28
Jan
12

Classically Shitty: Breakfast at Tiffany’s

Hilarious? Were there jokes in this movie? I must have missed them.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s is one of those “classic” movies you are supposed to like because film-fags said so. But it’s awful. I can’t think of a single redeeming aspect of this movie. Sure, it has George Peppard of A-Team fame, but that doesn’t enhance the movie. Maybe if halfway through Mr. T burst through a brick wall, gold chains glittering, a machine gun blasting, bullets ripping Holly Golightly’s flesh into threads, the movie could have been cool. But that didn’t happen, so it’s a piece of shit.

The actual breakfast at Tiffany’s is the first scene of the movie. But it’s so vague you have no idea what the fuck is happening. Holly stands outside the store some time before it opens and eats a pastry. That’s it. That was the breakfast at Tiffany’s. Well, the breakfast outside Tiffany’s at any rate. I guess you could end the movie right there. It would be preferable to the non-stop shitfest that follows. And believe me, it is a shitfest. Breakfast at Tiffany’s is boring, has shitty dialogue, a retarded protagonist, and it’s incredibly racist, too. It really has it all. 

Breakfast eaten. Movie over.

Essentially, it’s about this countrified twat named Holly who leave her Podunk small town for the allure of the big city. Unfortunately for her, living in New York City is expensive. Way more expensive than an uneducated talentless hick with no discernible job skills can afford. So, Holly does what any other respectable girl would do: immediately turn to a life of drug smuggling and prostitution. And not the awesome kind with mountains of cocaine like in Scarface. It’s just sort of barely there, in the background, like the writers didn’t think a life of crime would make for an interesting story. So, instead of drug-fueled orgies (which is what every scene should have been), we are “treated” to dull meandering conversations, gossip about neighbors, catty jealousy, and over-the-top racism.

Yeah that’s right, racism. Micky Rooney plays a caricature of a Japanese person. He has squinty eyes, wears yellow makeup, speaks with a really bad Engrish accent, and sports a huge pair of big fake buck teeth. The character isn’t so much a stereotype as he is an outright racist statement. He is what old white Hollywood Fuckos think Japanese people are like. Yeah, all those years spent living in California, none of them probably ever even saw a Japanese person, what with them in the internment camps and all.

"Herro?! Herro?! Terephone very hard to use!"

Basically, nothing really happens in this movie. The drug-smuggling plot goes nowhere, the prostitution plot goes nowhere, Buddy Ebsen shows up for a couple of scenes just to cash a paycheck, and Holly acts like a spoiled, clueless bitch. The central “focus” of the movie (and saying it has a focus at all is being generous) is a bland, watered-down romance between two generic white people. It’s impossible to give a fuck about either of them.

I can’t say why Breakfast at Tiffany’s was a popular movie when it was released. I guess film-goers had lower standards back then. Well, not that they have good standards now, but at least today we have a lot more options. What I can tell you is why the movie remains popular to this day. There is only one reason, and here it is:

She smokes in every scene in this movie.

That’s it. That picture of Audrey Hepburn is the only reason why anyone gives a flying fuck about this movie. They like the look she has. She looks classy and mysterious and kind of fun all together. She evokes nostalgia of a time gone by for people who never lived in that time. It is so famous that it appears on all sorts of things, in all sorts of places it doesn’t belong. For example:

*facepalm*

Hepburn’s iconic image elicits a romantic view of what life in late 1950s/early 1960s New York City was like. But guess what? It wasn’t like that at all. Here’s what it really looked like:

Just an average day in NYC.

I’d bet money that 90% of the people who have that fucking Audrey Hepburn picture hanging somewhere (or own the tacky glassware) have never seen Breakfast at Tiffany’s. If they had, they’d get rid of that shit immediately. But I suppose it’s better they haven’t seen it, and go on blissfully unaware of how terrible it is. It’s better that no one actually watch this rotten turd of a movie.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s is billed as a “hilarious romantic comedy” but it isn’t romantic and there is no comedy. I can’t remember laughing once. I can’t remember there being any jokes. Unless you count the overt racism as comedic. Or maybe in the 1950s they thought prostitution and drug-smuggling was inherently funny? I don’t know. I can’t figure it out. It’s like they didn’t know what to label it as (“piece of shit” wouldn’t have brought in film-goers), so they just chose a random genre. It’s like billing Robocop as a “fantasy adventure” film.

I would totally watch this movie.

