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.
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.
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:
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:
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:
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.
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.
Verdict: Shitty
Check out these other entries in the Classically Shitty series:
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.












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.
Don’t be afraid to post your own review. Just be warned that I won’t be able to contain myself if you do.
Robocop… on a freakin’ UNICORN!?!??!?
My head just exploded.
I’ll be in my bunk.
Breakfast at Awesomely Shitty?
I’ll be back tomorrow morning.
Be sure to bring your appetite.
Brik, you are amazing. Keep up the excellent work good sir.
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!
Sounds like a surefire Hollywood success!
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
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Why am I suddenly hearing Skrabak’s comments in a tacky Russian voice-over, like the one sported by the female spy from Rocky and Bullwinkle ?
Moose and squirrel!
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Welcome to the anti-Breakfast at Tiffany’s club!
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!
I’m glad you found this post more entertaining than the movie.
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.
You’re so right…
When I bought the movie, I was expecting something amazing, glamorous, beautiful… but I just didn’t like it.
For how much praise this movie gets for being a “classic”, there is really nothing in it that stands the test of time. What a waste.
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.
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.
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.
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!