Everyone has something they do to give themselves a pick-me-up when the world seems dark. Some indulge in their favorite coffee house drink. Others get a workout at the gym. A hot bath, round of video games, you name it. For Holly Golightly (Audrey Hepburn) in Breakfast at Tiffany’s, her pick-me-up is looking into the windows of Tiffany’s, at all the fine and expensive things.
Her problem is that she is always on the outside of the lifestyle she wants, looking in. She lives in a tiny, bare apartment with a nameless cat. The only money she makes is from visiting Sally Tomato (Alan Reed) in Sing Sing (her happy name for prison). Yet, she dresses like a socialite and holds loud, swinging parties at her place, with plenty of drinks flowing. In the moment, she seems to be on top of the world. When it’s over, she stubbornly keeps her lifestyle going.
When Paul (George Peppard), a young writer, moves in upstairs, he in instantly sucked into Holly’s world. There is something about this talkative young woman, whom he meets only wearing a men’s tuxedo shirt, he is unable to turn away from. She’s spunky and confident, yet a total wreck that he feels a need to protect.
But there is much more to Holly than meets the eye. Buried under all that social elegance and love for finer things is a past that Holly is running from. We understand later her fear of commitment. It’s why she can’t name her cat, be with anyone exclusively or even hang get some real furniture (for the record, I love her bathtub-sofa). She sees any committment as a cage and desperately wants to stay wild and free. Can Paul tame this girl, or would he even want to?
What Breakfast at Tiffany’s does perfectly, is put the characters first, conflict between them second and romance somewhere towards the back, so it can evolve naturally. We come away knowing Holly and Paul so well, they feel real. When we know them like this, their problems become much more compelling, like they’re our friend’s problems. I don’t know about you, but I don’t care about the budding romance of two strangers, but I genuinely worried if Paul and Holly could find happiness, both together and apart.
At the Oscars, Breakfast at Tiffany’s was nominated for a few awards, but seemed to have come just shy of a best picture nomination. It picked up awards for both best music scoring and best song, Moon River. Its nominations were in art direction, adapted screenplay, based off of Truman Capote’s novella, and lead actress by Audrey Hepburn. If Hepburn had not been nominated, it might have caused outrage to this day.
Breakfast at Tiffany’s is not a film I expected to enjoy as much as I did. While the characters are an odd sort, they feel inviting and compelling. The twists in Holly’s past were a bit shocking, but only added new layers and deeper understanding to her character. Same with the revelations in Paul’s character. Mickey Rooney’s role as Holly’s comically angry landlord is interesting, even if it is over the top and racist. I would advise all classic film fans to give this one a try. It’s hard to tell who exactly will enjoy it, but it’s an essential film of the early sixties and Hepburn makes it worth the time.
“Thursday! It can’t be! It’s too gruesome!”
You know I have never seen this yet I have a medium sized poster of this film in my room! I guess it was just because if no one else was going to put it up, and someone bought it, then I didn’t want it to go to waste. Also I think I can appreciate that poster now more than I did when I put it up. :D Well now I wanna see this movie! Like you said, who knows if I’ll enjoy it, but I like classic films alright, so I think I’ll give it a shot. :)
So cool, I love the poster for Breakfast at Tiffany’s. You gotta see it.
I put on our Netflix Queue. :)
Saw this film my freshman year at college…a different time and place, a different age; but absolutely everyone LOVED this film at the time. I still get a tear in my eye when she finds CAT at the end. I know that Mickey Rooney’s role has come in for criticism in the modern era of PC; but I thought it was a hoot at the time, and I still get a kick out of it.! Let’s also acknowledge Patricia Neal’s very supporting performance as Peppard’s Sugar-momma.
This was really quite a year for Audrey Hepburn, as her other major performance that year was as Shirley MacLaine’s partner in THE CHILDREN’S HOUR. The differences of the two performances–Holly Golightly and Karen Wright are stunning and among her best!
Thanks Ken, now I need to check out The Children’s Hour. Even though I saw Rooney’s role as racist, I laughed every time he hit his head on that lamp.
This was the first Hepburn film I ever saw and the one thing I really loved about it is how well she can play what most would call crazy and eccentric, especially when the real Fred dies. While I was watching it I could never remember that Paul’s name wasn’t actually Fred. The acting was great and I was quite disappointed when she didn’t win best actress, the music was very good and easy to tell if you’ve seen any Pink Panther movie that it was by the same composer(or of course you can just pay attention to the opening credits). And of course the movie was amazing.
Thank you so much for commenting, Bettina! Watching how deep Hepburn goes when she gets the news about Fred is shocking, but done so well, it’s amazing. Thanks for bringing up the Pink Panther similarities. The film’s director, Blake Edwards, is best known for the Pink Panther movies, which he started a couple years after this one.
I can’t believe I never realized that the couch was a bath tub (or vice-versa). That is so hilarious!
The thing is love most about this movie is that I can never quite tell how much of Holly is her acting the society-girl part and how much is actually her. I’ve seen it twice and I came up with different answers both times. It’s a mystery! That line of OJ’s really nails it: “She’s a phony, but she’s a real phony. She actually believes in all that phony stuff she believes in.” That one line serves as a great filter for Holly’s character, and then the rest of the movie because it’s all around her.
My very close second favorite part would have to be cat. It’s such a great symbol. When she lets cat out of the car at the end it’s so sad. If she left Paul behind I’d be sad, sure, but when it looks like she’s leaving cat it’s just heartbreaking.
The book to movie transfer was very good. It had the same type of spirit as the novella and that’s hard to come by. I don’t know anything about the competition for the adapted screenplay oscar that year, but it seems to me like Breakfast at Tiffany’s should have won.
That’s a great line that really sums up Holly, thanks for bringing that up, Hunter. I’ve only heard good things about how the film compares to the novella, but it was Judgment at Nuremberg that won the adapted screenplay award instead.
I completely agree with your view of Mickey Rooney’s character, it felt really unnecessary.
I also wrote a very short piece on the movie – http://ajshawler.blogspot.com/2012/01/day-66-breakfast-at-tiffanys.html
Rooney still has his moments, again, 1961 was a very different time. Thanks for sharing, Shawler.
I agree that the romance is not the big factor here, perhaps because Peppard’s character was gay in the original story. The romance element is a Hollywood addition to a story which really didn’t need it.
People like that still come to New York, by the way. I knew quite a few during the punk-rock era who were living lives very much like the one Holly lives — just with different music. I’ve met others since, too. And Capote was one himself.
Also, I will point out that, unless I misunderstand the point you’re making, Sing-Sing is the name of a real prison, somewhat north of New York City.