Holly Golightly is a terrible protagonist. She’s jealous and catty. She smokes like a chimney. She’s a drug-smuggling prostitute. Are we supposed to feel bad for a drug-smuggling prostitute when things don’t go her way? Give me a fucking break. The romance is stilted and ridiculous. It isn’t funny. It’s racist. Worst of all, it’s incredibly boring. Breakfast at Tiffany’s is a non-stop shitfest. This movie is a waste of time, and all copies should be burned immediately. No one should ever have another breakfast at Tiffany’s. You know what we should have instead? Breakfast at Awesomely Shitty. I’ll bring the Batter Blaster.

This rules.

Verdict: Shitty

Check out these other entries in the Classically Shitty series:

The Hustler

2001: A Space Odyssey

January 29, 2012 – Irony Update

On WordPress, after you publish a new post, a sidebar appears with a bunch of shit I could care less about. However, when I posted this review, a quote appeared that I could not ignore. It was from Truman Capote, the author of the book Breakfast at Tiffany’s.

The quote from Capote is, “That isn’t writing at all, it’s typing.” Of course, in the context here it is incredibly ambiguous. Does he mean my review of the movie is just nonsensical “typing”? Does he mean Breakfast at Tiffany’s is a piece of shit? Could it be he means the screenwriters of the movie turned his book into a steaming turd? Or WordPress might just have some algorithm that pulled a Capote quote when it saw the title of the post contained the words Breakfast at Tiffany’s.

Whatever the case may be, I think it is hilarious that Capote should bring me a message from beyond the grave as I trashed his work for all the Internet to see. Thanks for the irony bomb, Capote. It made me laugh. Maybe next time I will berate some of Shakespeare’s works and see if a zombie version of The Bard comes after me.

About these ads

55 Responses to “Classically Shitty: Breakfast at Tiffany’s”


  1. January 28, 2012 at 8:01 am

    Dude. I laugh so hard when I read your shit, Brik. Seriously. That’s hysterical.

    I’m going to cross this off my MTESS list right now, just for fear of you posting up on that thread. :D

  2. 3 Jay
    January 28, 2012 at 1:48 pm

    Robocop… on a freakin’ UNICORN!?!??!?

    My head just exploded.

    I’ll be in my bunk.

  3. January 29, 2012 at 11:14 am

    Breakfast at Awesomely Shitty?

    I’ll be back tomorrow morning.

  4. January 29, 2012 at 9:34 pm

    Brik, you are amazing. Keep up the excellent work good sir.

  5. 7 defectron
    March 31, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    Yes, your review raises a valid point. Audreys character has a very iconic look, I am tempted to for no reason at all make a character in a story whose settting is completely different look like that and smoke classy ciggarette alot. She will also interact with a cockney space lizard who lives in central park. Yes, this will win several major awards!

  6. 9 Rich
    June 14, 2012 at 6:20 pm

    You sir are brilliant!!! Lmao!! Could not have agreed more! I love how people almost get teary eyed talking about this slop! Keep up the good work

  7. 10 Elle
    July 3, 2012 at 9:20 pm

    You are so right! I too have loved the Audrey Hepburne images I’ve even used them as my desktop background on my computer but I had never seen Breakfast at Tiffanys. I decided to watch it tonight while browsing Netflix and it I could not believe how incredibly racist & offensive this film is. I didn’t watch past the first 5 minutes or whenever it was that we are introduced to this ridiculous character. I wish I hadn’t bothered with this piece of shit.

    • July 5, 2012 at 10:26 am

      I’m glad you turned the movie off, because it only got worse from there. You at least spared yourself additional pain and suffering. At least you’ll always have your Audrey Hepburn images to keep you company.

  8. July 8, 2012 at 2:50 am

    Oh Brik, when I first saw this article it was before you amended it to include the quote from Capote that somehow got linked to this article. I haven’t seen Breakfast at Tiffany’s, but I do know a few bits that might interest you.

    Firstly, Capote didn’t write the screenplay for the film. Some other guy adapted it. Not sure if this is good or bad, but basically what this means is that the film being shitty isn’t necessarily a reflection on the quality of Capote’s book – it might be good, but bleh, I haven’t read that either.
    Secondly, Breakfast at Tiffany’s is directed by Blake Edwards, the same fellow who wrote/directed the original The Pink Panter series of films starring Peter Sellers. Now, the original is good, A Shot in the Dark is fantastic, and the panther films after those steadily decline in quality. You’ve probably seen them, but if you haven’t, I hope Edwards’s involvement in Tiffany’s doesn’t deter you from seeing them.

