Breakfast at Tiffany's

Checking out both the original novel and the Wikipedia article on Breakfast At Tiffany's I was surprised to see how different Truman Capote's vision of this story was. Capote who wanted Marilyn Monroe cast as Holly Golightly lived to see Audrey Hepburn make his literary creation one of her best cinematic creations. I think given Marilyn's track record for behavioral problems on film sets, Capote, Blake Edwards the director, and everyone else concerned with Breakfast At Tiffany's probably dodged a bullet.

Capote's story is set in the Forties and the film is contemporary 1961 when it was filmed. There's no real plot to it, Capote did a character study and so is this. It's about two people and the fascination that George Peppard's character develops for the unconventionality of Holly Golightly as Hepburn essays her.

Hepburn is the kept woman of a cross section of the male species and Peppard is the boy toy of another woman who rents in their apartment, Patricia Neal. Neal who would win her Oscar the following year for Hud has her character as curiously underdeveloped. It's the main weakness of Breakfast At Tiffany's.

The strength is of course Audrey Hepburn who took Capote's character completely over and it's her vision of the story that we see when the film is broadcast. She's an amoral minx who in the end realizes that her life is really meaningless.

Breakfast At Tiffany's won two Oscars both for Henry Mancini for Best Musical Scoring and Best Original Song for Moon River. That song is best known for Andy Williams's rendition, but there are also superb recordings by Frank Sinatra and Tony Martin. Hepburn got a nomination for Best Actress and the film was also nominated for Best Art&Set Decoration for a color film and Best Screenplay adapted from another medium, in this case Capote's novella.

Considering all the changes made, maybe the credit should have read inspired by Truman Capote's work. In any event this film belongs in the top rank of the works of Audrey Hepburn.

Even now 57 years after its original release, Breakfast At Tiffany's remains a charming love story between two hustlers of sorts. Audrey Hepburn is not the Holy Golightly that Truman Capote intended, she couldn't be but she was Audrey Hepburn in all of her 1961 glory. Amazing how it still works that Audrey Hepbun touch. George Peppard is gorgeous but impenetrable. Mickey Rooney, unforgivable. Henry Mancini, opportune but. strangely enough the character that fascinated me the most in my latest viewing is Patricia Neal. I would love to see a full movie about that woman. She exudes sensuality and smartness. Blake Edwards concocts a lighter fare from Capote's book and as it happens, it's still very much alive and surprisingly relevant.

An army of fans consider this Hepburn's signature role and in many ways it is, even if she overcame miscasting to portray it. Based on a rather biting novella by Truman Capote, he (somewhat surprisingly) wanted Marilyn Monroe to play the role. The casting of Hepburn couldn't be more different, yet she made it her own and in the process created an icon that is every bit as lasting as Marilyn's skirt-over-the-subway-grate or Bette Davis's off-the-shoulder, chain-smoking Margo Channing. She plays an offbeat, effortlessly sophisticated party girl in New York City who subsists on the favors of various rich men. Though her livelihood couldn't be more tasteless, somehow Hepburn's presence adds a sheen of innocence and sweetness to it. When blocked writer Peppard moves in upstairs ("kept" by married socialite Neal), the two find themselves developing a friendship which eventually begins to turn into love. But since they are both people who use their bodies to earn their keep and are heavily dependent on others, the chances of their relationship lasting are slim at best. To read the above synopsis, one would expect a gritty, vulgar film. However, in director Blake Edwards' hands and with Hepburn floating around in exquisite Givenchy gowns, the movie is a candy box of color, style, humor and romance.

Even when she's hungover or just getting home from an all-nighter (as in the famous opening scene), Hepburn strikes a graceful and glamorous figure. In fact, it's when she's trying to act disoriented or disheveled that her performance is at it's weakest. It's as if she was so inherently stylish that she had to try (too) hard to present anything else! She does a very fine job with the role, even if the character's past is nothing short of preposterous. Peppard comes off as blandly attractive, but wooden. His arrogance regarding his role (fiercely protecting the traditional leading man image) not only undercut his own performance, but also slighted that of Neal's who was diminished as a result. However, sentimental filmgoers probably prefer his more heroic approach and Neal would certainly recoup her losses, earning an Oscar a short time later for "Hud". The most controversial aspect of the film is Rooney's portrayal of an Asian man who lives above Hepburn and who is awakened at all hours by her lifestyle. Whether or not one is offended by the over-the-top stereotype of the buck teeth and slant eyes, the role is not funny anyway! It's all way too forced and obvious, with his pratfalls in sight long before they occur. (A lamp exists RIGHT over his bed for the express purpose of giving him something to hit his head on continuously. Move it, already!) There are many memorable moments in the film including a sequence of Hepburn and Peppard doing things they've never done before, Hepburn sitting on the fire escape plaintively singing the Oscar-winning song "Moon River" (which is used throughout the film by master composer Henry Mancini) and wacky party scene (a prelude to Edwards' "The Party"?) in which all sorts of outre things take place including the cry "Timber!" when a tipsy guest begins to collapse. There's a surprising frankness, for the time, regarding Peppard and Neal's relationship. It seems to be one of the earliest Hollywood films in which the leading man is implied to be nude under the covers in his bed. The film is not without its flaws. Some of the dialogue is annoyingly indulgent and the storyline is fairly patchy (with a tacked on ending.) Still, with the sparkling presence of Hepburn (in some mind-blowing hats and costumes) and the slick work of Edwards, it is easy entertainment.

There are movies that are loved because of the cast, the music and style, not for the interesting plot, wonderful characterizations or snappy dialogue. This famous movie, Breakfast at Tiffany, has been lovingly regarded for years because of the wonderful Audrey Hepburn and the talented Henry Mancini. Moon River is one of the best movie songs ever. But there is, surprisingly, not much to say overall about this movie.

Two prostitutes become friends. George Peppards' role could have been played by anyone breathing and Micky Rooney was too ridiculous to be funny. The always superb Patricia Neal did not have much to do. Only Buddy Epsen moved me.

There are a few noteworthy scenes. But, Breakfast at Tiffany's is the best example I've seen of a lovely cake with a big hole in the middle.

I am never sure which Breakfast at Tiffany's is. I can certainly think of movies which more accurately portray the human condition, but of few that are more fun.

Neither Holly nor Paul seem to represent real people. Their attraction, which is the focal point of the movie, is a character unto itself. Paul sees Holly as scared, vulnerable, and in need of rescue and enjoys his role as potential knight in shining armor to her damsel in distress. She is drawn to him because he sees beyond her facade of fabulousness to the scared little girl she is inside and which she tries (not that hard really at all) to hide. Adding to her attraction to him is the fact that he stands up to her when she treats him shoddily. This probably does not happen to her too often, and it intrigues her.

These are mostly the tricks a romance novelist uses to keep readers baited and rooting for a fictional, possibly doomed romance to work and do not reflect the real nature of love. There is, however, enough chemistry, genuine affection, and respect between the two characters to keep the story from seeming utterly implausible.

Of course, a movie doesn't have to be realistic to realistically portray what is right and what is wrong with the world we live in. Breakfast at Tiffany's doesn't do a whole lot of that either, though. After watching I can never pinpoint one solid message from it.

What it does have a lot of, as many others have pointed out, is stylish, witty, good fun. This is almost always the movie I choose on the rare occasions when my husband is working late, my son is asleep, I have energy to spare and good bottle of wine just begging to be uncorked. Believable or not, it is well-told and compelling, and remains one of the better movies a gal can lose herself in.