Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

"Breakfast at Tiffany''s" is on TCM

I know, R1: Who gives a fuck?

by Anonymousreply 4402/18/2017

Raci$t Le$bian$ love that movie

by Anonymousreply 112/27/2010

Because Patricia Neal writes her man-whore a check (because man-whores do take checks) in big loopy handwriting, tears it off dramatically, and thrusts is at him as we all must do when giving our gigolos the heave-ho.

by Anonymousreply 212/27/2010

Turned it on at the beginning and once again it got me. All except for Micky Rooneys ridiculous character. He should be edited out.

by Anonymousreply 312/27/2010

Oh, Holly. I could have told you not to get mixed up with the South American guy.

by Anonymousreply 412/27/2010

From a recent post on Self-styled Siren's blog, where she's discussing Blake Edward's legacy:%0D %0D "And then the Siren cycles around to Breakfast at Tiffany%E2%80%99s. This film brings up a different question: Howard Hawks%E2%80%99 dictum aside, how many great scenes does it take for the movie itself to be called great? The Siren recuses herself from the bigger argument, again. But she knows how many great scenes it takes for her to overlook every single flaw in a movie, and love it anyway.%0D %0D %0D It takes exactly one."%0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 512/27/2010

Great. Now I'll have that song stuck in my head as I try to go to sleep.

You'll say we got nothing in common...

by Anonymousreply 612/27/2010

Why was Audrey cast in this? It's absurd that she's supposed to be a runaway mother from the American South.

by Anonymousreply 712/27/2010

If only Monroe (Capote's preferred casting) could have done it.

by Anonymousreply 812/27/2010

How very dare you, r8?

by Anonymousreply 912/27/2010

R7: Because she looked fabulous in Givenchy! That's reason enough for me.

by Anonymousreply 1012/27/2010

I agree Hepburn is absurd in the role and completely changes the entire tone of what the movie could have been.

Peppard's hotness aside, I've never as much as I've tried, been able to love or even like this movie.

by Anonymousreply 1112/27/2010

There was zero chemistry between Peppard & Hepburn. Not for one minute did I think she secretly loved him.

by Anonymousreply 1212/27/2010

It's one of the most egregiously compromised films of the '60s from an artistic standpoint. But I wonder if the story would be worth retelling at this point. Anybody taking on the role of Holly Golightly would be eaten alive.

by Anonymousreply 1312/27/2010

Oh, please! I thought there was way too much chemistry between Hepburn and Peppard. Obviously, Holly loved Paul, but didn't want to deal with it.

by Anonymousreply 1412/27/2010

Good lord, this is the iconic Audrey Hepburn film.

If we can't agree on that, this place is a shambles.

by Anonymousreply 1512/27/2010

All your questions about the film (incl. why Audrey was cast over Marilyn, why the gay narrator became a str8 love interest, was Blaek Edwards gay, etc.) are beautifully answered in this new book.

A great read and for sale cheap.

by Anonymousreply 1612/27/2010

I only like the opening where she's walking down the NYC street in that elegant dress and having coffee and a donut or whatever it is. The rest of the movie is just unpleasant and leaves me cold.

by Anonymousreply 1712/27/2010

The film leaves me cold. I like Hepburn, but the film lacks charm. I blame George Peppard.

by Anonymousreply 1812/28/2010

[quote]Peppard's hotness aside, I've never as much as I've tried, been able to love or even like this movie.

Me either. I can't watch past 30 minutes. And I've tried repeatedly.

by Anonymousreply 1912/28/2010

It's my favorite movie. I love it.

by Anonymousreply 2012/28/2010

Breakfast at Tiffany's

Sweet Bird of Youth

The Roman Spring of Patsy Stone

All these films about old women who hire nake hookers which were really stories about the old gay authors paying for young dick.

There just aren't that many old women who buy male street whores.

by Anonymousreply 2112/28/2010

Peppard was a very handsome guy--almost as good-looking as Paul Newman, and a pretty good actor. There have been hints that he was somewhat temperamental; see the anecdote below from the shooting of Vincente Minnelli's "Home from the Hills"; is that why he didn't have a bigger career?%0D %0D "That Minnelli and Peppard did not get along is an understatement. Peppard refused to do his more challenging scenes until he could be, or feel, in the right mood to enact them persuasively. Minnelli told Peppard that his approach was fine for a small Greenwich Village theater, but not for a big-budget Hollywood movie. You start to 'feel' the scene when you got off the bus at the location," said Minnelli. %0D %0D Stubborn and hot-tempered, Peppard decided not to compromise his principles, which meant giving his director hard time. Peppard hoped that a rebellious actor like Mitchum would share his feelings and support him. To Peppard's surprise, Mitchum advised caution: "It's a very expensive hike. I'm sure the studio can sue you. I'm certain it will be your last job. Even though you think Minnelli is wrong, you have to do it his way." %0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 2212/28/2010