    • July 8, 2012 at 7:35 am

      I didn’t really pay attention to who directed this trash. I have seen the first couple of Pink Panther movies and enjoyed them. I haven’t seen them all, but if they decline in quality as time goes on, then I may just have to endure the torture in order to write a future post on them. Thanks!

  9. August 26, 2012 at 5:41 pm

    Oh thank goodness. I watched this movie today and thought something was wrong with me because I thought I was the only person in the world that thought it sucked. What a stupid movie. Thanks for letting me know I’m not crazy.

    • August 27, 2012 at 8:40 am

      You are not crazy! The whole reason I started this series was to let people know that these movies suck, and you aren’t a weirdo for thinking the same thing.

      • 16 Me
        July 9, 2013 at 2:47 am

        I have had this film on my harddrive for ages so i put it on thia evening. it is still playing (they are searching for cat right now) while i am simultaneously researching other things such as how many other people have found the entire film nauseating.

        Things which i found appalling and/or strange
        – when she jumps into bed with him at the very beginning (then has a weird immediate nightmare WTF?)
        – they just both happen to be prostitues
        – Mickey Rooney’s entire character is outrageous
        – the only potential for a good plot line was the ‘weather reports’ smuggling and it just ends
        – that party
        – the quote “is she a phony?” Uh yes
        – the singing scene

        Oh dear I just can’t ever switch off a movie….

        Thanks for a wonderful blog. I will continue to read more posts.

      • July 9, 2013 at 9:52 am

        Thanks for coming by. Enjoy the other posts!

  10. August 29, 2012 at 8:42 am

    you are ignorant and you obviously know nothing about cinema!
    please stay on your level and continue watching american comedies full of penis jokes. do not disgrace the classics by even reading the titles of the worlds famous films.
    as there are people who cant do science , there are people who do not understand cinematography and what is important in the film.
    your parody of an argument is ridiculous and only shows how poor is your language and how low is your iq.

    • 19 mrsbrik
      August 29, 2012 at 8:53 pm

      I would suggest that you warn the entire Internet about how terrible Brik is. Go ahead. Spam his link all over the place. The world needs to know how much he loves penis jokes and how wrong it is that he thinks this movie is shitty.

  11. August 29, 2012 at 10:41 am

    Angela, you’re absolutely right. Obviously, I know “nothing about cinema.” My not liking a movie you enjoy is certainly proof of that. How dare I express my opinion on my blog!

    I will continue to watch “american comedies full of penis jokes” because those are the only things I am capable of watching. Just a cursory look through this blog you will find that 99% of the posts are dedicated to “american comedies full of penis jokes.”

    “your parody of an argument is ridiculous and only shows how poor is your language and how low is your iq.” — This is also true. My language is quite poor. I will try to aspire to your evident knowledge of language, grammar, and sentence structure. I had no idea that “proper language” included failure to use any capitalization and the continuous use of run-on sentences.

    I will never understand “what is important in the film”, and I would appreciate your guidance, as you clearly seem to know something I don’t. Rest assured, Angela, I will stay on my “level.” Never again shall I attempt to reach the lofty heights of someone who enjoys the smell of their own farts like you.

  12. 23 Alice
    September 25, 2012 at 8:02 pm

    you should really read the book, its great. while the movie’s shit- it changes a lot and takes away Capote’s skilled writing and attractive style which is really what makes his novel so good. and all things you complained about in the movie I’d say are totally fixed in the book. Capote hated the movie and disagreed with the directors/producers etc. who totally botched his work

    • September 26, 2012 at 8:32 am

      Thanks for the reply, Alice. I’m glad to hear that the book was so much better than the movie, and I sort of suspected that was the case. Unfortunately, the movie has left me so traumatized there is virtually no chance I’ll ever read the book.

  13. 25 Heidi Strauss
    December 18, 2012 at 1:33 am

    I personally love Breakfast At Tiffany’s, although in a way I can understand how someone (and especially a male) wouldn’t like it. You have to relate to Holly’s character in a certain way to like it. I think you missed the meaning of it a bit. To me it is about who you are born as vs. the person you want to be and which one ends up being truer in the end. In the book and movie there is a quote about Holly being a “phony, but a real phony..”, the movie is about escaping from yourself. Holly is a much darker character in the book, than in the movie. Capote wanted Marilyn Monroe to play Holly originally because he felt that in a way she embodied Holly. Monroe transformed herself but would always be troubled because of what she felt she was deep down. Audrey ended up playing Holly because Hollywood felt that Monroe was too sensual for the part and it would cause too much scandal because of who the character in the book really was. Audrey didn’t transform herself, she has always been a high class bourgeoisie type, so they thought that audiences would be more comfortable seeing her in the role. I’m not saying I didn’t like Audrey in the role, I loved her in it, but her as Holly does make the meaning a bit more vague. Although, I think that people really did fall for Audrey as Holly partially for your given reasons, but also because it gives people hope that you might really be able to transform yourself into something iconic like Audrey on the Breakfast At Tiffany’s poster or Marilyn Monroe in her white dress. You have to be a dreamer. I think this review is looking at the film shallowly. That is my opinion, but to each their own. If you can’t relate, you can’t relate.

