and can see what I missed the first time...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

I can't wait for this episode. Breakfast at Tiffany's is one fo my favorite movies, so I'm pretty sure I'll be voting yes. However, I'm interested to see what Devin and Amy have to say. I wonder if this film will lend itself to disagreement or consensus. Outside of the problematic portrayal of Mr. Yunioshi, there is Paul's sense of ownership of Holly and I'm interested to see if our co-hosts will discuss that at all. Those two issues aside, I still find the movie canon-worthy and am super excited for next week's episode.

Share this post


Link to post

Ashamed to say I've never seen this. Having just watched Roman Holiday for the first time recently though, all I gotta say is I hope it's better.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I remember liking but not loving this movie, with Hepburn giving a fantastic performance. Pretty confident I didn't like it at a Canon-worthy level, so I'll be curious how the rewatch goes.

 

I liked Roman Holiday a lot, even more then Breakfast, but I don't think it was Canon-level either.

 

Nice to see a rom-com, though. The Canon's short on romance.

Share this post


Link to post

I mean if Re-animator gets in, this has to also

 

I feel your pain, dude. But to me, this line of argumentation is invalid since that Cannibal Holocaust episode. I'm still trying to find a way to sue Devin and Sam Zimmerman over these 96 minutes of waisted lifetime. But in the end, it's just a fun podcast, a nice diversion.

 

Nice to see a rom-com, though. The Canon's short on romance.

 

We do have There's Something About Mary, Beauty And The Beast, Annie Hall, Sunrise, Rocky, Sex, Lies And Videotape and Brokeback Mountain. I think that's quite a list. But you're right, a straight-up rom-com is pretty much missing. After watching the film itself, though, I'm really not sure if this one is canon-worthy. It hasn't aged that well, and some parts felt a bit meandering. The dialogues are pretty clever, though, and I enjoyed watching a young, half-naked, hunky George Peppard in bed..... WherewasI?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Also: Was I the only one to notice that Moonriver, which is getting played a gazzilion times in the film, begins with the same three-note vamp as Goldfinger? And yes, once you know that, you can't stop hearing in your mind "Goooooooldfinger, wider than a mile, I'm crossing you in style...." and "Moooonriver, he's the man, the man with the midas touch...." during the whole fucking movie.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

After watching the film itself, though, I'm really not sure if this one is canon-worthy. It hasn't aged that well, and some parts felt a bit meandering. The dialogues are pretty clever, though, and I enjoyed watching a young, half-naked, hunky George Peppard in bed..... WherewasI?

I agree. I watched it a few years ago after not having seen it for a decade or so, and was surprised by how "meh" I felt towards it. I don't think it's held up as well as its iconography and legacy would suggest. Audrey Hepburn is without a doubt supernaturally beautiful and elegant, and Mancini's maudlin score is memorable stuff, but there's a lot of it that isn't that great. Mr. Yunioshi is beyond offensive of course and the film is almost worth rejecting for that alone, but I feel that the writing isn't generally good, and all the scenes with Paul's sugar momma and Holly's farmer daddy are pretty bad.

 

What does work is when the film captures the brief, elusive magic of youth -- the cat jumping around the apartment party, Paul and Holly stealing the five and dime masks, Holly playing guitar on the fire escape, the two of them holding the cat and kissing in the rain. I think Breakfast at Tiffany's does a better job than most at evoking that weird, all too short moment of young adulthood where things seem so damn IMPORTANT because your heart just has so much dang love in it, if only someone could just understand you.

 

The other funny thing about this film is that there's no way Holly and Paul stayed together forever. I give them maybe six months at best. Her impulsiveness would drive anyone crazy.

 

There's better Hepburn romantic comedies to canonize -- how about the supremely enjoyable Roman Holiday?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I do not like this movie. It bums me out because the source material is so good (and less racist).

Share this post


Link to post

Is Audrey Hepburn's career defining, beyond iconic role worth inducting an OK film with a ridiculous yellow-face role and the main dude being a bit shit?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Is Audrey Hepburn's career defining, beyond iconic role worth inducting an OK film with a ridiculous yellow-face role and the main dude being a bit shit?

Yeah... Call me when we do Roman Holiday. I don't know. Maybe I'm being a snob--which is often the case--because I'm just not in love with this film on any level. It's one of those classics for which I feel nothing. I don't love it. I don't hate it. It's perfectly beige to me.

Share this post


Link to post

Prediction: Amy and Devin will both say no, and this was chosen to give a lay-up "no" vote in the style of the Lolita and Shawshank episodes as to balance out the "The-Canon-is-too-permissive" grumblings.

 

Also, I vote "yes" for long sentences.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

As of now, I'm leaning no. But I'm curious to hear what Amy and Devin think. While it most be Audrey Hepburn's most iconic role, she has made many, many more deserving films (Roman Holdiay, Sabrina, Nun's Story, My Fair Lady, Wait Until Dark, Two for the Road just to name a few). That's not to say it's a bad film, it's a perfectly good one, I just don't think it's canon-worthy . Also Moon River is an awesome song.

Share this post


Link to post

Count me in with the "Roman Holiday" crowd. I couldn't vote for "Tiffany's", and it should be pretty obvious to anyone that Mr. Yunioshi alone would probably shoot this movie down. Have we had a single Canon movie with an element so outrageously dated and disqualifying as that one? Even King Kong (1933) came off better in its treatment of "the other", at least/especially in comparsion to the 2005 version.

 

But even without Mr. Yunioshi, I just found this movie boring, and Holly annoying. I gather that she's supposed to be pretentious and in denial, always putting on airs to hide her own insecurities, but, between her and George Peppard's character, whatever his name is and whatever he was like (I don't remember a thing about him), I just didn't have a horse in this race. At least Roman Holiday was a fun fairy tale and had likeable people and some whimsy, and at least Sabrina had a sympathetic title character and two more-or-less likeable male leads to play off of. What does this film have? Maybe Capote knew his scene, but it's not a scene I would want to spend time with. Buddy Ebsen's the only character in the film (other than the cat) that I feel anything for, and I STILL don't want him to end up with Holly. He deserves better.

Share this post


Link to post

I would love to hear about the adaptation choices RE the dude being gay in the books V a romantic interest in the film.

He's so boring, verging on dislikable in the film.

Share this post


Link to post

I remember watching this film when I was in middle school and feeling like it was the first "real important film" I had seen. So its kind of important to me, and I'll probably end up voting for it just because of that, also the art direction is pretty slick.

 

That said I agree, it's not Audrey Hepburn's best. Hepburn really doesn't seem to fit the character, but she's shot so well and costumed so immaculately that she seems to make the movie cooler, more sophisticated. While I would have rather seen Marilyn Monroe in the movie (like Capote had wanted), Hepburn at least owns the film, and makes it interesting to watch.

 

Holly Golightly could have been an interesting character, who unfortunately has been filtered through the male perspective of "women are crazy." This was the framework for the manic pixie dream girl. The unobtainable, otherworldly, nutty girl that the guy ultimately obtains, and lives happily ever after, apparently.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×