I hate Holly for throwing the cat out of the cab in the rain at the end of the movie.

by Anonymousreply 2312/28/2010

George Peppard hot in his shirtless scene

by Anonymousreply 2412/28/2010

[quote]It's one of the most egregiously compromised films of the '60s from an artistic standpoint. But I wonder if the story would be worth retelling at this point. Anybody taking on the role of Holly Golightly would be eaten alive.%0D %0D %0D %0D Hear! Hear!

by Anonymousreply 2512/28/2010

The book cited at R16 has quite juicy stories about Peppard, and how everyone on the set hated him - esp. Audrey, Blake, and Pat Neal.%0D %0D He was a "method" actor who decided the film was about him, not Holly. When Pat Neal said to Audrey "I can't stand him - how do you play love scenes with him?", Audrey replied "It's the best acting I've ever done".

by Anonymousreply 2612/28/2010

Mickey Rooney ruined the film for me. That said, I'm with the poster who liked the opening scene.

Pure classic.

by Anonymousreply 2712/28/2010

I liked the bathtub converted to a couch.

by Anonymousreply 2812/28/2010

Trivia for Mia at R27: Audrey Hepburn HATED the pastry she ate during the opening scene at Tiffany's. Never said why, just did.

Loved the party scene. Was that an early Mike Nichols wearing the eye patch (as one of the guests). Sure looks like him.

by Anonymousreply 2912/28/2010

What was the opening scene? I missed the first half hour and can't remember it.

by Anonymousreply 3012/28/2010

R15, are you insane? It's a blot on her glove. She's a hillbilly bride? Please.

by Anonymousreply 3112/28/2010

The opening scene:

by Anonymousreply 3212/28/2010

Everything about this movie rings false. %0D %0D Audrey Hepburn had difficulty with the opening scene because she didn't like pastry? Bitch please.%0D %0D It's not like they were asking her to eat broccoli.

by Anonymousreply 3312/28/2010

I have known so many covert hookers in my years of living here in San Francisco that BAT's always rings true. Closet hookers are phony shallow brittle egotists such as Holly.

by Anonymousreply 3412/28/2010

Love that movie. Cheers me up everytime. Yes, I realize all its problems but I still love it.

by Anonymousreply 3512/29/2010

Saw it for the first time last night, then went online and read about it-capote didn't like anything about it. I ended up liking it-made me believe in love for a few minutes anyway, but did get pissed when she threw that cat out in the street in the rain. Obviously, Mickey Rooney's character was shameful. I haven't read the book, but evidently he wasn't even a comical character, and he too tried to reach out to Miss Golightly's loneliness.

by Anonymousreply 3604/26/2013

This movie is a perfect example of, a bad movie, that has somehow ascended to be proclaimed as "great" over the years.

by Anonymousreply 3704/26/2013

I first saw BaT as a teenager and just loved it. I cried, cried, cried at the ending. Yes, MARY!!!

But then I read the novella in college.

Now I hate that stupid movie for completely changing the entire goddamned story. Certain scenes (the opening, the infamous party, the theme song on the fire escape, etc.) are fun but the movie as a whole is a piece of shit.

by Anonymousreply 3804/26/2013

Holly is impossibly glamorous for a girl who lives on tips from men - 50 dollars for the ladies room!

She and the narrator are both whores.

Of course in Truman's story she does go off to South America and the unnamed narrator (who has no romantic interest in Holly) finds Cat has a new home sitting in someone else's window.

But somehow the movie makes it work, with that song, that chorus at the end as they look for Cat in the rain (did any couple look better wet, they must have used glycerine or something on them), but I always feel weepy when she finds the cat who is squeezed between them at the end. Its also a great New York movie with that early 60s vibe.

by Anonymousreply 3904/26/2013

R33, she didn't have difficulty with the first scene. She just didn't like the pastry. IIRC, she was practically anorexic in her eating habits. What she did was take one small bite of only the roll part and not touch the frosting. It was something in her head, not something that some diva would pitch a fit about. She was incredibly easy to work with on set and well liked.

by Anonymousreply 4004/27/2013

I've had a fondness for NY Danish ever since.

by Anonymousreply 4104/27/2013


by Anonymousreply 4202/28/2015

I just read the book for the first time tonight, and it's great. (I was never really gaga about the movie.)

Someone should do another version as it was actually supposed to be. Of course they'd have to cast Holly perfectly, or it would all be for naught. (Preferably some new and unknown actress.) It's so unfortunate the Marilyn M. wasn't the original, because she really WAS Lulamae.

It's funny that the the movie is like a Sex in the City prequel, with the flighty little character finding her home in NY, because the book is just the opposite, with Holly moving on in the search for her elusive self and destined place.

Capote must have been livid with the movie's spin.

by Anonymousreply 4302/18/2017

[quote]Capote must have been livid with the movie's spin

& the money

by Anonymousreply 4402/18/2017
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!