    • December 18, 2012 at 9:38 am

      Yeah, I definitely can’t relate to this movie. Although, I do appreciate your interpretation. And if it helps you understand where I’m coming from, the point of the Classically Shitty series is to look at these films as shallowly as possible. :)

  14. 27 IRIS
    December 26, 2012 at 4:51 am

    Dear God I thought I was the only one who hated this movie. I only watched it because posters of Audrey were up in girl’s dorm room as center pieces of art. WHAT THE FUCK? I thought the movie would have some witty banter but all I see now when I look at the poster is a dumb self absorbed bitch. Don’t even get me started on the poor depiction of that Asian man.

    Thank you so much for writing this. God bless AMERICA.

  15. 29 Julie P
    February 12, 2013 at 10:31 am

    i watched Breakfast at Tiffany’s last night for the first time and I am almost 40 years old. YOU ARE CORRECT and also you are awesome for saying this is a piece of total crap film. A+ to you!

  16. 31 dwc
    March 2, 2013 at 3:02 pm

    I’m watching the movie right now! But it’s a tiny window in the corner of my screen, because it didn’t deserve any more space than that. I wanted to see what all the fuss was all about (and since I live in NYC, I wanted to see what it looked like back in the 60’s). But as soon as I saw the racism with the Asian guy in the first scene, I was done. My goal here is very simple: I’m trying to see if I can make it through to the end without dying. What doesn’t kill me only makes me stronger.

  17. March 7, 2013 at 11:27 am

    You’re so right…
    When I bought the movie, I was expecting something amazing, glamorous, beautiful… but I just didn’t like it.

  18. 34 Taryn
    March 13, 2013 at 4:03 am

    As a woman who loves fashion, I was intrigued by this movie.

    As a woman who loves literature, I fell in love with this book.

    As a woman who has gone through the same emotions, I identify with Holly

    Yes, Holly Golightly is a fashion icon. Her glamorous lifestyle and chic mannerisms naturally captured the hearts of many.

    Capote insists that she’s more than that though. She advocates a free spirited approach, but she is as guarded as they come. She has a sentimental heart and a skeptical mind. And she is acutely aware of the emptiness this approach has left inside her. There’s beauty and sadness in her dichotomies.

    I’m personally offended by critiques of art that don’t truly understand the art. If you don’t understand, understand that you don’t understand. It is art. Every bit of it isn’t meant for everybody.

    Don’t get me wrong; I fully advocate the freedom to express your dislike. However, there’s a difference between that and bashing someone’s artistry simply because it does not speak to you in particular.

    • March 13, 2013 at 8:30 am

      I completely get where you’re coming from. Nevertheless, we’ll have to disagree as to whether this movie constitutes “art.” Defining art can be difficult. From my point of view, movies with drug-smuggling prostitutes, horrible racist caricatures, and thread-bare plots don’t count as art. You are well within your rights to enjoy this movie, but I find nothing redeeming in it whatsoever.

  19. 36 Cat
    April 1, 2013 at 2:17 am

    Sweet Jesus on a pogo stick, you DO like to hear yourself talk don’t you?

    My guess is that you’re a fan of the “Hangover” or “Fast and Furious” type of film. It’s okay. You have the Internet to pat you on the head and tell you your inane ramblings are wonderful.

    Ah. For Truman to be alive and have his way with your trite, insanely pathetic ass. The world wide web, it’s given ranting “writers” like yourself a lovely place to be LOUDLY incompetent.

    Go with god, fool. Just because you don’t get it don’t make it true.

    • April 1, 2013 at 8:45 am

      Here’s what you just did: 1) Read my opinion of Breakfast at Tiffany’s, and got butthurt because you like the movie and I didn’t. 2) Assumed that I like movies you do not (i.e. The Fast and The Furious) — news flash: I don’t. 3) Decided that the Internet is SERIOUS BUSINESS and had to let me know how dumb I am. I’m sure you and Truman Capote must have been best friends, as I see you refer to him on a first name basis. Since you must be one of his last living friends on Earth, I’m glad you took time out of your important schedule to leave this comment on my blog. Thanks, and have a nice day!

  20. 38 a
    October 15, 2013 at 7:03 am

    I don’t like the film because I don’t like people escaping reality. If you don’t like your life change it. Go get a qualification and a real job. I would hate to be surrounded by phony people trying to convince everyone that they are real “real phonies” or more like deluded! give me a break!

  21. 40 Keya
    January 4, 2014 at 4:53 am

    OMG Finally someon talking some sense! When I was a teenage girl, movies like Breakfast at Tiffany’s and Pretty Woman were adored, and I met guys later at uni and work who sought out their “perfect girls” based on the leading ladies, who were pretty but fragile, needy and economically dependent. They maintain a stylish look but are supremely superficial, don’t work (no job or business), have no friends or sense of community blah blah. I’ve never been able to sit through Breakfast at Tiffany’s (and if you watch Blood Diamond, there must be sense of outrage about the diamond industry), it’s intensely boring and shallow.
    It’s on More 4 TV right now, and my bristles just came up, URGH! Hepburn is a chain-smoking anorexic, work-shy crazy woman. I still can’t believe she was the pin-up for generations of boys and girls….

  22. 42 Irma
    April 1, 2014 at 1:17 pm

    I actually really love this movie. I used to watch it over and over again with my mom when I was little, (as an immigrant, she didn’t quite understand what it was about, and as a 5 year old, neither did I!) I remember loving to watch the pretty scenes and dresses. I rewound the VHS to “Moon River” so many times that the tape wore out! Later on, in high school, I was really able to relate to Holly. She closes herself off from people and tries to depend on herself to extremes because she’s scared of being put in vulnerable positions and being let down, and that was how I felt at the time (typical angsty teen, eh?). She was pretending to be something she wasn’t, and feigned this “I Don’t Care” attitude. I remember feeling like Paul was talking to me during his ending monologue. I still watch it every so often, cry every time, and always feel satisfied at the end. Perhaps this movie holds sentimental value to me and that clouds my judgement, but man, It’s probably one of my favourite films. However, I definitely see where you’re coming from in your critique. Most of my friends hate it too. Oh well!

    I 100% agree that it is grossly racist, though!

    • April 5, 2014 at 8:16 am

      Nostalgia can cloud anyone’s judgment. I can’t blame you for liking something based on nostalgia. There’s lots of shitty things I like because of nostalgia. At least we agree this movie is terribly racist!

  23. 44 Joanna
    April 8, 2014 at 5:47 pm

    Suck a dick. This movie is better than life

  24. 46 Ben
    August 2, 2014 at 12:29 am

    I saw this movie a few years – well part of the movie anyway, I couldn’t sit through it till the end (though I had already seen the very end on an earlier occasion). Mickey Rooney’s portrayal of Mr. Yunioshi was the real killer for me, it left me embarrassed for all Westerners. I would too ashamed to watch this with a real Asian in the room. This isn’t the only movie to use Whites to play Asian roles, though it perhaps the most embarrassing example of the practice. Why didn’t Hollywood use real Asians?

    I’ve just been watching the 1957 movie ‘Sayonara’ in which Ricardo Montalban , a Mexican actor, plays a Japanese man. WTF – I went straight to Google to find why they would do such a thing and that eventually lead me to your blog.

    I have fond memories of a movie a saw as a young child, ‘7 Faces of Dr. Lao’ (1964) in which Tony Randall plays the titular character Dr. Lao, a Chinese man, as well as many other characters (thus the title). I remember it being a very funny movie and being totally in awe of Tony Randall’s portrayal of so many varied characters in the one movie. I now live in fear of seeing the movie again and cringing at Tony Randall’s portrayal of Dr. Lao, and thereby completely overwriting my childhood memories of this much loved film.

    I found no explanation for the practice but I assume that the real Asians just weren’t ‘Asian’ enough for the producers.

    • August 2, 2014 at 2:05 pm

      You echo my thoughts exactly. It’s disgusting every time they use an actor to play a character of a different race, and then make them into some kind of insulting caricature. Sometimes it works (only example I can think of is Ricardo Montalban as Khan in Star Trek) because the character’s race doesn’t really matter, but when the race is important, not using an actor of said race is a bad idea.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


January 2012
M T W T F S S
« Dec   Feb »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  

Archives

BrikHaus - Find me on Bloggers.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 263 other followers


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 263 other followers

%d bloggers like this: