The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewTrevor Lynch Archive
Breakfast at Tiffany's
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Blake Edwards’ 1961 film Breakfast at Tiffany’s—loosely based on Truman Capote’s 1958 novel of the same name—stars Audrey Hepburn in her iconic role of Holly Golightly, a charming, flighty, feminine, haunted young woman trying to create a life—and an identity—in a gorgeous Technicolor New York City at what is arguably the peak of American civilization, just before the plunge.

I have seen Breakfast at Tiffany’s six times, twice on the big screen, and although I loved it every time, for the first four viewings, the movie played a strange trick on my memory. If you had asked me what Breakfast at Tiffany’s was about, I would have said it is a wholesome romantic comedy. But that’s not really true. Yes, it has plenty of comic elements, but overall, Breakfast at Tiffany’s is a very sad and serious film. As Sally Tomato says, the story of Holly Golightly’s life would be a book that “would break the heart.” That’s certainly true of Truman Capote’s novel, which is indeed so heartbreaking that Blake Edwards rewrote the ending for the movie to give us a little hope to cling to.

And, as for wholesomeness, it has that too in the end. But somehow I repeatedly forgot that Breakfast at Tiffany’s is the tale of the romantic misadventures of two gold-diggers, Holly Golightly and her upstairs neighbor, Paul Varjak, both of whom are skating through their 20s by having sex with and taking money from older and richer people. Of course, they both maintain their self-respect by keeping a discreet distance between the sex-giving and money-taking, so that the quid pro quo is not too brazenly obvious. Capote said that Holly stopped short of simple prostitution, describing her as an “American geisha.”

Both Holly and Paul rationalize their choices by reference to a mission. Holly wants to buy land and horses and care for her sweet but slow brother Fred, who is currently in the Army. (The novel is set in 1943, so being in the army is a rather dangerous undertaking.) Paul is a writer who needs a patron to give him time to work on his great novel. But it is not working. He’s got writer’s block. As Holly notes, he doesn’t even have a ribbon in his typewriter.

Paul is the prouder and more serious of the two. Holly is top banana in the flake department. Which, of course, means that Paul suffered greatly at Holly’s hands when he falls in love with her.

Maybe the false memories are due to Henry Mancini’s music, which won two Oscars, for best score and best song for the haunting cornball classic “Moon River,” with lyrics of Johnny Mercer, which casts a silvery shimmer of nostalgia over the whole heartbreaking tale. Whatever the cause, I am grateful to this amnesia, for it has allowed Breakfast at Tiffany’s to surprise me again and again with each new viewing.

The basic plot of Breakfast at Tiffany’s is quite simple. Paul Varjak—played by George Peppard at the peak of his Nordic-preppy good looks—moves into an apartment on Manhattan’s upper east side and meets his ditzy downstairs neighbor, Holly Golightly. Holly has lived there for a year but looks like she is still moving in. That’s because she’s rootless, a drifter, a flake. She has an orange cat, but she hasn’t given him a name, because she doesn’t want the commitment. Her favorite place in the world is Tiffany’s, the jewelers on Fifth Avenue. She declares to Paul that if she ever finds a place that makes her feel like Tiffany’s, she’ll put down roots and give the cat a name. Of course it is hard to imagine a home that would feel like Tiffany’s. Buckingham Palace, perhaps? Holly, in short, is not too practical. Her conditions for settling down are a fanciful way of saying “never.”

Paul’s apartment isn’t exactly “him” either. It looks like an expensive European hotel room. It was decorated before his arrival by his patron, Mrs. Failenson, nicknamed “2E,” played by a radiant Patricia Neal (who once played opposite a certain Ellsworth Toohey in King Vidor’s film of Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead). The movie creates the character of Paul from the novel’s unnamed narrator. 2E and her relationship with Paul are inventions of the screenwriter, which considerably deepens the character and his relationship with Holly, creating dramatic conflict through “irreconcilable similarities.”

Holly finds Paul to be a sympathetic, useful, and highly presentable neighbor. As fellow gold-diggers, they also have a certain understanding. But in her eyes, their shared mode of life also precludes a relationship, for Paul has no gold, and Holly has set her sights on older, uglier men with more money. For Paul, gold-digging is a short-term strategy, to get his start in life, at which time he will settle down with a nice girl and take care of her. For Holly, however, gold-digging is a long-term strategy to find a husband, who will take care of her forever.

One of the most captivating sequences in Breakfast at Tiffany’s is when a mysterious stalker shows up outside Paul and Holly’s building. 2E thinks her husband is having her followed. Paul, who is a red-blooded male under his gorgeous wardrobe, is game for a confrontation. After a game of cat and mouse in the east side and in Central Park, the stalker approaches Paul and says, “Son, I need a friend.”

It turns out that the stalker, played by Buddy Ebsen, is Doc Golightly, a veterinarian from Texas and Holly’s . . . no, not her father, her husband, whom she married at the age of 14. Holly’s real name is Lula Mae Barnes. Lula Mae and Fred were runaways who showed up on Doc’s farm. Doc was a widower who needed a helpmeet. Hence the marriage. Doc has tracked Lula Mae down to persuade her to return home to “her husband and her chirren.”

Holly will have none of it. The marriage was annulled long ago, and she’s just not Lula Mae anymore. She has constructed a whole new identity for herself. She got rid of her Okie accent with French lessons, courtesy of a Hollywood producer, O. J. Berman (Martin Balsam), and she has a fabulous circle of rich male friends—whom she rates as “rats” and “super-rats”—competing for her attention.

When she sees a heartbroken Doc off at the Greyhound Bus station, she tells him that she’s a “wild thing” and that one should never fall in love with wild things, because they will just break your heart. In truth, Holly is just a flake who doesn’t know who she is or what she wants and is afraid of real relationships and real commitments. Berman thinks Holly is a phony, but he debates whether she is a real phony or not—a real phony being someone who believes his own nonsense.

The whole sequence moves from creepy, to comical, to corny, to deeply moving. That’s the magic of this film.

Once Doc has been sent on his way, Holly gets roaring drunk. It is a catharsis, a crisis, a crossroads. Paul now knows her story but loves her all the more. He hopes that she will get a little more serious about life, and maybe about him. Paul enjoys taking care of Holly. It makes him feel strong and manly. Being taken care of by 2E is convenient but emasculating. Unsurprisingly, Holly proves to be the better muse than 2E. Awakening Paul’s manliness also awakens his creativity.

Thus Paul is appalled when Holly declares that she is no longer going to play the field. She is going to set her sights on marrying Rusty Trawler, the ninth richest man in America under fifty, despite the fact that he is a tittering pig-faced manlet. (In the novel, Trawler is a known Nazi sympathizer who once proposed marriage to Unity Mitford.)

When Trawler falls into the clutches of another gold-digger, Holly coolly turns to pursuing José da Silva Pereira (played by Spanish aristocrat José Luis de Vilallonga), a dashing but strait-laced Brazilian from a prominent family. It is not clear to Paul, though, if he means to marry her or merely keep her as a mistress. Holly is oblivious, however.

Whatever José’s intentions, however, he calls it off when Holly is arrested. Holly has received $100 per week to visit Sally Tomato, an elderly mobster incarcerated at Sing Sing, and deliver his “weather report”—obviously coded messages about the narcotics trade—to his people outside.

Berman gets Holly bailed out. Paul packs her belongings and the cat and picks her up at a police station to take her to a hotel where she can hide out from the press. In the cab, he breaks the bad news about José. While adjusting her lipstick, Holly coolly decides to jump bail, use her ticket to Brazil, and marry some other rich South American. In an act of consummate bitchcraft, she tells the cab to pull over and abandons the cat in an alleyway in a downpour. In the novel, she follows through with her plan and disappears. A realistic but terrible outcome that puts Holly Golightly into the lower circle of flaky heartless bitches like Cabaret’s Sally Bowles.

In the film, Paul gives Holly a powerful talking to. He tells her that people really do belong to one another and that it is the only real chance we have of happiness. In today’s rabidly individualistic society, these are unfashionable sentiments, but deeply romantic and stirring ones. Paul actually reaches Holly. He actually changes her heart. She runs into the rain, searching for the cat, whom she finds, then Paul and Holly embrace, the prototype of a human family that may come to be. (Holly definitely wants children.) The end—a happy one, we hope.

ORDER IT NOW

Unsurprisingly, modern arbiters of virtue don’t like Breakfast at Tiffany’s very much. It is obviously heteronormative, anti-feminist, and otherwise “problematic.” But their ire is focused mostly on Mickey Rooney’s portrayal of Holly’s upstairs neighbor, Mr. I. Y. Yunioshi, as a buck-toothed Jap buffoon, straight out of World War II propaganda cartoons. Frankly, even I am offended by Mr. Yunioshi. Capote’s novel makes much more of race, but it is hard to say if it is “problematic” or “woke.” For instance, Holly notes that José has a touch of black blood. But she doesn’t mind the prospect of having slightly “coony” babies as long as the father is rich and respected. (Eventually, they’ll come for Capote as well.)

I highly recommend Breakfast at Tiffany’s. But what is most enchanting about this film can’t be captured in prose. It simply must be seen—for the beautiful people, the iconic fashions (one of the little black dresses Audrey Hepburn wore in this film fetched nearly one million dollars at auction), and its portrayal of a glamorous, safe, overwhelmingly white New York City.

Watch it as nostalgic, escapist entertainment—a mid-century American time capsule. I’m betting you’ll want to re-watch it as a character study that even manages to have a “message”—and a wholesome one at that. It communicates the joys and follies of youth in America at its peak—an age of seemingly infinite potential—and the necessity of finally growing up and actually taking a stand, of actually being someone. It became the road less traveled.

 
• Category: Arts/Letters • Tags: Movies 
Hide 335 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. syonredux says:

    —in a gorgeous Technicolor New York City at what is arguably the peak of American civilization, just before the plunge.

    And it’s that sense of cultural loss that makes the movie so poignant. Watching Breakfast at Tiffany’s (and many other films made during the the 1924-1965 Golden Age) is a heartbreaking glimpse into the Anglo-America that once was…..

  2. fnn says:

    Since you’re doing old movies, how about Johnny Guitar? To me the movie seems preposterous, and I assume it’s liked by many critics because of the gender-bending, the anti-McCarthyism and its overall strangeness.

    • Replies: @Angharad
  3. …how about Johnny Guitar? because of the gender-bending, the anti-McCarthyism and its overall strangeness.

    Maybe that’s the reason with some critics and scholars, but that is ONE HELLUVA MOVIE.

    Nicholas Ray was one of a kind.

  4. @syonredux

    BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S makes good double feature with MIDNIGHT COWBOY. Great triple feature with THE GRADUATE. And a quadruple feature with DARLING(with Julie Christie).

    But Holly Golightly is less a character than Hepburn’s star play.

    Mary Tyler Moore Show has some of the vibes of BAT.

    PRETTY WOMAN was sold as BAT of the 90s.

    • Replies: @syonredux
    , @AceDeuce
  5. anon19 says:

    glamourous, safe overwhelmingly white New York city,

    Just like how Toronto and Canada used to be.

    • Replies: @Ancient Briton
  6. Golightly is a fluff, not a flake.

    A flake tends to have pretensions, like hippie girls gazing into crystals.

    Holly has no pretensions whatsoever.

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
  7. TKK says:

    Excellent writing & analysis, Mr. Lynch! A pleasure to read but with real meat and potatoes.

    If you ever feel inclined:

    The Exorcist
    5 Easy Pieces
    One Eyed Jacks

    I can never sort out if One Eyed Jacks is great or terrible.

    • Replies: @Hossein
    , @John Howard
  8. Miro23 says:
    @syonredux

    —in a gorgeous Technicolor New York City at what is arguably the peak of American civilization, just before the plunge.

    And it’s that sense of cultural loss that makes the movie so poignant. Watching Breakfast at Tiffany’s (and many other films made during the 1924-1965 Golden Age) is a heartbreaking glimpse into the Anglo-America that once was…..

    It wasn’t going to last. The rest of the world was going to recover after WW2 – but still – the counter-cultural leftist hippy/globalist/SJW led decline of the US into 2019 has been spectacular by any standards.

    Israel’s US colony is now a really ugly place, internationally and domestically.

    • Replies: @Houston 1992
  9. Al Ross says:

    Thanks for this review. Would you please review the Paul Newman / Bruce Willis film, ‘ Nobody’s Fool’ ?

  10. danand says:

    “Maybe the false memories are due to Henry Mancini’s music, which won two Oscars, for best score and best song for the haunting cornball classic “Moon River,” with lyrics of Johnny Mercer, which casts a silvery shimmer of nostalgia over the whole heartbreaking tale. Whatever the cause, I am grateful to this amnesia, for it has allowed Breakfast at Tiffany’s to surprise me again and again with each new viewing.”

    I feel the same about Moon River. I enjoy the Two Cellos rendition as well:

  11. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S makes good double feature with MIDNIGHT COWBOY.

    Indeed. The transition from BAT to MC perfectly captures New York’s descent into the abyss.

    Nicholas Ray was one of a kind.

    Definitely one of the finest filmmakers of the ’40s and ’50s.Of his oeuvre , In a Lonely Place, On Dangerous Ground , and Bigger Than Life are my particular favorites.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    , @Priss Factor
  12. So when is Greg going to do a Wizard of Oz review, since he’s now embracing his feminine side?

    • Replies: @syonredux
    , @MaryLS
  13. I always thought Paul may be gay. Not that I had any proof it’s just that I felt Capote may have thought of him that way (I never read his work). Being the 50’s that couldn’t have worked for this film like it did a decade later for Cabaret (a much more serious script).

    I do think the film is deserving of the good feelings most repeat viewers have about it. The cast is first rate and of course it’s Hepburn’s signature role. Even though you really can’t imagine Holly flipping her rural SW accent for what she was working her way through Manhattan with. She was an elegant phony.

    • Replies: @James J. O'Meara
  14. “But somehow I repeatedly forgot that Breakfast at Tiffany’s is the tale of the romantic misadventures of two gold-diggers . . . ”

    And risk taking and being responsible for the same. As the end of the film is really ambivilent about their future – save that it will the two of them and of course, that orange Tabby.

    Love that tune “Moon River” which captures the traditional mood and goal: boy meets girl and the two set off ” . . . after the same, rainbows end . . .”

    But then I get a kick out of Clint Eastwood singing “I Talk to the Trees”, and Lee Marvin singing “Wanderin’ Star.”

  15. Zelda says:

    I saw the movie three times and never once I found offensive Mr Yunioshi’s character. Maybe because I’m Italian and I’m used to “offensive” American stereotypes, such as Italian characters being always portrayed in American movies as mafia mobbers or spaghetti eaters (and obviously the same applies to French, Spanish and all European people, all “stereotyped” in American movies).

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Priss Factor
    , @kikz
  16. In truth, Holly is just a flake who doesn’t know who she is or what she wants and is afraid of real relationships and real commitments.

    Long before I saw the movie or read the book, I lived the role of Paul (hey, it got me 850 sqf with high ceilings on the UES for $535 a month) living across the hall from a Holly-type. One thing you could say of her is that she knew where she came from and who she was (past tense), and was determined not to be that person any more, hence the party life. At some point you either grow up and move on, or you drink and drug yourself to death … or worse.

    The best one can ever expect a Holly-type to be is The Fun Zone.

  17. JimDandy says:

    “But what is most enchanting about this film can’t be captured in prose.”

    But what was captured in prose in the source novel is vastly superior, literarily speaking. Just sayin’.

    • Replies: @Backwoods Bob
  18. I could never understand the appeal of this movie. Nor, for that matter, all rom-coms (or wannabe rom-coms).

    Though, the author is right in his reminiscences on opulent, European America….

    • Agree: theMann
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @Republic
  19. Hossein says:
    @TKK

    one eyed jack was a great movie. Brando and Malden were brilliant . Nobody has the talent or the ability to make such wonderful movies anymore.

    The cartoonish and revolting marvel based computerized trash can never replace great movies of the past.

  20. Hossein says:

    A review of Sam Peckinpah’s great movie, Cross of iron , would be awesome.

    Cheers,

    • Replies: @Ian Smith
  21. anon[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @Zelda

    You simply cannot compare portrayal of Asians in Hollywood with that of Italians. At least Italians were portrayed as masculine, while Asian males are emasculated and dehumanized beyond reason. Fuck the kikes who run Hollywood.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    , @Doug P.
  22. And the end is cliche: Love solves everything.
    ……………………………………………………………….
    Well? It does not.

  23. Lin says:

    Can someone kindly tell what is the time-line evolution of these terms:
    Courtesans–>mistress–>excort–>hookers(whatever class)–>’sex workers’
    Apparently the first 2 are seldom used these days

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    , @Kiel
    , @Alden
  24. Mr. Hack says:

    Wasn’t “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” in some ways just a remake of “Sabrina”? Both films capture the ouvre of “the height of Anglo-American” civilization that has sadly succumbed to the politically correct machinations of leftist Hollywood. I haven’t viewed either film in quite a while and was anticipating this review to get to the acting performance of Humprey Bogart, who of course gave another showcase performance in “Sabrina”. I miss the old escapist Hollywood, more whitewashed and wholesome product of its golden years.

  25. Jabby Dot says:

    The scenes of early 60’s NYC makes one long for a past that may never return-one can only hope.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    , @The Alarmist
  26. chris says:

    Whatever value the two characters might have had in the original novel, they became two-dimensional stick figures in the movie; the better the ‘technicolor’ the less real or interesting they became. This movie was like sugar-water to me.

    A great film to compare this one to is ‘Night of the Iguana,’ the contrast is really striking.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    , @Priss Factor
  27. dfordoom says: • Website

    It is obviously heteronormative

    You do realise that Capote’s novel was pure homosexual propaganda don’t you? The message was that Paul should embrace his homosexuality. He would then be free to be himself. In reality that would have meant spending the 60s and 70s in gay bath-houses and dying of AIDS in the 80s.

    And as far as Holly is concerned she should embrace freedom as well, which in real life would have meant a couple of decades of slutting around and then dying alone.

    In the book Paul and Holly (and the cat) all choose freedom meaning they choose lives of mindless hedonism, sexual excess , irresponsibility and loneliness. And this is presented as being a Good Thing.

    It’s an incredibly evil book. It’s a How To manual for the Me Generation.

    It’s also further evidence that the disintegration of American society was already far advanced when the Boomers were still in nursery school.

  28. bob sykes says:

    I have seen most of the movies mentioned above, and I like Breakfast at Tiffany’s best. I’ve seen it two or three times, and this is a great review. It is a sad movie, and Doc Golightly is its saddest character.

    My favorite movie is The Maltese Falcon. I also like Bogart’s The Big Sleep, but not the Mitchum version. Bacall, like Hepburn, can’t sing a lick. Both are real easy to look at.

    I want to thank TheAlarmist for the diagram. I was never in the No Go Zone, but I was in Danger Zone briefly.

  29. Mr. Hack says:
    @chris

    “Contrast”ing these two films is indeed an exercise in black & white portrayals. Sugar coated escapism (kind of like a musical of the same era, however without most of the music) vs raw, uncensored bohemian realism. Another film similar in its dramatic appeal was also written by Tennesee Williams, ” Cat on a Hot Tin Roof”.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @chris
  30. ia says:

    I just watched BAT again recently myself and have to give you credit for a very good synopsis and analysis. It does capture a lot of things going on at that time in the US.

  31. @Lin

    Hookers/whores (time immemorial)>courtesans (mostly 16th-18th C)> mistress (a very old term, but in modern usage more frequent in the 19th C)> escort (20th C) >sex worker (20th-21st C).

  32. @Mark James

    I also always assumed that Paul was one of those “actually gay but we can’t show that” characters that would be re-written in some coded way; his paid-for relationship with 2E suggests that, for instance.

    Turning the screw, perhaps Paul and Holly are both gay; I mean, two gay men, one older but less experienced, the other younger but already an old hand at living off older, unattractive men. Holly an orphan, “married” at 14, unable or unwilling to settle down with one man, etc. might all read as “gay.”

    Both characters had to be hidden behind heterosexual crypsis, but perhaps would really angered Capote about the “happy ending” was that it completely converted the relationship into a conventional marriage.

    • Replies: @Alden
  33. “Another film similar in its dramatic appeal was also written by Tennesee Williams, ” Cat on a Hot Tin Roof”.

    And with that one you get the Technicolor too!

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    , @Mr. Hack
  34. @dfordoom

    You do realise that Capote’s novel was pure homosexual propaganda don’t you? The message was that Paul should embrace his homosexuality.

    You do realize that the character of Paul was invented for the movie, out of the unnamed writer who is the narrator of the novel.

    I think you’re a lunatic, and a dishonest one at that.

    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  35. @James J. O'Meara

    And- what do Truman Capote and Tennessee Williams have in common? Beside being Americans & Southerners?

    Hmmmm….

    • Replies: @James J. O'Meara
  36. Mr. Hack says:
    @James J. O'Meara

    And of course, technicolor was (and is) the greatest form of color photography ever devised. It’s stylized and enhanced method of delivery was magical. However, I have a special fondness for black and white films produced in the 40’s – 60’s. “The Night of the Iguana” was still done in a superlative black & white style, IMHO. Last night I viewed a documentary on PBS about Teddie Roosevelt’s adventures in the Brazilian Amazon. It was basically shot in black and white, and could have been enhanced by color photography exposing more of the rich and abundant rainforest foilage, flowers, and waterfalls, etc.

  37. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Trevor Lynch

    You do realize that the character of Paul was invented for the movie, out of the unnamed writer who is the narrator of the novel.

    It’s quite common for unnamed characters in books to be given a name in a movie adaptation. Or for character names to be changed whilst still being essentially the same character. So in my comment change “Paul” to “unnamed character in the book” and my point still stands. The character of Paul was not invented for the movie but was given a name and somewhat altered (and most characters in books are somewhat altered in movie adaptations). It was the book I was talking about (and I read it a very long time ago so feel free to shoot me for not remembering that he wasn’t given a name in the book).

    My real point was that the book is homosexual propaganda and promotes decadence and degeneracy.

    In this case it can certainly be argued that the book and the movie have very different messages. Capote celebrates the fact that his characters never grow up. In the movie they do grow up.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
  38. @Mr. Hack

    When I was a kid, like many little boys I was a big fan of monster movies, especially the zany ones from the 50s and 60s with lots of space aliens and giant insects. One time when I was about six years old, I saw in the TV Guide that a movie was on called “Night of the Iguana.” I just assumed it would be about a giant iguana attacking a city. So I patiently sat up and watched the entire movie, expecting that any moment, a giant iguana would arrive and kill all these idiots.

    I never trusted Tennessee Williams again.

    • LOL: Alden, Mark Hunter
    • Replies: @Spike
  39. Alden says:
    @dfordoom

    The book was gay propaganda.

  40. Isn’t it, essentially, an American film? Something about “American Dream” (whichever version)? To achieve glamorous, buoyant, exciting (big) city life as contrasted with drab & boring workaday existence …

  41. Alden says:
    @Mr. Hack

    Logline for Cat on a Hot Tin Roof

    Six adults yell at each other for a weekend while 4 children occupy themselves as best they can.

    • Replies: @James J. O'Meara
  42. syonredux says:
    @Kent Nationalist

    A review of The Wizard of Oz would be quite interesting, particularly if it were paired with Zardoz.

  43. Alden says:
    @James J. O'Meara

    I agree. There were many plays and books written by gays in which women characters were really gay men and their typical problems and lives.

    The most blatant one is Street Car Named Desire. Stanley is the big macho gay. His wife is the middle aged gay paternal type who puts with a lot just so he can have gay sex without lowering himself to pay for it.

    Blanche is gay but afraid to actually cross the line. That type used to get drunk and get raped. Women used to do that to back in the day when pre marital sex and adultery were not acceptable.

  44. Alden says:
    @Mr. Hack

    What’s bad about black and white is that it’s so unnatural. Sky is blue trees bushes and plants are green, dirt is shades of brown, humans have brown and blue eyes, not gray.

    It’s somewhat plausible in interiors with an entire house in gray white and black. But exteriors and actors in black white and gray is just unnatural.

  45. Anon[424] • Disclaimer says:

    When I was 17 …….

    • Replies: @Anon
  46. Breakfast at Tiffanys was made in 1961. Two years later came the JFK assassination and “le deluge” from we’ve never quite resurfaced, notwithstanding Reagan and “Morning in America”. This movie could never have had the same impact, nor perhaps could it have ever been made, post-11/22/63.

    The Mancini version of “Moon River” is incomparable and in a class by itself. The Andy Williams and Jerry Butler versions pale by comparison. Mercer’s lyrics were like a poem, best read than heard (notwithstanding the Mancini recording). And as it would turn out they were prophetic. No two songs could be more different than “Moon River” and “Born To Be Wild” by Steppenwolf but, in a way, they were both about the same things even though set in two different generations, if not worlds. A reminder that the more things change, the more they remain the same.

  47. @Miro23

    American dominance in manufactured goods could not last as our natural competitors in Japan, Europe had been bombed back two generation by the “Good” War.
    But our culture did not have to collapse. Our economy did not need to be hollowed out, FIRE —finance insurance real estate interests— did not need to dominate the economy at the expense of all other useful sectors. The 1965 immigration act did not need to be passed. We could have reined in the MIC, not fought in Vietnam.
    Our decline was not inevitable, and it is not irreversible.

    • Replies: @Miro23
    , @Bookish1
  48. ricpic says:

    Audrey Hepburn: every man’s desire.

    Johnny Mercer: a genius, period.

    • Replies: @Prester John
  49. syonredux says:
    @Alden

    What’s bad about black and white is that it’s so unnatural.

    That’s also what’s great about it. It’s pure form, uncontaminated by color:

    • Replies: @Johnny Paytoilet
    , @Alden
  50. JimDandy says:
    @anon

    That’s all changed for the asians, whereas Italians are still portrayed as greasy cartoons.

    • Replies: @anon
  51. Ian Smith says:
    @Hossein

    I loved the novel by Willi Heinrich, not such a fan of Cross of Iron the movie, though. It could be that I just don’t like Peckinpah’s style, though.

  52. Mr. Anon says:
    @syonredux

    On Dangerous Ground is indeed a great movie.

  53. Mr. Anon says:

    The high point of movies – visually – was the 1950s through the 1970s. During that time, at least some film-makers paid attention to how a movie looked. Now they all seem to look flat and washed out.

  54. Miro23 says:
    @Houston 1992

    Our decline was not inevitable, and it is not irreversible.

    The problem is, that winning in 2019 means getting, national unity, focused national development policies, rooting out corruption, and world class national education e.g. Switzerland/Korea/Japan – things that the US more or less had in the early 1960’s and has completely lost (other than a few top universities catering to Asians).

    A country without an ethnic identity is not going anywhere. And if US Anglos think that it can’t get worse – then think again – for instance the Ukraine.

    • Agree: Houston 1992
    • Replies: @Republic
  55. anon[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @JimDandy

    I’m sorry I just don’t see how things have changed for Asian males. Asian males are still portrayed as homosexual or alien foreigners subject to mockery. I’d love to switch places with the Italians, since at least the mafioso image is “alpha” and cool.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
  56. I was lucky enough to watch Breakfast at Tiffany’s in a theater on a Sunday in New York City (Chinatown) in the 2000s. It was some kind of revival thing. It was perfect, and some of the audience even laughed at Mickey Rooney’s harmless goof on the Japanese, despite being un-pc.

    Rooney apologized for the role later, but always maintained for years that no Asian ever complained to him and many, many Asians would tell him that the role was hilarious and wonderful. The woke generation has ruined all that.

    • Replies: @anon
  57. @ricpic

    Audrey was, for me, an acquired taste. As a hormone driven kid in my teens she wasn’t to my taste in terms of looks (compared to say MM or Ursula Andress a/k/a “Ursula Undress”). It was only when I grew older and mature did I begin to appreciate how beautiful that woman was–both inside and out.

    And yeah…Mercer WAS indeed a genius!!

  58. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Alden

    What’s bad about black and white is that it’s so unnatural.

    That’s what is so cool about black-and-white. Its artificiality. Movies are not reality. They’re movies. They should look artificial.

    Some movies look better in colour. Some look better in black-and-white. You can capture certain moods in black-and-white that you just can’t capture in colour.

    • Agree: syonredux, Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Steve2
  59. anon[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @R.G. Camara

    Those Asians you mentioned who celebrate their own racial degradation on the widescreen deserve to get a baseball bat to their craniums. You won’t ever see blacks for example supporting racist portrayals of themselves, which is why we always get black geniuses or doctors in American movies lol.

    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
  60. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Prester John

    Breakfast at Tiffanys was made in 1961.

    Breakfast at Tiffanys is a good example of the Production Code working as it was meant to work. You take a vicious immoral book with a negative destructive message but you can’t turn it into a vicious immoral film with a negative destructive message. So you turn it into a wholesome movie with a positive message.

    That’s why censorship is a good thing.

  61. @anon

    Nah, Blacks used to get a kick out of Stepin Fetchit, Amos n’ Andy, and minstrel shows. It was only when (((certain people))) informed us all that such portrayals are racist that they soured and became angry about it. Just like Asians with Mickey Rooney.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
  62. As a longtime fan of Audrey Hepburn and lover of her type (but not of the Holly Golightly type!) I enjoyed this review. Trevor Lynch’s interpretation is spot on, as he describes the subtext that has been there the whole time, right in front of us.

  63. anon[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @R.G. Camara

    Nowadays, blacks are extreme snowflakes talking about “anti-blackness” when they are the most coddled group in America, thanks to (((certain people))). What angers me is the hypocrisy where Asians are still suitable targets for mockery and racism while blacks and (((certain people))) must be worshipped, when in actuality, they are two of the most unpleasant groups in America lol.

  64. @Priss Factor

    I think the slang at that time, at the end of the beatnik era, would have been “kook,” not flake.

  65. One of my all time favorite flicks. Saw it for the first time back in early 1962, a great year for movies by the way. My favorite scene, when Audrey sings “Moon River” while strumming the ukulele. A similar scene in 1965’s “The Great Race” is Natalie Wood singing “The Sweetheart Tree” to Tony Curtis & she is playing a guitar. Another great Mancini tune by the way. That had to be one of the most hilarious comedies of all time. What a great era!

  66. JimDandy says:
    @anon

    Well, a lot changed, fairly quickly. There is no way Hangover could be made today, for instance. TV has a lot of Asian males in studly roles these days. Asian women essentially play infallible hot badasses. As for the gay thing, well… gay everything is obligatory these days.

    • Replies: @anon
  67. @syonredux

    I’ve seen well over 100 “Film Noir” flicks made from the early 40’s to the late 50’s. Being filmed in black & white is what made those movies so great. Could you imagine what “Out of the Past” (1947), “Panic in the Streets” (1950) or “A Touch of Evil” (1958) would have looked like had they been in Technicolor? Contaminated! By the way, I saw the “Longest Day” (1962) when it first came out in black & white. Some forty years later, I watch the colorized version & all I can say, it really sucked.

    • Replies: @Alden
  68. Kiel says:
    @Lin

    You forgot ‘slut’.

    They’re all generally correct euphemisms for the word ‘female’, separated in application by period/culture/circumstance.

    In less than 1% of cases, they may also apply to males, differentiated by gender identity & kink.

    • Replies: @Lin
  69. @Zelda

    I saw the movie three times and never once I found offensive Mr Yunioshi’s character.

    It is offensive, but that’s part of the humor. Humor always has a victim, and caricatures rely on exaggeration. Clouseau, for instance, is a caricature of French buffoonery.

    At any rate, it is an inspired performance, the only one for which Rooney will be remembered. Rooney was very popular for several yrs, topping box office charts year after year. But almost all of his movies are now forgotten. His role in BAT is a keeper. It is funny as hell.

  70. @R.G. Camara

    Objections to racial portrayals typically come from virtue-signalling Whites and (((Whites))). For the most part, the objects of their supposed solicitude don’t care.

    • Replies: @anon
    , @R.G. Camara
  71. anon[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @JimDandy

    I see. I stopped watching TV for quite a while now, so probably not up to date. I personally felt the traditional Italian portrayal, starting from the Godfather trilogy, was not really degrading. I always perceived Italians as patriarchical, family-oriented, masculine tribal people who do not forget old grudges, not too bad of an image to have if you ask me.

  72. Nobody mentioned anything about George Peppard. I thought he was good. He was sort of a bland actor who got a lot of good parts from 60-70. Obviously it was an important role but I don’t think a Newman, Holden, McQueen type would have worked. Paul was an observer–constantly amazed– he wasn’t a facilitator.
    I was also trying to remember if Paul/Holly had a sex scene or even a hint at one and I don’t think they did. At the beginning Holly was being chased down by some guy who gave her cash and Paul was getting his rent money from Patricia Neal.

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
  73. @Bardon Kaldian

    I could never understand the appeal of this movie. Nor, for that matter, all rom-coms (or wannabe rom-coms).

    Love stories are among the most popular. Boy meets girl. The stuff of countless movies, books, and songs.
    As for comedy, people like funny. Romance and Funny seem a natural fit.

    BAT is a real gem, one of the few that makes the chemistry work.

  74. Kiel says:
    @dfordoom

    One flaw with your otherwise prescient comment . . . Holly would not die alone.

    Holly would have a cat.

    Holly’s cat who would also die, slowly, in agony, of dehydration, as Holly’s unloved and rapidly decomposing corpse languished for weeks prior to her neighbors calling the superintendent to investigate a distinctive and foul smell emanating from their air return vents.

    However, in an effort to prolong life, the cat may just pull it out as it consumed bits of Holly to acquire the bits fetid moisture that still remained in her body.

    We’ll have to wait for the sequel to the reboot to see how the conflict resolves.

  75. @Ian Smith

    It could be that I just don’t like Peckinpah’s style, though.

    It’s not one of his best. Far from it. He had problems with production and the bottle.

  76. anon[837] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ris_Eruwaedhiel

    Funny thing is white cucks and (((whites))) have no problem with racial portrayals as long as its not blacks and the Chosen. Everyone else is fair game.

  77. @chris

    Whatever value the two characters might have had in the original novel, they became two-dimensional stick figures in the movie

    George Peppard is good-looking and serviceable. No more, no less.

    Holly Golightly in the movie is really Hepburn frolicking at her peak in looks and charm. She’s in full bloom. She’s less a character(as she may be in the book) than a fit for Hepburn to showcase her star power. And it works wonderfully on that level.
    She’s about as real as Inspector Clouseau or Sean Connery as 007. And for that reason, it doesn’t make much sense to speak of her in terms of past history, psychology, meaning, or values. Holly exists to make Hepburn look great on screen. That said, Hepburn had the touch and twinkle to make Holly into something more than a mere mask, a cartoon character. She sparkles and aches with just enough humor and pathos to make us feel for the character. Peppard works essentially as a straight man to her crazy-funny-girl antics.

    The only two characters that suggest anything like real-world experience, feelings, and motives are the two older roles played by Patricia Neal and Buddy Epson. But they are sidelined soon enough because the movie favors fantasy over reality. In the real world, a man like Varjak(Peppard) wouldn’t have been so sentimental and walked out on his ‘sugar mommy’ so easily; and most writers are not that handsome. And a more serious movie would have delved more deeply into Holly’s past history, her core formative being. But the movie is about escapism and the fantasy of being young, handsome, and lovable. Even the real-life lesson at the end with the cat recovered from the rain is Pure Hollywood, esp with the Mancini-Mercer score.
    I heard Capote wasn’t pleased with Hepburn in the role and had in mind someone like Marilyn Monroe. While Hepburn is brilliant in the role, it’s true enough that she’s not very convincing as a once-farm-girl who miraculously transformed into such a darling. She was also hardly convincing in MY FAIR LADY as a common girl gone fancy, but BAT works far better than MFL because it’s light and brisk like a gazelle whereas MFL is too elephantine for a comedy-musical. It drags.

    BAT is not a serious movie but one worth taking seriously in terms of talent and delivery. It’s Blake Edwards at the top of his game. It it to him what BLADE RUNNER is to Ridley Scott.
    It is also the only Audrey Hepburn movie that has passed the test of time in terms of lasting popularity, though ROMAN HOLIDAY and TWO FOR THE ROAD are pretty good too.

    • Replies: @chris
    , @Anonymous
    , @Pericles
    , @Dumbo
  78. And, as for wholesomeness, it has that too in the end. But somehow I repeatedly forgot that Breakfast at Tiffany’s is the tale of the romantic misadventures of two gold-diggers, Holly Golightly and her upstairs neighbor, Paul Varjak, both of whom are skating through their 20s by having sex with and taking money from older and richer people.

    The most wholesome movie about whores. Whore-some?

    Holly may be a gold-digger, but then, who isn’t? Isn’t the sexual marketplace all about looking for whomever has more money or status? Even Jenny in LOVE STORY admits that she’s partly attracted to Oliver for his status and legacy.

    Holly’s gold-diggery may seem more blatant because of her humble origins, but even elites with fancy credentials act the same way. Why did Chelsea Clinton marry into a rich Jewish family? And why did the Jewish boy marry Chelsea? Daughter of former president. All about power, privilege, money, status. All about money and status.

    If true love is about the meeting of hearts and souls, then even love based on looks is shallow. After all, someone can be handsome or pretty and be a total idiot, lout, or moron. The fact is, if Holly were ugly, neither Paul Varjak now we would care about her. It’s because of her beauty and charm that he and we are made to care. Gold-digging may be shallow, but ‘face-collecting’ maybe equally so, that is IF one is looking for True Love with someone of quality of soul as well as body.
    All those old rich men marrying some young woman simply because she has the looks and smile. She could be a bimbo whose only meaning in life is ‘shopping’, but some men will even abandon their wives and children to chase after such young tarts.

    But then, money and looks do matter. If Doc(Epson) had lots of money, Holly wouldn’t have run from him. If Holly were plain or ugly, Doc wouldn’t have chased after her. Just the way it is.

    Now, the movie wants us to believe that Holly doesn’t really know herself. Surrounded by people with money who get what they want by throwing dollar bills around, she’s convinced that the world is full of rats, and she’s gonna find the biggest one. But the gold-digger really happens to be a ‘hooker with a heart of gold’, and Paul finally digs it out of her. Well, it works on the Hollywood level.

    • Replies: @Pericles
    , @Anon
  79. @Mark James

    Redford could have been a good choice for the Paul Varjak character.
    He and Audrey Hepburn would have made a splendid couple.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  80. @Ris_Eruwaedhiel

    As was on great display during the whole “Washington Redskins need to change their name NOW thos RACISTS!” nonsense brought up a few years ago by NBC, Bob Costas, and sportswriter filth.

    Turns out American Indian tribes aren’t offended by it, only people who don’t know any Indians got offended. The whole effort failed.

  81. syonredux says:
    @Ian Smith

    I loved the novel by Willi Heinrich, not such a fan of Cross of Iron the movie, though. It could be that I just don’t like Peckinpah’s style, though.

    Cross is OK, but’s it’s not top-tier Peckinpah. It’s certainly not at all comparable to masterpieces like Pat Garrett And Billy The Kid and The Wild Bunch.For that matter, it’s also not as good as Ride the High Country , a heartfelt and deeply moving valediction for the “traditional” Western.

  82. @syonredux

    Other movies that strongly resonate with me of the “American High” of the ‘50’s include North by Northwest and High Society.

    Those films illustrate how fragile an identity that civic nationalism (combined with US natural competitors being knocked back so hard in WW2, ) had conferred upon Anglo -America. Sadly , that society was ripe for the plucking.

  83. It would be great if Trevor Lynch reviewed Elia Kazan’s (Kazatzoglou) films. Also, mention of his honorary Oscar in 1999 would be great where some members of the audience refused to clap. It was touching that De Niro; and particularly, Scorsese presented him with the award who understood the southern European experience in the United States more than morons like Nick Nolte.

  84. @anon19

    TO was pleasant and liveable in the 70’s (I was there) – but glamourous? mai non.

    • Replies: @anon19
  85. @syonredux

    Indeed. The transition from BAT to MC perfectly captures New York’s descent into the abyss.

    Another movie worth comparing to BAT is THE BIRDS by Hitchcock. If BAT is great romantic-comedy, THE BIRDS is a great horror-romance.

  86. @JimDandy

    Why ruin what started as a decent comment with redundant valley-girl speak at the end?

    Literally speaking = Strike one.

    Just sayin’ = Strikes two through nine, your whole side is out. You are a valley girl.

    • Replies: @Jack Armstrong
  87. @Priss Factor

    Mickey Rooney was good in his debut role in Ah, Wilderness! (1935)

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  88. Republic says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Though, the author

    is right in his reminiscences on opulent, European America….

    Taki Theodoracopulos of Taki’s Magazine has many articles of New York City in the 1950s.

    see his Adios, Manhattan, May 20, 2019

    • Agree: byrresheim
  89. Hydro says:

    Truman Capote’s first choice to play Holly Golightly was Marilyn Monroe but her acting coach objected to MM playing a prostitute and chose The Misfits instead. I can only feel a deep sense of regret as MM could have made BAT into an achingly deep and touching classic. Instead, we have a thoroughly enjoyable but forgettable Givenchy fashion show.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  90. Alden says:
    @Johnny Paytoilet

    Film noir is my absolutely favorite genre. I watch them every week on TCM’s Noir day. What works is that they’re mostly interiors or at might when it’s dark. The term noir doesn’t come from dark unsavory characters. Those movies were often cheaply made B and C movies in every country. The lightening was dark to hide the cheap sets, toy guns and that the men wore the same clothes in every scene. The French word just sounded better than black

    Watched the 1975 version of Chandler’s Farewell My Lovely last night. It was in color and I loved it.

    But then I like color. We’re I dictator of the world I’d ban white walls beige floors and beige black brown gray and mud green furniture curtains etc, especially black leather couches.

    I’d ban black, dark grey, grayish beige, mud colors like mud green and maroon for women’s clothes. Golden tan, butterscotch, caramel, cinnamon and chocolate brown would be allowed but not grayish or mud brown.

    But first I’d ban affirmative action

  91. Republic says:
    @Miro23

    A country without an ethnic identity is not going anywhere. And if US Anglos think that it can’t get worse – then think again – for instance the Ukraine.

    People on the opposite sides in Ukraine are of the same ethnic type, in one generation they can be reunited with the same ethnic identity as before.

    In the United States there is no possibility of ever having ethnic unity in the future.

  92. syonredux says:
    @Alden

    Film noir is my absolutely favorite genre. I watch them every week on TCM’s Noir day. What works is that they’re mostly interiors or at might when it’s dark. The term noir doesn’t come from dark unsavory characters. Those movies were often cheaply made B and C movies in every country. The lightening was dark to hide the cheap sets, toy guns and that the men wore the same clothes in every scene.

    And that’s where artistry comes into play, turning a weakness into a strength….

    Watched the 1975 version of Chandler’s Farewell My Lovely last night. It was in color and I loved it.

    It’s OK. Mitchum was far too old for the part, though. On the other hand, it’s vastly superior to the re-make of The Big Sleep that he made a few years later.

    But then I like color.

    So do I. But I also appreciate its absence…..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCsXASEw4VA&t=34s

    • Replies: @Alden
  93. @Buck Ransom

    Redford could have been a good choice for the Paul Varjak character.

    He was in BAREFOOT IN THE PARK, which clearly riffs on BAT.

    Even though the ending of BAT is rather affirming of old-fashioned values, much of its appeal is the nihilism of youth and beauty. Holly needs no biography, memory, or loyalty because she has what it takes, beauty and charm, to make men throw money at her. It is to romantic comedy what RIDE THE HIGH COUNTRY is to the Western. A transitional work that signals the new while adhering(and paying final tribute) to the old and ‘classic’. In that, it is rather like UMBRELLAS OF CHERBOURG(though the Demy pic has a semi-happy ending for the man and a sad ending for the girl). Hitchcock’s THE BIRDS is also an uneasy work that draws on classic Hollywood while leaning over the abyss of the new. And both movies are about the curse and necessity of the cage. People want freedom to break out of the cage, but freedom without sound grounding in values and memory can lead to chaos. (Once homos flew out of the cage, it sure led to lots of trouble.) In a way BAT might be called CATS… or Dogs and Cats. In the end, the Paul the dog who believes in loyalty saves Holly the cat from herself. Cats act like they’re independent but are lost without a master and home.

    BAT closes with a Hollywood ending, and the ‘old’ values are reaffirmed, but Holly is appealing for the same reason Catherine is in JULES AND JIM, one that ends darkly and the titular character in DITA SAXOVA(all the more so because she survived Shoah). Though Holly isn’t a killer, she represents freedom of youth unbound by rules like Alain Delon character in PURPLE NOON or Charlotte Rampling character in GEORGY GIRL.

    An actress who had some of that Hepburn winsomeness was Melanie Griffith with SOMETHING WILD and WORKING GIRL, but she quickly faded… but then so did Hepburn. In a way, BAT may have been as fatal to her career as PSYCHO for Anthony Perkins. It defined her star persona so perfectly that it spoiled future roles.

    • Replies: @Alden
  94. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Ancient Briton

    Mickey Rooney was good in his debut role in Ah, Wilderness! (1935)

    Mickey Rooney made a number of good movies. Unfortunately his best performances were in movies that aren’t well-remembered – movies like Quicksand, The Strip and Drive a Crooked Road.

  95. chris says:
    @Priss Factor

    Thanks ‘Priss’ I really appreciate that ! Interesting tidbit about Capote preferring Marilyn over Audrey in this role. I kind of agree, Audrey is a bit too prudish to sell the entire role her character implies, even if she’s supposed to be in the delusional stage during the movie. Marilyn would definitely have suggested more, … if they would have been able to drug her enough to make it through the filming that is.

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
  96. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Hydro

    Truman Capote’s first choice to play Holly Golightly was Marilyn Monroe but her acting coach objected to MM playing a prostitute and chose The Misfits instead.

    In 1961 Marilyn Monroe was too old. Audrey Hepburn was really too old as well. Monroe earlier in her career might have pulled it off.

    I can only feel a deep sense of regret as MM could have made BAT into an achingly deep and touching classic.

    Or it might have been a train wreck. Who knows? It might have been an exercise in misery. As it is BAT is a classic, but a classic of a different type.

    The problem with Holly is that there’s really nothing to admire about her. There’s nothing under the surface. A hooker hoping to land a rich guy. It’s the same with Paul. Dig beneath the surface of a guy like that and you’re not going to find anything. A male whore. So the light-hearted treatment that was adopted may have been the wisest course.

  97. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Alden

    Watched the 1975 version of Chandler’s Farewell My Lovely last night. It was in color and I loved it.

    It’s surprisingly good. Mitchum was too old but he makes it work – an ageing world-weary Marlowe.

    Of course it would have been even better in black-and-white!

    • Replies: @Alden
  98. chris says:
    @Mr. Hack

    yeah, definitely agree with that; if anyone could portray decadence, then it was definitely Tennese Williams, it takes one to know one I guess. And they made very accurate renditions of his most important plays or novels in the 1950s and 60s.

    . …and since everyone is mentioning their favorite movies, mine are: “8 1/2” and “The Loved One”

    • Replies: @Alden
  99. No film that I have seen shot in b/w ever looks good when colorized, and what it has done to documentaries is nearly tragic. In the case if all such films, it attempts to change space and time which simply destroys it reality by transforming all the context into something that simply did not exist.

    Colorizing also destroys the fine detail of black and white films and that is distracting. It does nothing in my view view to make events more real. Given the quality, colorizing nearly animates images.

    • Agree: utu
  100. Alden says:
    @syonredux

    Of course. It’s amazing what Jean Renoir could do with 30 seconds of railroad train wheels and film stock of a railroad station.

    I still prefer color. It is natural.

  101. AceDeuce says:
    @Priss Factor

    Mary Tyler Moore signed on to do a Broadway stint in a stage musical version of BAT, opposite Richard Chamberlain, in 1966. It was ripped to shreds by critics during the out of town preview shows, and never made it on Broadway for a single show. One of the biggest debacles of the modern American theater.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  102. AceDeuce says:
    @Prester John

    If you want a great version of Moon River, look no further than the version by the late great Nancy Lamott, who died far too young in the early 90s from cancer. She put out a fantastic tribute album to Johnny Mercer and his songs. I think her version of Moon River is on YouTube. Check it out.

  103. AceDeuce says:
    @syonredux

    It’s been a longtime (and true) cliche that screening films set in NYC from the beginning of the 60s, and then some from the end of the same decade, is a major shock to the system.

  104. @chris

    Audrey Hepburn said in some interview years later that she never thought she was right for the part.

    But that’s Hollywood, I guess. Anyway, she was luminous in the role and it has turned out to be one of the iconic performances and most-remembered movies of that period.

    She was very good in the thriller Charade with Cary Grant, and that has held up well. Personally, I have always liked her best in the 1967 film Two for the Road with Albert Finney. She was starting to show more acting chops by this point, but then she retired for a number of years to raise a family, and her comeback never quite took off.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Priss Factor
  105. Anonymous[427] • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    I heard Capote wasn’t pleased with Hepburn in the role and had in mind someone like Marilyn Monroe.

    Capote was a friend of MM and wanted her for the role but later came to understand Hepburn was the better choice on several levels.

    I don’t think the movie is “homosexual propaganda” at all, I think homos back then knew full well theirs was a sorry lot, I think it’s if anything a wistful longing for a sort of normalcy for people who would never truly be normal-normal, if you know what I mean.

    Genuinely normal people are not the stuff of fiction, nor usually (unless exceptional circumstances intervene) the stuff of written or storied nonfiction. You’re either really good, really bad or really different usually to be a character.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Priss Factor
  106. Steve2 says:
    @dfordoom

    Older B&W movies had clarity and depth/contrast.

    Also, think of early Macs and eye popping B&W screens.

    Technicolor was magnificent though.

  107. Bookish1 says:
    @Houston 1992

    It was over for america in 1945. We fought on the wrong side in ww2 and it was just a matter of time before the victorious bolsheviks would reap their harvest in the u. S.

  108. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    Birds was based on something that really happened in coastal Marin county near San Francisco Bodega Bay maybe?

    I couldn’t stand the Japanese clown in BAT. Probably because I grew up in San Francisco which had a big population of Chinese and Japanese ranging from Gold Rush Chinese and 1880s Japanese to newly arrived. Asian immigrants don’t behave that way.

    I knew that takes about 3 or 4 generations plus going to a White school and working with Whites, even just customers to melt the great Asian Stoneface.

    My biggest problem with AH movies are all those ancient wrinkled codgers who are her love interest. I believe Peppard was the only one not at least 25 years older.

  109. Alden says:
    @Buck Ransom

    I loved 2 for the Road. It was so realistic. Group of girls meets group of boys. One of the couples clicks and gets married.

    Then love and lust turns into LIFE. Career pregnancy diapers children housework child raising money money money household maintenance, squabbles about nothing.

    They didn’t have money problems but I think the husband strayed.

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
  110. Gast says:

    Is there anything more ridiculous than film buffs?

    “In the novel, Trawler is a known Nazi sympathizer who once proposed marriage to Unity Mitford.”

    So very subtle, Mr. Capote.

    Why follow the fiction by people who hate you?

  111. @Buck Ransom

    Audrey Hepburn said in some interview years later that she never thought she was right for the part.

    For the character in the book, true.

    But it doesn’t matter in the movie because it was meant as a star vehicle for Hepburn. So, it wasn’t so much a case of Hepburn adapting herself for the role as the role being adapted for Hepburn. A risky move, but it worked like a charm.
    The movie is less a faithful adaptation of the novella than a fanciful adoration of its free-spirited character. (LOLITA is another film that works despite drastic deviation from the source material.) Birdlike Hepburn made Holly extra-flighty and chirpy, and the movie’s success relies as much on her(and Mancini) as on Blake Edwards.
    Edwards makes a mess of the ‘auteur theory’. Though he had critical defenders, his career has seen more ups and downs than most ‘auteurs’. It’s hard to discern consistency. He could be brilliant or absolutely awful, and in his case, actors were the key.

    Another thing about Edwards is he had the same problem as Polanski. Libertine and anarchic, he had a tendency toward excess and vulgarity if given free rein. He could be very funny with such, as in 10 and the glow-in-dark condom scene in SKIN DEEP. And VICTOR/VICTORIA, which is genuinely funny. But such works leave a bad taste in the mouth because they are so shameless and gross in their scatology. The condom scene in SKIN DEEP is one of Edwards’ most uproarious moments, but who feels proud of having laughed at that Howard-Stern level joke?

    One wonders how BAT might have turned out had it been made in the 70s, 80s, or 90s. But because it was the early 60s, there was the balance of ‘innocence’ and raciness. It pushed boundaries but without falling over the cliff.

  112. Alden says:
    @chris

    Book The Loved One is better than the movie. Not E Waugh’s best even.

    Paraphrase of the first page.

    The 2 weary Englishmen posted to the far away desert met on the porch of their shabby bungalow for their usual 5:00 drinks.

    The dry palm fronds rustled in the wind. Insects chittered They were surrounded by the sun faded huts of the natives. They could hear the shrill cries of the brown skinned native mothers retrieving their children who’d played in the pond all day.

    It was 1940’s Los Angeles. The Englishmen weren’t colonial administrators. The brown skinned natives were just suntanned. The pond was the local Park and Rec swimming pool.

    Typical English total disdain for everything in America and Americans but hilarious. Waugh disdained everything in the U.K. as well.

    • Replies: @chris
  113. George Costanza had some interesting insights on this film.

  114. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Anonymous

    I don’t think the movie is “homosexual propaganda” at all, I think homos back then knew full well theirs was a sorry lot

    The movie isn’t, but the book definitely is.

    And by 1961 homosexuals were getting ready to launch a major offensive to normalise and promote their lifestyle. That year saw the release of the first major English-language homosexual propaganda movie, Victim. And it saw the release of the first Hollywood lesbian propaganda movie, The Children’s Hour. Which starred – Audrey Hepburn!

  115. @Alden

    Children? You mean no-neck monsters!

  116. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Alden

    Birds was based on something that really happened in coastal Marin county near San Francisco Bodega Bay maybe?

    It was based on a story by Daphne du Maurier, who of course wrote the source novel for another Hitchcock classic, Rebecca.

  117. @Alden

    Interiors! As in Woody Allen’s first “serious” film, ironically in color (sort of) though wanting to be black & white. The set design was by Joel Schumacher, of Batman infamy. Trevor Lynch should review this “Jew influenced by Bergman looks at WASPs” epic.

  118. @Prester John

    “No two songs could be more different than “Moon River” and “Born To Be Wild” by Steppenwolf but, in a way, they were both about the same things even though set in two different generations, if not worlds. A reminder that the more things change, the more they remain the same.”

    Well, that’s just brilliant.

  119. @Anonymous

    I don’t think the movie is “homosexual propaganda” at all, I think homos back then knew full well theirs was a sorry lot, I think it’s if anything a wistful longing for a sort of normalcy for people who would never truly be normal-normal, if you know what I mean.

    I don’t see that either. But I suppose it is suffused with a kind of ‘gay sensibility’, Capote being a homo and all. Homos are known to be birdy. One of the biggest homo movies is La Cage Aux Faux, remade into Birdcage with Robin Williams. Holly isn’t a homo, but ‘gay’ men might kind of identify with her, especially as homo men, like Holly, have hardly been known for settling down or fidelity. Precisely because it was risque to make movies about homos back then — ADVISE AND CONSENT was one of exceptions — , homos projected their own fantasies onto ‘normal’-seeming characters. But then, that’s what artists do. They channel their dreams and frustrations onto their characters. So, BAT is most certainly not a homo PROPAGANDA.

    Homo men have male aggressiveness but female narcissism and vanity. So, some of Capote’s own homo sensibility was prolly written into the character of Holly. She is a homo man’s female fantasy of what he wants to be. And homos are totally into fashion and decor, and BAT has plenty of that.

  120. For instance, Holly notes that José has a touch of black blood. But she doesn’t mind the prospect of having slightly “coony” babies as long as the father is rich and respected. (Eventually, they’ll come for Capote as well.)

    As the Proglob is all for race-mixing, esp between black men and white women, this would hardly put Capote in bad graces with current PC police.

  121. @Alden

    “My biggest problem with AH movies are all those ancient wrinkled codgers who are her love interest. I believe Peppard was the only one not at least 25 years older.”

    Alden: Yes, the age mismatch is jarring now to me. The most jarring films had her being the love interest of Gary Cooper. Rex Harrison , though, seemed more plausible.

    But who from her generation could she have been paired with who was a box office draw? in addition, was there not a trend of the older GI generation (19091-24) men from WW2 snatching the best Silent generation (1925-1942) women?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  122. @Alden

    Mitchum’s British, colour remakes are disparaged for obvious reasons but are actually pretty great. The way he finishes off Canino is what Bogart would have done but for the Hayes code.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  123. Alden says:
    @dfordoom

    We all have our preferences. One thing unacceptable in the movie was Charlotte Rampling wearing a dark Rust colored dress with a big pastel pure green jade necklace.

    Horrible horrible. Dress could have been any pastel or even navy or black but dark rust and pure pale green is just awful. Navy and any shade of dark blue is great with pure pale green if they wanted a dark colored dress. Shades of mud green are fine with dark rust. But jade isn’t mud green

    I thought it was originally B&W and the dark rust dress was just bad colorization. Then I saw 1975.

  124. @Alden

    Two for the Road is great. I have watched it too many times to keep count.
    Refresher synopsis for you: Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney are two bright young Brits who first encounter each other (but do not meet) on an English Channel ferry as it lands in France.

    The movie follows them over the course of the next 10 or 12 years of their life through all the kinds of events you describe. But the chronology ricochets all over the place, with a scene from Year 1 followed by a scene from year 7, then bouncing back to Year 4 on onto Year 8 before bouncing back to Year 1 — and on it goes for the duration of the film. An important detail is that all the action takes place on road trips they are taking through the villages and countryside of France. It was filmed in 1967, so it has the lightness and texture of France before the soixante-huitards starting fucking everything up.

    The disjointed chronology serves to heighten the contrast of who they were when they met versus who they become during their life together. The joy of their first years gives way to the inevitable marital friction, with betrayals and recrimination and reconciliation, and infidelity on both sides. But as luck and Hollywood would have it, they finally figure things out and we get a blissful happy ending as they prepare to cross the French border at Menton into Italy.

    The screen chemistry in this film is the real thing; the two stars apparently became involved during the filming and the connection shows on camera. The nature of the story gave Hepburn a chance to explore some emotions — anger, bitterness, jealousy — she had never shown onscreen before. I think it is her best work and a classic. Highly recommended if you haven’t seen it.

    • Disagree: Honesthughgrant
    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Priss Factor
  125. Two for the Road is great.

    Written by Frederic Raphael, the guy who worked on EYES WIDE SHUT.

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
  126. Angharad says:
    @fnn

    “Johnny Guitar” is hilarious!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  127. Lin says:
    @Kiel

    You forgot ‘slut’

    Being a slut(like Cleopatra) is not a trade.
    But a stud is, as in the movie(or the stud or it’s handler in a farm) : Holly to Paul:”$300, she is very generous.”

    • Replies: @Kiel
  128. @Jabby Dot

    Same with “North by Norhwest” and no, it’s never coming back.

  129. syonredux says:
    @James J. O'Meara

    Mitchum’s British, colour remakes are disparaged for obvious reasons but are actually pretty great. The way he finishes off Canino is what Bogart would have done but for the Hayes code.

    The Mitchum Farewell, My Lovely is OK. Mitchum was, of course, far too old (Why didn’t they cast him as Marlowe back in the ’50s? He would have been perfect), but at least the movie was set in the ’40s. Mitchum’s The Big Sleep was godawful. Marlowe belongs in LA, not London. Joan Collins was rather good as the trampy Agnes Lozelle, though.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  130. @dfordoom

    Capote celebrates the fact that his characters never grow up.

    If you say so. I say he laments this about his characters and this is the principal reason the book (unlike the film) is a tragedy.

  131. @Alden

    My biggest problem with AH movies are all those ancient wrinkled codgers who are her love interest. I believe Peppard was the only one not at least 25 years older.

    But Gregory Peck, 37 when he made ROMAN HOLIDAY, was no wrinkled old codger.

    She was with Anthony Perkins in GREEN MANSIONS, but Perkins was a homo.

    Peter O’Toole was still youngish when he made HOW TO STEAL A MILLION.

    Her most heartfelt role was probably for ROBIN AND MARION. Both 60s iccons had faded by then.

  132. @syonredux

    The Mitchum Farewell, My Lovely is OK. Mitchum was, of course, far too old (Why didn’t they cast him as Marlowe back in the ’50s?

    The great thing about Mitchum was he was always ‘too old’. He had that look on his face like ‘been there, done that’, a world-weary quality. In that sense, he was ageless.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  133. @Priss Factor

    Frederic Raphael wrote another 60s hit as well, Darling starring Julie Christie.

  134. Breakfast is a silly movie – its now watched only because Hepburn sings Moon river and is so cute.

    The book is full of fine writing, but doesn’t make much sense unless you realize everyone is actually Gay – and Holly (notice the double-gender name) and her “Husband” weren’t really married. The cat is the best actor in the movie.

    That Lynch feels the need to mount a tired attack on Mickey Rooney’s portrayal of a Japanese – in lockstep with a million SJW’s – is really sad.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  135. @Priss Factor

    1) Funny face? Hepburn wanted to dance with Astaire.
    2) Sabrina? That’s the play – old fart gets girl. But i agree that Bogart is too old.
    3) Roman Holiday? Yeah, would’ve been better with Newman or someone born in 1920s.
    4) My Fair Lady? Rex Harrison owned the part.
    5) Love in the Afternoon? Complete miscasting. Cooper way too old
    6) War and Peace? Total disaster. Henry Fonda – WTF!
    7) Charade? Actually works with Cary Grant. But that’s Cary Grant – 1 in a million.

    • Replies: @Alden
  136. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    The Mitchum Farewell, My Lovely is OK. Mitchum was, of course, far too old (Why didn’t they cast him as Marlowe back in the ’50s?

    The great thing about Mitchum was he was always ‘too old’. He had that look on his face like ‘been there, done that’, a world-weary quality. In that sense, he was ageless.

    There’s world-weary, and then there’s weary because you’re too old. So, Mitchum in Out of The Past was world-weary; in The Big Sleep, he needed a nice nap in a comfy chair.

    What was Mitchum’s last great performance? For my money, it was Eddie “Fingers” Coyle in The Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973). Top-notch New England crime picture.

  137. @Priss Factor

    Hepburn was 37 when she made Two for the Road with Albert Finney, who was
    close to 10 years younger. They seem roughly the same age in the film.

  138. MaryLS says:
    @Kent Nationalist

    What does that have to do with the Wizard of Oz? The Wizard is a fantastic American myth with multi-layers of meaning.

  139. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    Other than Peck, O’Toole and Perkins, her other love interests were wrinkled old codgers. Peck was born middle aged. He looked 45 to her 18-20 year old character. O’Toole was very wrinkled in How to Steal a Million. Probably b cause of his alcoholism.

    She was known for elderly love interests in her movies. Her husband was a few years younger.

  140. @Honesthughgrant

    That Lynch feels the need to mount a tired attack on Mickey Rooney’s portrayal of a Japanese – in lockstep with a million SJW’s – is really sad.

    Do most Justice Junkie types even know of the film? I think most of them are into video-games(or bitching about it), superhero movies, new Star Wars, and rap. I doubt if most of them even watch movies that are older than 20 yrs.

    Btw, PC isn’t about outrage about ALL peoples. Notice how Justice Junkies are mostly silent about the plight of Palestinians. And they are fully onboard with bashing Syrians and Russians. Of late, they only pretend to care about Kurds out of hatred for Trump. PC is about outrage over blacks, Jews, and homos/trannies. Making fun of other groups doesn’t really count.

  141. Alden says:
    @Buck Ransom

    I remember all that. And she had a very realistic ordinary wardrobe until her husband started making big money.

    Different from the usual Givenchy fashion show.

    Even with the dollar high against the franc; how could she have had the money to buy all those Paris designer clothes in Sabrina? That suit she wore on the day she came home Probably cost
    $2,000 in mid 50’s when $6,000 was a middle class yearly salary.

  142. @syonredux

    I haven’t seen BIG SLEEP with Mitchum(and don’t want to), but I thought he was pretty effective in FAREWELL MY LOVELY. Also, that period, from late 60s to mid 70s, was about neo-noirs. POINT BLANK, LONG GOODBYE, FAREWELL MY LOVELY, and CHINATOWN were trying to upend the genre. It was also the period of the Anti-Western.

    Old noir glazed style over grim reality. Neo-noir peeled off the style for a cruder look at reality.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  143. Alden says:
    @Honesthughgrant

    In War and Peace Natasha was about 14 when the movie began. Love in the Afternoon. In most of her movies she played a fabulously well dressed adult woman

    In Love in the Afternoon she played 18, 19 year old still living at home. She dressed like a 19 year old student living at home. Teen age hair style as well.

    Cooper was 69. But he was a sunbather for decades and looked older. Maybe that’s why Peck and a lot of the old actors wrinkled so early.

    Her movies made big profits. Audiences loved them.

    • Replies: @AceDeuce
  144. Alden says:

    Has the word Tiffany’s attracted any jewelry ADs on anyone else’s computer?

  145. @dfordoom

    Yes, of course. Celebrating this paean to hedonism as some apotheosis of good ol’ traditional-values America?

    These people on here are just clueless. Clueless. And that imbecile who wrote the article undoubtedly gets paid for it, too.

    People with lobotomies could write better, or at least more informed, articles.

    • Troll: Anonymousse
  146. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    I haven’t seen BIG SLEEP with Mitchum(and don’t want to), but I thought he was pretty effective in FAREWELL MY LOVELY.

    He’s better in Farewell than he is in The Big Sleep.

    Also, that period, from late 60s to mid 70s, was about neo-noirs. POINT BLANK, LONG GOODBYE, FAREWELL MY LOVELY, and CHINATOWN were trying to upend the genre.

    Were they trying to upend the genre with Farewell, My Lovely? As I recall, it seemed to be more of an exercise in genre nostalgia.

    Long Goodbye, though, was an attempt to upend the genre. The whole point of the movie is that Marlowe is out of place in ’70s SoCal. The film opens with Marlowe awakening from deep sleep, as though he’s been in hibernation since the ’40s, and he’s even called “Rip van Marlowe” at one point, further driving home the sense that this is not his proper time and place.

  147. Were they trying to upend the genre with Farewell, My Lovely? As I recall, it seemed to be more of an exercise in genre nostalgia.

    You’re right in some respects. But I thought the garish color remake with Mitchum was a lot grubbier and more sordid than past noir, not least because the Hays Code was history. It was more in-your-face, and Stallone added some lord-of-flatbush rawness to it.

    While noir was always seedy and disturbed, the element of style usually held throughout the film. But style seem to fall apart in color neo-noirs in the 60s and 70s. Polanski did something remarkable with CHINATOWN because the style is so assured and yet the film has so much of 70s street-style realism.

  148. anon19 says:
    @Ancient Briton

    At least it was safe sport. Before the Jamacian gangbangers did their nightly shootings like now.

  149. dfordoom says: • Website
    @houston 1992

    But who from her generation could she have been paired with who was a box office draw?

    There were plenty of male stars from her generation who were box office draws but they would have been entirely wrong as leading men for Audrey Hepburn. The previous generation of male stars were a much better fit for her.

    George Peppard on the other hand was almost exactly the same age as her. He was the right kind of male star for her because he was by 1961 standards a slightly old-fashioned kind of leading man.

  150. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Angharad

    “Johnny Guitar” is hilarious!

    Yes, it’s one of the great so-bad-it’s-good movies. Nicholas Ray made some amazingly bad movies. Party Girl is a classic stinker despite a very good performance by the underrated Robert Taylor.

    • Replies: @Angharad
  151. @Buck Ransom

    Two for the Road is great.

    It’s decent movie but could have been much better. Its European art-house mannerisms are most annoying, and there are too many caricatures, especially the intellectual couple with the bratty daughter. Also, Albert Finney’s character is so unlikable that it’s rather saddening to see Hepburn shack up with him.

    It’s a Hollywood movie draped in trendy Euro-artiness and gliding on chic, and it all seems artificial and contrived, a patchwork of stylistics than a whole cloth. Nichols did it much better with THE GRADUATE where the Europeanism and Hollywoodism were matched seamlessly, creating, at least for awhile, a new hybrid cinematic language that paved the way for MIDNIGHT COWBOY, HAROLD AND MAUDE, and MCCABE AND MRS MILLER.

    I suppose one could argue that the artifice was intended, that the story is about two young people who met and fell in love but whose later neo-bourgeois incarnations became infused with airs of status and faux-sophistication. And yet, the sadness is they can’t regain what was lost. Too distant and too simple, and too painful. They can’t go home again, just like Lancaster character in THE SWIMMER.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  152. Just watched WWII in HD the coloring was irritating all the way through. Sure some footage at the time was color, but most was not —

    No other way for me to say it — distracting

  153. @Jabby Dot

    At this point, I’d settle for the NYC of the 1990s. Oddly enough, one of my early NYC jobs was in one of the towers in Rock City, and it looked like something straight out of Mad Men. I even had a sofa in my office, but unfortunately no bar. I worked for a division head who’d take me out for Three-Martini lunches. Ah, I can only dream of what it would have been like to be a white male junior executive in the NYC of the 1960s.

  154. swamped says:

    “Watch it as nostalgic, escapist entertainment—a mid-century American time capsule”…just like this review which hardly seems necessary anymore after almost sixty years. “I’m betting you’ll want to re-watch it as a character study that even manages to have a ‘message’—and a wholesome one at that”…don’t bet the farm, there’s nothing “wholesome” about whores, even middle-class ones; and New York City is about as un-wholesome a place as you could imagine, even pre-DeBlasio. A vicious, besotted, sinkhole that has never been anything much to nostalgize. It hardly “communicates the joys and follies of youth in America at its peak” to most real Americans in the hinterland who don’t have much sentimental feelings for NYC decadence. Besides, that wispy aristocrat, Audrey Hepburn isn’t even American! “[T]he necessity of finally growing up and actually taking a stand, of actually being someone”…is actually left undefined. Another film that came out the same year, 1961, ‘Poor White Trash’, directed by Harold Daniels & starring Peter Graves & Lita Milan, is probably closer to a mid-century time capsule for many Americans, at least in flyover country.

  155. Pericles says:
    @Priss Factor

    I heard Capote wasn’t pleased with Hepburn in the role and had in mind someone like Marilyn Monroe.

    It appears he and Marilyn were friends or at least comrades in arms. Have a look at this, some similarities to BAT right?

    What was [Marilyn] like backstage? (in Goffman’s sense, not just in the movie world) Our best glimpse into that side of her life is an account by Truman Capote of an afternoon he spent with her in April 1955. They are at a funeral parlor in New York, a memorial for a grand old lady of the theatre who had been something of a mentor to Marilyn. As usual, Marilyn is very late. When she arrives in the entry hall, she explains she couldn’t decide what to wear—was it proper to wear eyelashes and lipstick? She had to wash it all off. What she decided to wear was a black scarf to hide her hair, a long shapeless black gown, black stockings, combined with erotic high heels and owlish sunglasses. She is gnawing at her fingernails, as she often did.

    Marilyn: “I’m so jumpy. Where’s the john? If I could just pop in there for a minute–”

    Capote: “And pop a pill? No! Shhh. […They’ve] started the eulogy.”

    They sit in the last row through the speeches. After it’s over, Marilyn refuses to leave.

    Marilyn: “I don’t want to have to talk to anybody. I never know what to say.”

    Capote: “Then you sit here, and I’ll wait outside. I’ve got to have a cigarette.”

    Marilyn: “You can’t leave me alone! My God! Smoke here.”

    Capote: “Here? In the chapel?”

    Marilyn: “Why not? What do you want to smoke? A reefer?”

    Capote: “Very funny. Come on, let’s go.”

    Marilyn: “Please. There’s a lot of shutterbugs downstairs. And I certainly don’t want them taking my picture looking like this.” … “Actually, I could’ve worn makeup. I see all these other people were wearing makeup.”

    Capote: “I am. Gobs.”

    Marilyn: “Seriously, though. It’s my hair. I need color. And I didn’t have time to get any. It was so unexpected. Miss Collier dying and all. See?” She displays, under her scarf, a dark line at her hair part.

    Capote: “Poor innocent me. And all this time I thought you were a bona-fide blonde.”

    Marilyn: “I am. But nobody’s that natural. And incidentally, fuck you.”

    (The banter goes on from there.)

    http://sociological-eye.blogspot.com/2019/07/marilyn-monroes-networks-pulled-her.html

    So she seems like a very natural choice, possibly even being the muse of Capote’s book. On the other hand, perhaps big, brash show girl Marilyn wouldn’t have come across as sympathetic as the gracile Audrey on the screen.

    • Replies: @Spike
  156. Pericles says:
    @Priss Factor

    All about power, privilege, money, status. All about money and status.

    Even if the newlyweds page of the New York Times apparently has the unofficial name of Mergers & Acquisitions, I still think whoring is considered transactional on a level beyond that. Well, perhaps not in New York?

  157. @The Alarmist

    Interesting that the period of the “three martini lunch” (along with “sexual harassment”) coincided with America’s industrial domination of the world. Execs seemed able to operate quite well on three martinis. (As did Brits on their comparable “nips out to the pub”, so it’s not just America as the only WWII winner). Then that moralizing bastard Carter declared jihad on it, along with gasoline and central heating. Now it’s all protein shakes and yoga classes, and the economy is in the dumpster. Funny how that works.

    One thing, though, is that the martinis of the day were served in very small glasses; when Cary Grant picks up his gibson (gimlet?) in NbyNW it disappears behind his fist. At some point in the 90s, during the “bachelor pad” revival, the glasses and consequently alcohol amounts became gigantic, part of the whole “supersize” trick (extra amounts added to an already inflated price give the illusion of getting “something extra” for the high price).

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    , @dfordoom
  158. @dfordoom

    Possible Hepburn age appropriate leading men:

    Redford, O’Toole, Connery, Eastwood, Caine, Beatty, McQueen, Garner, Rock Hudson, Heston, Newman, Brando, Richard Burton, Clift Robertson, Beatty, Montgomery Clift, William Holden.

    The problem is that most of the good leading men born in the late 1920s and 1930’s didn’t become stars till the 1960s. That’s why the number of leading actors who could’ve hooked up with Hepburn in the 1950’s was fairly small – and most were too old. Back in those days, most male actors didn’t become stars until they’re around 30 – and Hepburn was 24 when she made “Roman Holiday”. BTW, Finney is much younger than she is, but looks the same age. Too bad he ruins “Two for the Road” with his lack of charm.

  159. @dfordoom

    so an older GI generation leading man was needed for the younger Silent (1925-42) actress?

  160. @Ian Smith

    Cinematic justice remains to be done for Das Gedulige Fleisch, as it was titled in the original German. I don’t think Sam Peckinpah had the ability to understand the subtlety of the novel and casting James Coburn as Rolf Steiner was a mistake; Coburn was just too American to ever convince anyone that he was a German non-commissioned officer. I doubt, however, that any German director would want to touch it, even 75 years after WWII.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  161. @James J. O'Meara

    As did Brits on their comparable “nips out to the pub”, so it’s not just America as the only WWII winner.

    On my first assignment to London in the ’90s, I was surprised how hammered my colleagues got at lunch, and even more surprised at how brazenly otherwise co-workers openly snogged with persons not their spouse. I still see that at some evening events around Christmas. This probably explains why the City of London still dominates in finance despite the best efforts of NYC to try to unseat them.

    Then that moralizing bastard Carter declared jihad on it, along with gasoline and central heating. Now it’s all protein shakes and yoga classes, and the economy is in the dumpster.

    In NYC in the ’90s, hookers and blow were often on offer to clients, and our female colleagues were not at all shy about joining us and the clients at Scores. Client gifts were also very generous, as well as trips and other entertainment. The industry started cracking down on that in the mid ’00s, which obviously ushered in the Global Financial Crisis from which the world has never quite recovered.

    One thing, though, is that the martinis of the day were served in very small glasses….

    Sure, in the movies. My grand-dad proudly told us he only had one cocktail a day, but it was a 20oz. tumbler glass with a Manhattan; he was not alone at the club in that indulgence.

  162. @Diversity Heretic

    I doubt, however, that any German director would want to touch it, even 75 years after WWII.

    But Germans did make STALINGRAD, DAS BOOT, and DOWNFALL that humanized the Wehrmacht and even Nazi leadership. Not glorified but still presented as all-too-human.

    Peckinpah’s CROSS OF IRON has to be taken for what it’s worth. An international production like BRIDGE TOO FAR. I think it was the success of DIRTY DOZEN and PATTON that paved the way for other WWII movies in the 70s. Peckinpah meets WWII, it sounded too good to pass up.

    The problem isn’t simply with Coburn. James Mason is far too British to come across as a German officer. Also, Peckinpah’s style of action is too intense and spectacular for an anti-war movie.

    But if you accept it for what it, an international production and Coburn star vehicle, and Peckinpah’s opportunity to blow stuff up, it’s a pretty good show. I prefer it to BIG RED ONE.

  163. chris says:
    @Alden

    Thanks, Alden, I did read almost all of Whaugh’s books (except for Brideshead) and fount them absolutely excellent. I also agree that The Loved One does lose a little bit of its dimensions in its movie adaptation, but the cast makes up for that and I don’t think it would be easy to improve on it either.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  164. AceDeuce says:
    @Alden

    Love in the Afternoon, released in 1957, was filmed in 1956. Cooper was 55 when filming the movie. He never made it to 69, or even close. He died in 1961, a few days after he turned 60.

    • Replies: @Alden
  165. kikz says:
    @Zelda

    …you forgot Southerners…

  166. Alden says:
    @The Alarmist

    You’d have been married with a house in the suburbs and first baby on the way by the time you were 27 if you had a good job.

    Most companies encouraged early marriage for young executives with not so subtle hints. So did families and friends. Often you’d see a group of 5 friends all get married within 18 months.

    Things changed abruptly by 69,70.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  167. Alden says:
    @AceDeuce

    I thought he was 69. Whatever, he looked a sunbaked 75. Not a love interest for a 19 year old student living at home. And she stalked him

    • Replies: @anon
    , @AceDeuce
  168. Spike says:
    @Pericles

    Reading this article inspired me to look up Capote and I came across a documentary that said his mother was the inspiration for Holly. She was whoring herself out in the 1920’s getting picked up and dropped off in the South and disappearing for months to sell herself in New York while leaving Capote to be raised by his country relatives. Hmmm…the roaring 20’s, feminism, flappers, shorter dresses, the automobile…technology meets liberalism meets feminism meets hyper-materialism all promoted by the media. This crap started 100 years ago. Now it’s liberal feminism, tattoos, mini skirts and stripper heels, airplanes and Instagram, all promoted by… the media. Of course, we now have a much more “diverse” selection of these women in greater numbers than ever before. Today, white Holly Golightly has been replaced by brown Cardi B and a million other low IQ brownies just like her.

  169. Spike says:
    @The Germ Theory of Disease

    Lol. The same thing happened to me with Chariots of Fire when I was a kid. I was into sci-fi and fantasy (still am) and thought it was going to be an epic fantasy story with actual chariots on fire and monsters and humans battling in some ancient Roman fantasy world. Boy was I wrong. As the movie was playing I remember feeling stupid and angry for not asking my father what the movie was going to be about.

  170. dfordoom says: • Website
    @James J. O'Meara

    Interesting that the period of the “three martini lunch” (along with “sexual harassment”) coincided with America’s industrial domination of the world. Execs seemed able to operate quite well on three martinis.

    Execs were able to operate quite well on three martinis, and lots of cigarettes. And steaks. Alcohol plus nicotine plus meat-eating equals rapid technological and economic progress.

    Today we operate on salads and antidepressants and weed, so we have technological stagnation and economic bubbles.

    • LOL: The Alarmist
  171. dfordoom says: • Website
    @chris

    Thanks, Alden, I did read almost all of Whaugh’s books (except for Brideshead) and fount them absolutely excellent.

    He was absolutely on fire in the 1930s. Vile Bodies, Black Mischief, Scoop – magnificent stuff.

    • Replies: @chris
  172. Thanks for the review. This film was on my bucket list and your review motivated me to finally watch this great film.
    Audrey Hepburn has charmed me to death.
    However…the part at the end where she released the Cat made me lose a lot of sympathy for Holly. Of course we knew all along that they would get the Cat back. It was as if the Cat was a metaphor for her lack of commitment or belief in something tangible. I gotta read the novel though. Things change so much in the screenplay.
    Perhaps Capote’s original preference of Marilyn for Holly would have been more credible. Hepburn had just too much class to have credibility as a hillbilly gone to New York.
    Holly was definitely not marriage material.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  173. Kiel says:
    @Lin

    “Being a slut(like Cleopatra) is not a trade.”

    Nonsense, most women practice hypergamy, which is the formal name for the slutty behavior of trading-often, without emotion or compunction, and most importantly . . . trading-up.

    Use, Use-Up, Discard, Rinse and Repeat!

    It’s a business in a very real sense, with definitive tangible rewards if done right.

    And ole’ Cleopatra, having reached the pinnacle that few will ever reach, traded her ‘charms’ for her life.

    • Replies: @Alden
  174. Patricia Neal (who once played opposite a certain Ellsworth Toohey in King Vidor’s film of Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead)

    No, she played opposite Howard Roark (played by Gary Cooper). On IMDB’s cast page, Toohey is listed fifth.

    Sorry to pick nits, but I don’t have anything to say about Breakfast At Tiffany’s, never having seen it.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  175. dfordoom says: • Website
    @SonOfFrankenstein

    It was as if the Cat was a metaphor for her lack of commitment or belief in something tangible.

    The cat is the key to the story. In the book she releases the cat (it’s been a long long time since I read it but I seem to remember that it’s more a case of her chasing the cat away than releasing him) because cats are free spirits and they don’t belong to anyone.

    In the movie Holly has learnt enough to realise her mistake and to realise that this is adolescent nonsense. Everybody wants to belong to somebody. Including cats. Even owning a pet requires accepting responsibility, it requires a commitment. And it’s a commitment that benefits both the pet and the owner. Even the cat, in his cat way, understands this. They don’t have much trouble finding him because he’s not stupid. It will soon be dinnertime.

    Interestingly enough in the book there’s a suggestion that the cat is smarter than Holly and what’s-his-face (which admittedly is not too difficult). He finds someone else who will accept a commitment. He’ll be fine because he’s a cat and he doesn’t give a damn about freedom. He wants regular meals, affection and a nice comfy place to sleep. It’s as if Capote had his doubts about the benefits of freedom.

    The final scene with the cat in the book (long after Holly releases him) is extremely significant and is often overlooked or misunderstood. The cat is in the story for a reason.

    The final scene with the cat in the movie is not sentimentality. If they hadn’t looked for the cat then it would have been a sign that they were not ready for grown-up commitments. Again, the cat is in the story for a reason.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  176. @Alden

    You’d have been married with a house in the suburbs and first baby on the way by the time you were 27 if you had a good job.

    You forgot the part where I’d have a small Pied-à-terre in the City for my girl on the side.

    • Replies: @Alden
  177. anon[142] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alden

    Sunbathing massively boosts testosterone levels in men, it doesn’t do women any harm, either.

    • Replies: @Alden
  178. anon[346] • Disclaimer says:

    In Casino Royale, when Bond gives his famous drink recipe, he says something like “I only have one drink before dinner, but it must be very large, very cold and very good.”

  179. @dfordoom

    In the movie Holly has learnt enough to realise her mistake and to realise that this is adolescent nonsense. Everybody wants to belong to somebody. Including cats.

    Still, part of her appeal is that she is a ‘wild thing’ and free spirit. It’s a paradox. That free quality draws men to her, but men drawn to her wants to own her and ‘put her in a cage’.

    Same goes the dynamics in MARNIE where Sean Connery gets excitement in playing the hunter with Tippi Hedren as the game.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  180. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Priss Factor

    Still, part of her appeal is that she is a ‘wild thing’ and free spirit. It’s a paradox. That free quality draws men to her, but men drawn to her wants to own her and ‘put her in a cage’.

    Yes. Life is compromise. You hope you can find somebody to whom you can belong without feeling that you’re in a cage. Growing up means that you realise that that is your best chance of happiness. Holly isn’t going to find that kind of man if she continues being a whore. In fact being a whore will eventually put her in a worse cage.

    She gambles that Paul is the right type of man. He’s probably as good as she’s going to get.

    Same goes the dynamics in MARNIE where Sean Connery gets excitement in playing the hunter with Tippi Hedren as the game.

    Now there’s a movie worth reviewing. Not one of Hitchcock’s best but definitely extremely interesting.

    Even more interesting would be a comparison with Winston Graham’s novel. As with BAT the differences between novel and film are illuminating.

    • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
  181. @Priss Factor

    Excellent and accurate comment about Mike Nichols’ amazing The Graduate (1967), and its influence on American cinema in the 1970s. In my view there is a direct link between Nichols’ film and Bob Rafelson’s Five Easy Pieces (1970). Thematically, both films center on alienation.

    • Replies: @Alden
  182. @syonredux

    I’ve watched The Friends of Eddie Coyle (1973) numerous times. It somewhat resembles The Maltese Falcon (1941) in that it mainly consists of interior scenes heavy in dialog between cops and crooks and crooks and crooks. Wonderful dialog.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  183. @dfordoom

    “Not one of Hitchcock’s best but definitely extremely interesting.”

    The backstage drama behind Marnie (1964) is interesting. Tippi Hedren became the target of Hitchcock’s obsession in The Birds (1963), and then a victim of his psychological torture in Marnie. Strangely, or obviously, this abuse served the storyline of both films.

    • Replies: @Alden
  184. Alden says:
    @Kiel

    Being born heir to the throne of the Pharaohs, Cleopatra reached the pinnacle before she met up with Caesar and Antony. Direct descendant of Phillip of Macedonia and Alexander’s brother and sister, she was far and above those 2. Egypt was wealthier than Rome and all of Italy in her time.

    Another misogynistic woman hating sad old celibate bachelor heard from. The fact that you had to back more than 2,000 years to cite Cleopatra shows there’s no women in your life.

    • Replies: @byrresheim
    , @Kiel
  185. @SunBakedSuburb

    The Departed and Black Mass really did not convey the actual Irish mafia like Mitchum. He was the real deal. You believed him as a weary criminal.

  186. Alden says:
    @SunBakedSuburb

    I didn’t like The Graduate at all. Typical Jewish sneering at White Christians and the world we built. And leaving a handsome blond at the altar for a short ugly, sexually repulsive Jew?? Yuck

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @chris
    , @Anon
  187. Liza says:

    America “at its peak” would never have produced people like Holly or Paul or most of the others. (Holly’s husband may be an exception.)

    That beautiful surroundings and superficially beautiful and rich white people indicate greatness in a country is the attitude that got us to where we are today.

    This story is about America tottering and staggering, with two people unexpectedly, miraculously, setting themselves right. Maybe the book intended that we should come to this conclusion, I don’t know.

  188. @Alden

    I didn’t like The Graduate at all.

    One thing I don’t like about THE GRADUATE is making Mr. Robinson out to be a bad guy at the end. He has reason to be upset. In the novel, it’s Ben’s father who visits him at Berkeley. Still, the scene works, and Norman Fell’s reaction to the outburst is a riot.

    To be fair to the movie, Ben is no knight in shining armor. He is often something of a jerk.
    We root for him because his passion is real.

    And Hoffman in 67, though no ladykiller, had youth and spirit.

  189. America “at its peak” would never have produced people like Holly or Paul or most of the others. (Holly’s husband may be an exception.)

    There are a lot of people in a civilization, and every civilization, at its peak or not, produces people like that.

    Also, times of great wealth means more fun and hedonism, and that means decadence.

  190. AceDeuce says:
    @Alden

    It was widely commented in old Hollywood that Coop was hung like a Louisville Slugger. That plus lotsa $$ and being a top dog in Hollywood…..he got more ass than a toilet seat at the bus station.

  191. Alden says:
    @anon

    I have nothing against sunbathing, old men, alcoholics and druggies.

    But all those wrinkled oldsters like DeNiro etc just look bad on screen. For the last 40 years nostril shots or Extreme Close UPs have been the fashion in cinema photography. Not even the entire face, just mouth, nose and eyes, not even chin and forehead. It’s supposed to give audiences a sense of intimacy with the character and action.

    One wonders why they even bother with sets and locations. Just the middle parts of faces. The least the DP could use long and medium shots for the elderly. But ECUs are in style.

    55 year old appearing Susan Sarandon as mother of a 5 year old is bad. But at least with cosmetic surgery and long shots instead of continual close ups, she passed for a mid 40s plausible mother of a 5 year old.

  192. Alden says:
    @The Alarmist

    Should have mentioned a major reason for early marriage. The Draft!!!! With Vietnam heating up, many college seniors made sure to get married as soon as they graduated and the student exemption ended. The draft also encouraged many men to go to grad school to extend the student exemption.

    And yes, you’d probably have a girl in the city. I remember so many of my parents friends got divorced when the youngest finished high school.
    Reason was usually the husband and his secretary had a long term relationship.

  193. Alden says:
    @SunBakedSuburb

    The first and second scene in Marnie are some of the best ever. It’s a factory, the Friday morning before the long holiday weekend. Factory closes at noon so everyone can get a start on the weekend

    Miss Perfect Secretary volunteers to stay till 5 to answer the phones. It’s long before voicemail. She goes out to her car, gets a suitcase, opens the safe, takes out thousands and drives away with a smile on her face.

    Next scene, a bed in a hotel room. She tosses about a dozen IDs and social security cards in different names on the bed.

    All time favorite is the opening scene of Rob Roy. Rob and his crew of rieviers chasing down a crew of cattle rustlers on foot. Beautifully done.

  194. “Nah, Blacks used to get a kick out of Stepin Fetchit, Amos n’ Andy, and minstrel shows. It was only when (((certain people))) informed us all that such portrayals are racist that they soured and became angry about it.”

    If i were you I would do some reading about how the roles of Amos an Andy were viewed by blacks then, forward. Or you might want to spend some time talking to blacks who are film historians. One of the great follies of contemporary society is that blacks needs whites to comprehend social constructions and meanings for their lives. Whether it ‘s Amos n Andy, Stepin Fetchit or Rochester . . .

    And these characters and caricatures were popular among whites. By the 1950’s blacks began to challenge the motifs which they believed whites saw as the embodiment of black citizens as opposed the entertainment modes in the likes of Laurel and Hardy, Buster Keaton and other entertainment tropes of comedy.

  195. “Nah, Blacks used to get a kick out of Stepin Fetchit, Amos n’ Andy, and minstrel shows. It was only when (((certain people))) informed us all that such portrayals are racist that they soured and became angry about it.”

    Ironically, Jews played a huge role in blackface and minstrel shows. And Fetchit was a Hollywood product. Hollywood wasn’t controlled by Eskimos.

  196. @Liza

    America “at its peak” would never have produced people like Holly or Paul or most of the others. (Holly’s husband may be an exception.)

    That beautiful surroundings and superficially beautiful and rich white people indicate greatness in a country is the attitude that got us to where we are today.

    Not quite. This is the type of behavior one sees in naturalist or satirical novels by Theodore Dreiser & Sinclair Lewis, covering period from 1890 to 1920, approximately.

    • Replies: @Liza
  197. @Liza

    America “at its peak” would never have produced people like Holly or Paul or most of the others. (Holly’s husband may be an exception.)

    Don’t make the mistake of assuming NYC and its denizens are part of America. I have said to many that living in NYC for more than a few years made it easy to leave America altogether.

    • Agree: Liza
  198. @Alden

    Now, if you could cut out the ugly ad hominems, one might find some merit to your argument.

    What is wrong with you that you have to resort to ugliness instead of relying on your command of facts?

    • Replies: @Alden
  199. @Rex Little

    No, she played opposite Howard Roark (played by Gary Cooper). On IMDB’s cast page, Toohey is listed fifth.

    Right, she was in opposition to Toohey but played opposite Cooper.
    Interesting that she’s referred to as 2E in BAT. Was that an allusion to Toohey?

  200. @The Alarmist

    I saw some of it in 1960, aged 12. My uncle was a Senior VP at American Express, and he was 40. If he hadn’t had a heart problem just a year later he would have been its youngest ever President. He did recover though, and went on to be the President and CEO of another company, a job which made him famous.

    Anyway, here is what life for a young (if not perhaps junior) executive right in the middle of Manhattan was like (apart of course from the actual business side of it, which I knew – and know – nothing about): a large house in Locust Valley on two acres, two servants, and a nanny for the younger of the five children; membership of a city club (mostly used for those bibulous lunches) and a country club, used much more often, and intensively by the wife and children, the locus of every activity not centred on the home; summers at places like Point O’Woods on Fire Island; frequent trips abroad, mostly London and occasionally Paris, and to the West Coast, where the family had close connections to precisely that old European Hollywood set which gave its inspiration to films like the one we are discussing here; prep schools for the children, where some did rather better than others, causing maternal angst and paternal indifference; oh, and a bit later, when most everybody had decided that the weather on the West Coast was just too good to ignore any longer, a pied-a-terre in the Ritz Tower, just to show that they were still around, and not ready to be forgotten .

    It was decorative, spacious, and picturesque, but, as the “heart problem” hints, it was by no means always easy.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  201. chris says:
    @dfordoom

    Funnily enough I just recently saw the movie “Downton Abbey” which just reminded me of how much I miss Waugh and for that matter Chesterton and Wodehouse and that entire generation also. In his pinky, as they say, Waugh had more talent then the author of this claptrap of a movie.

    “Abby” being a curtain call for British fossils to sacrifice ‘glory’ of their Victorian age, in order to persuade the current generation of British aristocracy afictionados to forsake their meager trove of values without even being properly entertained for their effort. Especially annoying being the oh so modern progressive personalities and the now ubiquitous “gay” scenes, directly aimed at undermining the remaining vestige of moral anchors left in their society. I wish that society a good parting and may the royal doorknob not hit them in the arse.

  202. chris says:
    @Alden

    Dustin’s subsequent and very credible accusations of being (and having been) a complete creep, doesn’t exactly help the cartoonish moral tale of the Graduate from aging any better than he himself did.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @Alden
  203. Liza says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Bardon, it’s not Dreiser or Lewis who are representing the events & conditions in the book and movie as being America “at its peak” (1940s in the book and 1960 in the film). It is the reviewer, Trevor Lynch, who believes this. I find that a bit shocking that he would think so; he seems to be a pretty smart reviewer in general.

    It communicates the joys and follies of youth in America at its peak—an age of seemingly infinite potential

    Arty, good looking white people; stylish clothes; fine buildings. Is that all there is? Nothing seething beneath the surface calling for justice; no ugliness infecting the culture? I am not surprised this book was written by a homosexual. Whoever coined the phrase “deeply superficial” must’ve had this film in mind. I saw it a couple of decades ago and just hated it, though I could not have articulated exactly why at the time.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @6dust6
  204. @Liza

    From end of WWII to the mid 60s, most Americans never had it so good. It was a time when the majority of Americans could claim to be Middle Class.
    But 60s excesses with youth culture & drugs, race riots, Vietnam War, immigration act, and etc. led to the slash and burn America that we know today.

    But you’re right. The seeds of destruction were already there sprouting before the 60s really happened.

  205. @chris

    Most people in arts and movie industry are creeps. Talent is what matters, and Hoffman was perfect for THE GRADUATE. Just the right mix of gloom and gleam.

    • Replies: @chris
  206. @Priss Factor

    Yeah, you can see the decline in Literature during the late 50s and 60s as Hemingway, Faulkner, Steinbeck, O’hara, TS eliot, saul Bellow, etc. faded from the scene and were replaced by vidal, Alan Ginsberg, Updike, Vonnnegut, mailer, et. al. All inferior and 2nd rate.

    The Rot in movies in the early to mid 60s was covered up by Hollywood filming a bunch of action movies, war movies, 50’s Hollywood musicals, and stuffy English drama’s like “Man for All seasons”.

    By the end of the 60s’ Hair had replaced Singing in the Rain, The wild bunch had replaced Shane, and Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolff had replaced All about Eve. Brando had gone from “On the waterfront” to “Burn” and “Reflections in a Golden Eye”.

    Someone wrote a doggerel about the decline:

    From FDR to Nixon,
    From The Wizard of oz to The Wiz,
    You wouldn’t believe it possible,
    But ‘Tis.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Priss Factor
  207. Alden says:
    @byrresheim

    Why do you have to attack the sex life of the Queen of a country greater than Rome at the time whose people considered her to be a God??

    Why not attack the adulterers Cesare and Marc Antony who were married? Cleopatra was single and didn’t betray a husband as those two betrayed a wife. Shouldn’t a great moralist thinker such as yourself condemn adultery?

    And as Queen and Chief God of Egypt, she was far, far wealthier and more royal than they were.
    They were the gold diggers. She was not.

    Stop insulting women and I won’t insult you anymore.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  208. Alden says:
    @Honesthughgrant

    Logline Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolfe

    2 drunks yell for hours. 2 fools stay and watch instead of going home.

    Virginia Wolfe was the first lol intellectual movie I ever saw. Turned me against prestige intellectual movies forever. I tried to read 2 Virginia Wolfe books. Couldn’t get past the first 20 pages.

    She, her siblings and half sibs were one sick sick crew. Not just incest, but bisexual incest. They started on Virginia when she was two. They brought their spouses into it too. Parents both insane. Mother claimed to have God given healing powers. She’d visit sick people and lay hands on them.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  209. Alden says:
    @chris

    I just thought it was awful awful. But then, I despise prestige intellectual movies.

  210. @Honesthughgrant

    Yeah, you can see the decline in Literature during the late 50s and 60s as Hemingway, Faulkner, Steinbeck, O’hara, TS eliot, saul Bellow, etc. faded from the scene and were replaced by vidal, Alan Ginsberg, Updike, Vonnnegut, mailer, et. al. All inferior and 2nd rate.

    Bellow reached his peak in the 60s and 70s.

    Hemingway introduced a direct journalistic style of writing, but his legendary status owes much to his persona. It’s difficult to take anything by him as Great Literature now.
    Steinbeck was a fine storyteller but entirely conventional.

    Mailer was often crude and vulgar but he was a great writer. Vonnegut was brilliant with ideas. Philip Roth is another great. Don Delillo has a remarkable way with words. I don’t think literature, by and large, got worse from 60s to 90s, but the culture generally became less literary. But if there were fine new novelists, poetry really went to shit.

    The Rot in movies in the early to mid 60s was covered up by Hollywood filming a bunch of action movies, war movies, 50’s Hollywood musicals, and stuffy English drama’s like “Man for All seasons”.

    This owed less to cultural decadence than the threats faced by the old studio system. Having lost their monopoly over movie theaters and faced with competition from TV, Hollywood had rough going for awhile, especially as it was still run by old-fashioned people of the Big Studio era. There was a fresh and interesting movement in America from late 60s to mid 70s, but it faded due to ‘auteur’ self-indulgence and rise of Lucas and Spielberg.

    By the end of the 60s’ Hair had replaced Singing in the Rain, The wild bunch had replaced Shane, and Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wolff had replaced All about Eve. Brando had gone from “On the waterfront” to “Burn” and “Reflections in a Golden Eye”.

    I love SHANE but WILD BUNCH is one of the greatest films. Dangerous and disturbing, even somewhat sick, but a powerful work. SINGIN’ IN THE RAIN is great but it’s just about the only musical that I like. Old fashioned musicals were made in the 60s, but I can do without SOUND OF MUSIC and PAINT YOUR WAGON. I have a soft spot for SCROOGE with Albert Finney though.

    I don’t care for REFLECTIONS IN A GOLDEN EYE but I’ll take BURN over WATERFRONT.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  211. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    Hemingway introduced a direct journalistic style of writing,

    That’s putting it a tad too mildly. Hemingway’s impact on English prose in the ’20s and ’30s was enormous. You can even find traces of his influence in antithetical spirits like Evelyn Waugh.

    but his legendary status owes much to his persona. It’s difficult to take anything by him as Great Literature now.

    Have to disagree. Hemingway produced a good amount of rubbish, but the best of his work endures as G.L.: The Sun Also Rises, A Farewell to Arms, “The Snows of Kilimanjaro,” “Big Two-Hearted River,” “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place,” etc. Mind you, I’m saying this as someone who doesn’t particularly like EH’s style (I prefer Faulkner and Fitzgerald to Ernie).

    Steinbeck was a fine storyteller but entirely conventional.

    He was pure crap.Nothing of his work deserves survival.

    I love SHANE but WILD BUNCH is one of the greatest films. Dangerous and disturbing, even somewhat sick, but a powerful work.

    Completely agree on WB. A tremendously powerful but nihilistic work of art. Loyalty is about the only virtue that the film seems to endorse. It’s curious, though. Along with much else, WB is a kind of war film. Indeed, it might be the best American movie about WWI…..But Peckinpah’s actual war movie (Cross of Iron) ended up being quite mediocre….

    Mailer was often crude and vulgar but he was a great writer.

    Another writer who was massively influenced by Hemingway.I like The Executioner’s Song , but that’s just about the only work of Normie’s fiction that I enjoy.

  212. syonredux says:
    @syonredux

    I like The Executioner’s Song , but that’s just about the only work of Normie’s fiction that I enjoy.

    And, yes, I know that Song is technically non-fiction.

  213. I was in the Danger Zone last weekend.
    It’s like the Twilight Zone, but scarier.
    Your money, your health, and your sanity are all at risk.
    I escaped the Danger Zone by the skin of my teeth.

    Now how do I get back into it?

  214. Kiel says:
    @Alden

    “Another misogynistic woman hating sad old celibate bachelor heard from.”

    Awww, you cute little White Knight.

    Judging from the level of invective in your comment history, we can safely say that ‘sad old celibate bachelor’ is you.

    No problem from me with sex, or women – I love whores, both the professional & freelance types.

    Additionally, I never invoked Cleo’s name into the conversation, the person to whom I was replying did.

    So, you may want to work on your reading comprehension, as well as your ability to track a conversation thread.

    . . . thanks for playing.

    • Replies: @Alden
  215. chris says:
    @Priss Factor

    What was a cool and hip movie in my youth became a very dated and completely unwatchable parade of cliches when a little maturity had set in.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  216. Miro23 says:
    @Priss Factor

    But you’re right. The seeds of destruction were already there sprouting before the 60s really happened.

    Agreed. It was the US in party mode. Maybe the hedonism of the 1920’s (interrupted by the Depression and WW2) but full on partying again after 1945.

    1968+ was really the time that the US needed to get serious about education and industry. It was challenged by a rebuilding Europe and Asia but did nothing. In fact, the US got into debt and sent its manufacturing (together with the jobs) overseas.

    • Agree: Liza
  217. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Priss Factor

    But 60s excesses with youth culture & drugs, race riots, Vietnam War, immigration act, and etc. led to the slash and burn America that we know today.

    But you’re right. The seeds of destruction were already there sprouting before the 60s really happened.

    Drugs had a lot to do with it. The rise of the drug culture should not have been tolerated. And it was tolerated. I’m not sure what it was like in the USA but in Australia by the 70s the drug laws were simply not enforced at all.

    The drug culture was responsible for a lot of the craziness. Especially cannabis. I knew too many cannabis casualties. In some ways heroin wasn’t as bad. The junkie either OD’d or they eventually gave it up. The cannabis users never quite recovered, and usually had a lot more trouble giving it up.

    And as drug use increased the youth culture became more destructive, culminating in appalling exercises in nihilism like Easy Rider. It’s rather shocking to contemplate that only eight years separates Breakfast at Tiffany’s from Easy Rider. The drug-fuelled societal collapse was breathtakingly fast.

    • Replies: @Alden
  218. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Alden

    I tried to read 2 Virginia Wolfe books. Couldn’t get past the first 20 pages.

    You haven’t missed anything. Orlando is particularly bad. Degenerate trash.

    The interwar period saw literature diving headfirst into the gutter. So much decadent garbage being produced. Woolf, Isherwood, etc. This was the era in which literary critics decided that pornography, like Henry Miller’s writing, qualified as literature. And in France André Gide and then in the 40s Jean Genet and Simone de Beauvoir. Western civilisation was already heading for the trash heap.

    • Agree: Kiel
  219. dfordoom says: • Website
    @syonredux

    Steinbeck was a fine storyteller but entirely conventional.

    He was pure crap.Nothing of his work deserves survival.

    Agreed. Not just crap, but heavy-handed and clumsy. The pulp writers of that era were better than Steinbeck.

  220. @Old Palo Altan

    I had to settle for a summer house in Old Lyme and a small flat in Chamonix, where I’d go skiing and paragliding. Definitely a step down.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  221. @syonredux

    He was pure crap.Nothing of his work deserves survival.

    GRAPES OF WRATH is a great work. I love CANNERY ROW.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  222. @chris

    What was a cool and hip movie in my youth became a very dated

    GRADUATE is still ahead of its time in many respects. Also, its appeal is less about being cool and hip that about conveying the mood of late youth crisis and anxiety of romance.

    LOVE STORY channeled some of its atmospherics, and HAROLD AND MAUDE did it even better.

    • Replies: @chris
  223. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    He was pure crap.Nothing of his work deserves survival.

    GRAPES OF WRATH is a great work. I love CANNERY ROW.

    I despise both.Of course, as the grandson of an Okie, I particularly loathe the execrable Grapes of Wrath.

    James Gould Cozzens was vastly superior to Steinbeck….yet his brilliant novels (Guard of Honor, The Just and the Unjust) have been deliberately neglected.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @Alden
  224. chris says:
    @Priss Factor

    I don’t fully agree, but I do appreciate your response

  225. Anon[178] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon

    Another fellow who couldn’t settle down and raise kids and leave his community a little bettered.

    So gay and promiscuous lead to the same place?

  226. @The Alarmist

    Congratulations. These days that’s doing very well indeed – and don’t you now glory in a chateau somewhere in France?

    The vie de chateau can be idyllic – a friend of mine who lives that way by choice, having purchased and superbly restored an eighteenth century manoir on the Loire south of Tours, is, if not precisely happy, certainly very content with his lot.

    On the other hand, there are places like Normandy where it seems never to stop raining where such a life might be more an ordeal than a pleasure. Acres of leaking roofs for one thing.

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
  227. Anon[178] • Disclaimer says:
    @Priss Factor

    Let me not to the marriage of true minds admit impediments!
    Love is not love which alters when it alteration finds,
    Or bends with the remover to remove.
    Oh no, it is an ever fixed mark
    That looks upon tempests, and stans unmoved.
    It is the star to every wandering bark,
    Whose worth’s unknown, though its height be taken.
    Love is not Time’s fool, though rosy lips and cheeks
    Within his bending sickle’s compass come;
    Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks,
    But bears it out even to the edge of doom.
    If this be error and upon me prov’d,
    I never writ, nor no man ever lov’d.

    Two comments:
    1) marry within your circle, not to preclude gold-digging, but because God is provident like that. Plus, makes it easier to find someone well-suited, and love is born from frequent interaction.
    2) the ability to love can be lost. More so when man’s essential vocation to love is disparaged.

  228. @syonredux

    GOW is sympathetic to Okies.

    And Steinbeck’s socialism is now preferable to turbo-globo-capitalism that we have today.

    Never heard of James Cozzens.

    https://infogalactic.com/info/James_Gould_Cozzens

    • Replies: @syonredux
    , @dfordoom
  229. Anon[178] • Disclaimer says:
    @Alden

    Laughing here! Now they only make the-princess-and-the-plumber movies for European girls. The others, well it’s the prince and the Markle storyline.

    About BAT, the laughs and the beauty was the only way to make two hours with promiscuous, unprincipled characters living a dingy life palatable. The now standard Hollywood recipe. Spoonful of honey in the cultural war.

    • Replies: @Alden
  230. @syonredux

    That’s putting it a tad too mildly. Hemingway’s impact on English prose in the ’20s and ’30s was enormous. You can even find traces of his influence in antithetical spirits like Evelyn Waugh.

    Here’s the thing. I think, even if Hemingway had never existed, American prose and lingo would have followed pretty much the same trajectory under pressure from popular culture, movies, and mass journalism. He did it as well or better than others, but I think he was part of a larger trend than its progenitor.

    but the best of his work endures as G.L.: The Sun Also Rises, A Farewell to Arms, “The Snows of Kilimanjaro,” “Big Two-Hearted River,” “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place,” etc.

    Many critics thinks his metier was the short story given he was the master of paring down the narrative to its essence. SUN ALSO RISES isn’t much in retrospect but I can understand its cultural significance at the time. The lost generation thing. As I recall, FAREWELL TO ARMS is mostly about some guy named Fred eating sausage, onion, and sauerkraut and falling in love with a woman named ‘kat’ who dies having a kid. Its main appeal seems to be melodrama without the melodramatics. A kind of stoic melodrama.

    • Replies: @syonredux
  231. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    Here’s the thing. I think, even if Hemingway had never existed, American prose and lingo would have followed pretty much the same trajectory under pressure from popular culture, movies, and mass journalism. He did it as well or better than others, but I think he was part of a larger trend than its progenitor.

    You can definitely see a tendency in that direction. For example, Hammett’s early stories (written before he was exposed to Hemingway’s work) have a similarly stripped-down style. But Hemingway simply did it better than anyone else. Hence, his example granted aesthetic weight to the trend.

    but the best of his work endures as G.L.: The Sun Also Rises, A Farewell to Arms, “The Snows of Kilimanjaro,” “Big Two-Hearted River,” “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place,” etc.

    Many critics thinks his metier was the short story given he was the master of paring down the narrative to its essence.

    That’s the common wisdom. And, in this case, the common wisdom is quite right.

    SUN ALSO RISES isn’t much in retrospect but I can understand its cultural significance at the time. The lost generation thing.

    It’s not on the same level as Gatsby ot the best of Faulkner’s work, but it stills holds up today.

    As I recall, FAREWELL TO ARMS is mostly about some guy named Fred eating sausage, onion, and sauerkraut and falling in love with a woman named ‘kat’ who dies having a kid. Its main appeal seems to be melodrama without the melodramatics. A kind of stoic melodrama.

    With Hemingway, it’s the telling, not the tale.Weirdly, he’s kind of like Henry James in that regard.

  232. syonredux says:
    @Priss Factor

    GOW is sympathetic to Okies.

    The wrong kind of sympathy.

    And Steinbeck’s socialism is now preferable to turbo-globo-capitalism that we have today.

    Having one’s heart in the right place doesn’t make one a good writer.

    Never heard of James Cozzens.

    I would recommend The Just and the Unjust (Excellent novel about the law), Guard of Honor (Perhaps the best American novel about WW2), Men and Brethren (Strangely moving novel about a clergyman in New York), and Castaway (Atypical Cozzens story, it depicts a man trapped in a post-disaster NY department store). Some people would add By Love Possessed , but I don’t care for it. It’s too overwritten for my tastes.

  233. Alden says:
    @Kiel

    I’m a reasonably happy married woman 4 children, 8 grandchildren. Ha ha ha

    Reason there’s only about 10 percent woman UNZ readers is the women hating misogynistic sad old celibate bachelors and bitter divorced men who are still outraged that they had to support their children 20 years ago.

    Most women read UNZ a week or 2 and stop reading because of the women hating celibate sad old bachelors and bitter divorced men still furious they had to support their children 20 years ago.

    Even Ann Coulter and Kellyanne Conway would not stick with the UNZ men and their continual hateful attacks on women.

    I like UNZ enough to stick around and put up with all the misogynistic women hating sad old celibate bachelors and the rest of it.

    But I’ll continue to defend women who are unreasonably attacked such as attacking whatever idiot called Cleopatra a worthless slut.

    Direct descendant of Phillip of Macedonia and Alexander’s brother and sister, regarded as a God by her people, wiped out her brother and sisters and grabbed the throne of what was then a country wealthier than Italy.

    Cesear and Marc Antony were nothing compared to her. And they were adulterers. They were sexually immoral

    “Cleopatra was a slut.” Whoever wrote that is not just an ignorant fool but a hypocrite. She was a slut but the married men who lived with her weren’t?

    Then there’s the fertility fanatics. Fathers of
    0 to 2 children they endless pontificate that White women should have more children. Conceive and raise them all by themselves presumably.

    Fertility fanatics want more White children in the world? Do what my husband did. Conceive and raise 4. Or more than 4.

    Reading you men’s comments it’s difficult to believe most of you are married and have children.

    Regarding women sometimes this site reads like you’re all 1940s repressed gays trying to explain why you don’t date and never got married. “Women are just fat and ugly and horrible. That’s why I never married or even dated”

    Cleopatra had 3 or 4 children by just 2 men. King Augustus of Saxony had more that 300 children by dozens of women.

    But she’s the slut. King Augustus was a paragon of morality and sexual virtue because men can do no wrong. .

  234. Alden says:
    @Anon

    BAT’s on TV every once in a while. The few NYC exteriors were just clean parts of NYC. Holly had no furniture. Peppard’s furniture was nice, nothing special. The apartment house was very ordinary.

    Holly’s clothes were just the plain black dresses the fashion industry has been pushing for the last 100 years. Her orange mohair coat was a nice relief from the black black black.

  235. Alden says:
    @syonredux

    Ever read In Dubious Battle?

    Same setting as GOW. Principal character is a communist party remember trying to organize the Okie farm workers for a communist revolution. He’s been sent by the American communist party.

    He’s pursued by both the FBI and union busters working for the Farmers & Ranchers Association.

    East of Eden was excellent about Salinas Watsonville and the development of refrigerated freight cars to bring California lettuce to the northern states during the winter.

    But the whole Mother leaves Father for no discernible reason and becomes a prostitute brothel keeper in the nearest town is just appealing to prurient interest. Author could at least have described some reason for her to leave a nice home to run a brothel.

    Steinbeck has his day and will disappear soon. His oppressed farm workers are now evil privileged Whites. So are the homeless in Cannery Row.

  236. @Old Palo Altan

    I’m thinking of pitching a TV script: Green Acres set in Champagne Ardennes, where Eb is a dumb country French type and Arnold wears a beret (don’t see many of those, but you have to meet American expectations), but at least the local Hooterville has a decent Boulangerie Patisserie. My version of Lisa is still quite pretty, but can’t do hotcakes for the life of her. I could call it Grand Est, but the joke would be lost on people; Hectares Verts sounds a bit obtuse, so how about Grand Acres?

    Yes, the roof is paramount, but the rest can be somewhat dilapidated so you can decorate to taste. The are two major problems with buying ready-to-live-in: The price will be outrageous, and the French have horrible taste in bathroom and kitchen decor. Better to pick up a fixer upper for half-million or so and count on spending €1k per sqm to renovate to your taste than to spend a million or two or more and have to redo the bathrooms and kitchen anyway.

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  237. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Priss Factor

    And Steinbeck’s socialism is now preferable to turbo-globo-capitalism that we have today.

    Yes, I’d have to agree with that.

  238. Bookish1 says:

    Russell BAker wrote in the NYT some years ago “if someone could step from 1940 NY into NY today he would be shocked and horrified, it would be like a futuristic nightmare come true.”

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  239. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Alden

    Many of the older bachelors were yesterday’s playboys. They couldn’t be faithful. They either did not marry because they played hopscotch from one singles bar and woman’s bed to the next or they were married and continued carrying on affairs until the woman divorced them.

    As for describing women as being beneath their own standards, how many of these men look like Brad Pitt or Richard Gere?

    If any race could succeed through victory from the cradle by screwing than Bangladesh or Africa would be Superpowers where the fertility rate is six children per woman or something.

    • Replies: @Alden
  240. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Bookish1

    I’m not sure that is true. New York City is vastly better than it was in the seventies and eighties. Watch old films like FORT APACHE, THE BRONX or DEATH WISH or that series about the retired British spy THE EQUALIZER.

    • Replies: @Bookish1
  241. New York City is vastly better than it was in the seventies and eighties

    But at the expense of rest of NY that was forced to take NY’s unruly Negroids.

  242. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:

    You answered a question I had always had. I wondered what happened in the whole Broken Windows era to run-of-the-mill offenders. What did they do with the sort of feral packs that Bernhard Goetz blew away in the subway? Goetz himself said that AIDS wiped many of them out. But they had to send the rest somewhere. They could not put them all in jail. Not for the rest of their lives. Where did they go? What did they do?

  243. Liza says:
    @Alden

    I like UNZ enough to stick around and put up with all the misogynistic women hating sad old celibate bachelors and the rest of it.

    Yes indeed. I don’t know about you, but I am just waiting for the hate-a-thon to really begin.

    I am not sure about Augustus’ 300 offspring, though. However, where there’s smoke there’s fire and there is probably reason for the inflated figure. And he would not be the first to be spreading his seed like crazy, never mind all the cheating and lying necessary to pull it off.

    Some of the bitching by men is justified. There is very little gratitude shown by feminists in particular for the fact, the simple fact, that whatever good things we still have, much of it was brought about by the dreaded White Man and kept in place by their efforts. They really do a lot of the shitwork. It would be nice if a certain portion of them were not such despisers of women. It is a fallen world, Alden. I don’t think any of this can be set right by human efforts.

    • Replies: @Alden
  244. Alden says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Thanks. As far as complaining there are no pretty women around, just obese tattooed uglies, they remind me of all those 12 year old boys who used to think Playboy girls were representative of the average girl they’d date when they got older.
    Or the girls who’d fantasize they’d grow up to look like movie stars.

    I’m not very sensitive. But I definitely get the idea the misogyny and hatred of women comes from a lifetime of being rejected by women

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  245. melpol says:

    Common dream of Homosexuals is to have breakfast after sex bedecked with status and jewelry. The movie could have been played by Gay men hoping to find a wealthy sponsor. Gays frequent jewelry shops often dreaming of one day eating breakfast in one of those glitzy spots.

  246. Alden says:
    @dfordoom

    I didn’t like Easy Rider at all. I was turned off by one of the first scenes. They stop for breakfast in a typically very busy breakfast service diner.

    And Nicholson harasses the very busy waitress because the place is out of rye bread. Why doesn’t he complain to the owner or manager about the lack of management skills that caused the place to run out of rye bread?

    Typical liberal idiot intellectual class warfare. The drug dealer gets to harass a hard working busy waitress about his choice of bread.

    At least Nicholson pulled his nose out of the cocaine dish enough to continue making movies.

    Peter Fonda dove into the cocaine dish and stayed there the rest of his life.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
    , @dfordoom
  247. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Alden

    Absolutely. The more a person is rejected by the opposite sex, the more they will feel that way since one of the human drives is reproduction and specifically with the most fertile female or virile men.

    For women the mating game is more difficult. They not only seek the most handsome and virile male but also the best-off financially.

    All men seek is physical attractiveness in a reproductive partner. Money is less of an issue.

  248. @The Alarmist

    Do Americans have any affection at all for France? That is, the great unwashed, whose interests would have to be aroused for any such show to be a success. My own judgement woud be that there is nowhere of less interest to them, or less admirable.

    The English do love such shows, and will again, once the brexit thing is finally solved one way or another. So make your pitch to the BBC: Americans living and variously coping in a semi-delapidated chateau – their successes, their failures, their dealings with the suspicious locals.
    I’d watch it!

    My friend is Belgian, so his bathrooms and kitchens (there are two) are impeccable. He has recently bought an appartement in the most expensive bit of Paris, and has spent a happy year restoring it too. He has invited me over to inspect it, I but hesitate every time I read about what the city is like these days

    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    , @Bill Jones
  249. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Alden

    The scene where Nicholson acts like an asshole was Five Easy Pieces. But no matter, the fact that he was behaving that way to a helpless woman made the viewer wish some man had kicked his ass.

    Of all the seventies angst antiheroes Nicholson was the most despicable. There was something genuinely mean-spirited and base about Nicholson.

    Elliot Gould came off as a goofy neurotic. Dennis Hopper was merely a jabbering space cadet with a manic giggle. Peter Fonda had some comic ability but in straight roles he was a louche mannequin. Hoffman was a great actor.

    In any event, if anyone wanted to see advertisements for how well the sixties sex and drugs worked out they need only look at the lives of the stars.

    • Agree: Liza
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Priss Factor
  250. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Alden

    I didn’t like Easy Rider at all….

    Typical liberal idiot intellectual class warfare. The drug dealer gets to harass a hard working busy waitress about his choice of bread.

    The counter-culture was a very ugly thing really. Just as the Sexual Revolution that accompanied it was pretty ugly in reality – selling women on the idea of sexual freedom but it was just a way to persuade them to have sex with disgusting loser hippie men like the repulsive drug dealers in Easy Rider.

    And yes, there was definitely a class thing involved. A contempt for ordinary working class people.

  251. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Jeff Stryker

    Of all the seventies angst antiheroes Nicholson was the most despicable. There was something genuinely mean-spirited and base about Nicholson.

    Elliot Gould came off as a goofy neurotic. Dennis Hopper was merely a jabbering space cadet with a manic giggle. Peter Fonda had some comic ability but in straight roles he was a louche mannequin. Hoffman was a great actor.

    I agree with all of that, except for the part about Hoffman being a great actor. He’s a ham. The kind of showy pretentious gimmicky actor that critics adore. The same goes for de Niro, Al Pacino, Meryl Streep. Method Acting destroyed acting.

  252. @Old Palo Altan

    Try looking up Escape to the Chateau and, better still, it’s sister-show Escape to the Chateau DIY on channel4.com, though I don’t know if you can stream it from there. Brits are all over the French chateau scene.

  253. @dfordoom

    Films from the late ’60s, like Easy Rider, and most of the ’70s are the bête noire of American cinema.

  254. @dfordoom

    except for the part about Hoffman being a great actor. He’s a ham.

    Hoffman as perfect for certain kinds of roles. I can’t think of anyone who could have done a better job with Ratso Rizzo. Maybe Al Pacino but that’s about it.

    Hoffman was also excellent in STRAW FROGS and DEATH OF A SALESMAN, a role he was born to play.

  255. @dfordoom

    The counter-culture was a very ugly thing really.

    CC turned ugly and excessive and stupid… but it showed promise at the outset as a search for meaning and re-connection with meaning and nature in reaction to the complacent materialism that came to define postwar America. But the excess of drugs, youth culture, and sex drove it into the ground.

    EASY RIDER was a big hit, but it was never a real favorite among cinephiles, and it became dated pretty fast. Still, it has value in that it’s more than a mindless propaganda for CC. Fonda says ‘we blew it’, and Dennis Hopper’s character comes across as rather grubby. The people in the commune seem rather lazy and clueless. The worst thing about the movie is the cheapshot with the rednecks. It was as if the ONLY way to lionize the CC types somewhat was by using southern bigots as foil. All in all, a mixed bag.

    Funny thing is Hopper’s next movie, THE LAST MOVIE — it almost was his last movie literally — pissed off everyone, and he was attacked by feminists and EVERYONE. It ran only two weeks and disappeared.

  256. @Jeff Stryker

    The scene where Nicholson acts like an asshole was Five Easy Pieces. But no matter, the fact that he was behaving that way to a helpless woman made the viewer wish some man had kicked his ass.
    Of all the seventies angst antiheroes Nicholson was the most despicable. There was something genuinely mean-spirited and base about Nicholson.

    To be fair to Nicholson’s character, all he wanted was two slices of toast, and he was willing to pay for the entire sandwich for just the two slices of bread. I think the scene is about the narcissism of pride. Thus, both are acting stupid. Waitress could have just served the bread, or Nicholson could have just gone along with restaurant policy of ‘only stuff on menu’. But both are so consumed with pride that neither will budge. That said, I do agree that the waitress was made less sympathetic.

    Still, FIVE EASY PIECES has hardly any character who is sympathetic. There’s no one to root for. Nicholson is presented as something of a phony seeking authenticity. He’s from a distinguished musical family, but he left all that to look for the real America and rub shoulders with regular folks. But he is too educated and sophisticated for that. He’s rather like Albert Brooks in LOST IN AMERICA who discovers he’s a fish out of water outside big cities. Nicholson works hard to be one of the working class with bowling and beer, but he’s made of finer stuff. Thus, he becomes a double-a**hole. He’s an elitist-at-heart who looks down on working class, and he’s a working class poseur who resents the pretentious/pompous elites. Ultimately, he’s not a sympathetic character, and the film doesn’t make him out as hero or anti-hero. He’s just a man with serious problems. He betrays everyone, esp himself, and he runs off leaving Karen Black all alone — like what the old man in MURIEL(Resnais) does. He keeps running away but can’t run away from himself.

    Acting isn’t about always playing likable or noble characters. It’s about presenting characters, warts and all, with complex psychology, as with Hamlet or Othello or Richard III. And Nicholson was brilliant in several 70s movies like CUCKOO’S NEST, CHINATOWN, and LAST DETAIL.

    Also, such types were not new in Hollywood. Bogart played louts. Cagney was demented in many roles. But powerfully so. Great stars all of them.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Jeff Stryker
  257. @Alden

    But I’ll continue to defend women who are unreasonably attacked such as attacking whatever idiot called Cleopatra a worthless slut.

    She was a worthwhile slut.

    • LOL: Kiel
    • Replies: @Alden
  258. Alden says:
    @dfordoom

    I agree about Hoffman. I call it the jittery Jew school of acting. The jittering is to distract from his lack of ability. Or if he’s not an actor, whatever he’s trying to con you into.

    Romantically, it’s just repulsive.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  259. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    How dare you call her a slut.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  260. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    There was no rye bread in the restaurant. What was the waitress supposed to do? And why harass her about it? Owners chefs and managers do the purchasing, not the waiters.

    Oh well

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  261. Bookish1 says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    He wasn’t talking about the 70s 80s, he was talking about the 40s and before the ww2 disaster that destroyed this civilization.

  262. Damocles says:

    This story reads like Ava Gardner’s Wiki.

  263. Kiel says:
    @Alden

    Here’s the 411 everybody:

    A commenter named ‘Lin’ posted a question concerning the origins of the words harlot, courtesan, hooker, etc, whatever.

    I on the other hand innocently mentioned that they forgot the word ‘slut’.

    Len then countered, with Cleo’s name no less, something or another, associating her with the word ‘slut’.

    I retorted with some B.S. about hypergamy being hardwired, a woman’s right to engage in child sacrifice of their unborn on 2st Ammendment grounds, etc, etc.

    Then ALDEN inserted himself into the mix, all White Knighting like the hero, and calling me a whore-hater without having fully comprehended the thread.

    I think if anyone deserves an apology, it’s me.

    :o)

    • Replies: @Alden
  264. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Alden

    I agree about Hoffman. I call it the jittery Jew school of acting. The jittering is to distract from his lack of ability. Or if he’s not an actor, whatever he’s trying to con you into.

    The interesting movie to watch in this context is Rain Man. Hoffman’s performance is showy and in its own way spectacular but you’re always aware that you’re watching an actor. That’s bad acting.

    Tom Cruise on the other hand just quietly gets the job done and is utterly convincing. And he actually has the more difficult rôle because his character is very unsympathetic whereas everyone is going to sympathise with Hoffman’s character. No-one noticed Cruise’s performance. That’s good acting, because good acting is when you don’t notice the acting.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  265. Alden says:
    @Kiel

    I’m a herself not a himself. And who are you to call Cleopatra a slut?

    What’s hypergamy? Female equivalent of promiscuous male lecher? Or is it just a word the misogynist women haters made up?

    • LOL: Kiel
    • Replies: @Kiel
  266. @Alden

    No, it was not about rye bread. He just wanted the two slices of bread. He didn’t want a sandwich but was willing to pay the price just for the two pieces of bread.

    FIVE EASY PIECES is pretty hard on everyone. No one comes across good. The quasi-hippie hitchhikers are pretty gross. Karen Black as a low-class woman and the intellectual psychologist are both mocked.

    Bob Rafelson was 37 when he made the movie and wasn’t exactly in tune with youth culture. If anything, FIVE EASY PIECES exposes the sorry myth of dropping out and being a free spirit.

    Later, Rafelson made one hell of a movie with MOUNTAINS OF THE MOON. Excellent stuff.

    • Replies: @Alden
  267. @Alden

    ‘Slut’ isn’t necessarily an insult. It can mean any woman who uses sex with men for power and advantage. And Cleo used her body and charms to gain the favors of men like Cesar and Antony.

    • Replies: @Alden
  268. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @dfordoom

    Pacino was never really convincing as anything but a sweaty and ruthless petty criminal.

    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian
  269. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @dfordoom

    Tom Cruise was not impersonating mental illness. He was playing a slick young man who sold cars who possessed a vague manic streak. No great stretch for Cruise.

  270. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Priss Factor

    I could never buy Nicholson as anything but a working-class Irish-American with a wild streak who might be a mean drunk.

    Fine for Randall P. McMurphy or a Navy lifer but as a scion of old wealth? Nah, couldn’t buy Nicholson as that.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  271. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Alden

    And as Queen and Chief God of Egypt, she was far, far wealthier and more royal than they were.
    They were the gold diggers. She was not.

    Cleopatra was a queen and she did her duty as a queen, and that duty sometimes involves contracting marriages or relationships that serve the vital interests of the kingdom.

    She was in a very dangerous world. Rome was immensely powerful, and aggressive and expansionist. Clearly Egypt was under threat. And Egypt, for all its wealth, could not hope to defeat Rome militarily. In order to have a chance of maintaining Egypt’s independence (even if that meant being to some extent a vassal state) it was wise for her to look for an alliance, sexual emotional and political, with a very powerful Roman. Julius Caesar was an obvious and sound choice. Later on Mark Antony seemed like a good bet.

    Of course it’s possible she was genuinely attracted to these two men, or even in love with them. But pursuing a personal alliance with them was part of her duties as Pharaoh and she took her duties seriously.

    Calling her a slut is absurd.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  272. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @dfordoom

    True but I don’t see much better about the punk movement you mentioned. Sid Vicious and Nancy Spugnen were no better than Hopper or Fonda.

    You’ve advanced the opinion that the punk drug of choice-methamphetamine-was somehow better than cannabis and I disagree with this as well. The worst that can happen with cannabis is that you’ll end up like Tommy Chong-a stupefied burnout. The worst that can happen with crystal meth is that you end up a paranoid psychotic with clinical depression for the rest of your life because your dopamine receptors are wiped out. LSD is whole different animal and I did know some people in college that fried their brains on acid. However, I disagree with you that cocaine is any better than cannabis. Nobody gets a gun and goes out and robs somebody to buy more marijuana. Coke heads will.

    I cannot speak for the Dogs in Space-era of punk in Australia but the ones in US had a bad attitude, were often violent and virtually unemployable because, well, they were anarchists. Most middle-class punks were poseurs, but the lower-class ones were sometimes sociopaths.

    Of course the same could be said for the hippies. The lower-class hippies like Manson were genuinely destructive revolutionaries.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  273. @Jeff Stryker

    but as a scion of old wealth?

    Dubya

  274. Hibernian says:
    @Liza

    Not the peak but an inflection point on the downward slide before really precipitous decline began.

    • Replies: @Liza
  275. Liza says:
    @Hibernian

    Yes, that’s a good enough description.

  276. @dfordoom

    Cleopatra was a queen and she did her duty as a queen, and that duty sometimes involves contracting marriages or relationships that serve the vital interests of the kingdom.

    She was vain & egotistical and got Egypt involved in Rome’s civil war. She didn’t play it cool but hot. She got burned and so did Egypt along with her.

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Alden
    , @dfordoom
  277. @Jeff Stryker

    Sid Vicious and Nancy Spugnen were no better than Hopper or Fonda.

    They were far worse.

  278. “In today’s rabidly individualistic society,…”

    Was that a joke? In today’s politically correct, conformity-ruled, socialist leaning society, how could anyone begin a sentence with that massively obvious lie??

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  279. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    The great moralist checks in.

    When was Rome not involved in some kind of power struggle? It wasn’t a civil war, just one more assassination, in a long line of assassinations and power struggles.

    Like Vertingtroix the Greeks and Kings of Europe, the Balkan’s and Morocco to Armenia, the British, Bouducia the Queen of Egypt did her best

    Just remembered Early Modern English; slut didn’t mean sex at all. It was related to slob and slum. Slum originally meant a dirty messy house, even if it was expensive.

    Slut meant a slob. “I fired the maid because she’s a slut.” Meant I fired her because she didn’t clean properly and the house got dirty. “ “ “ Neighbor is a slut” just meant neighbor is a bad housekeeper her house and kids are a mess.

    With all her money and slaves, Queen/Pharaoh Cleopatra didn’t have to worry about laundry and housekeeping

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  280. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    As I remember it was rye bread. But I don’t like Nicholson at all either in person or in his movies.

    First time I met him was about 1975. He was with Angela Houston who’s taller than he even in flats. Plus he was completely bald on top, coarse features bad skin. Then he dumped Houston and tried to get me to go to their hotel room for a drink Gag. Barf. Finally found husband and the lecher went away. Meanwhile Houston’s looking all sad but resigned. He also wore a brown suit. Gross! !!

    Last time I saw him he looked like every other shabby old man.

    Re; Cuckoos Nest. It came between the 2 Hodge cases and the Donaldson case that closed all the mental hospitals and sent the mentally ill out to live on the streets. It was just like Snake Pit and all the other close the mental hospitals propaganda of the time. Wasn’t Nicholson’s fault. It was just a job. But it contributed to the close the mental hospitals propaganda. And the evil results

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  281. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    Charms??? Obviously you haven’t seen the numerous profiles of Cleopatra on coins. She was the opposite of attractive, nose like a cucumber. She lived in Rome a few years. Read the Roman’s descriptions of her. Receding chin, prematurely gray hair, granted they didn’t like her.

    A gazillion slave girls had bodies and charm. Living with her was like marrying Isabella of Castile, Eleanor of Aquitaine , Empress Maria Theresa, ER 1 of England or widowed Catherine the Great.

  282. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    Cesear and Antony had a huge choice of beautiful women, including slaves of all the countries the Roman’s conquered. She didn’t need them. They needed her army money and country, Antony especially needed her army for his plans to become Emperor.

    The Queen of Egypt’s attraction wasn’t herself. It was Egypt, still wealthier than all of Italy at the time. You think Canute married Queen Emma for her charm?? He married her because she was the widow of King Aelthered and daughter, sister and mother of Dukes of Normandy.

    And slut originally meant slob.

    Words fail

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  283. Kiel says:
    @Alden

    Reading comprehension really isn’t your strong suit.

    How many kids did you manage to breed again?

    • Replies: @Alden
  284. @Alden

    Yeah, I saw the movie with Liz Taylor. She still struck me as a fancy slut.

    • Replies: @Alden
  285. @Alden

    As I remember it was rye bread. But I don’t like Nicholson at all either in person or in his movies.

    No, it was about toasts.

    I don’t particularly like Nicholson the person, and yes, his characters tend to be jerks, lunatics, eccentrics, or charlatans. But, art isn’t limited to presenting likable people doing likable things.
    What matters is that Nicholson’s performances ring true with in his best works. That’s all that matters. He played a megalomaniacal monster in SHINING and it was inspired.
    Do I personally like Nicholson or the kind of characters he plays? No. But he brought to life the malaise of alienation(in works like CARNAL KNOWLEDGE) or laughing irony of desperation. It’s like we may not like hyenas, but they exist in nature, and art cannot ignore truth.

    Cuckoos Nest. It came between the 2 Hodge cases and the Donaldson case that closed all the mental hospitals and sent the mentally ill out to live on the streets. It was just like Snake Pit and all the other close the mental hospitals propaganda of the time.

    I will have to disagree with this. No one watching the movie can possibly believe that the people in the ward aren’t without serious problems or issues. Also, even though Ratched comes across as cold and manipulative, McMurphy turns the place upside down and not in a good way.

    • Replies: @Mike P
    , @Alden
  286. @Alden

    Slut meant a slob.

    And ‘slave’ used to mean a Slav. Meanings change.

  287. @trevor lynch

    Have you considered doing a review of Chinatown?

    • Agree: Liza
  288. dfordoom says: • Website
    @John Howard

    “In today’s rabidly individualistic society,…”

    Was that a joke? In today’s politically correct, conformity-ruled, socialist leaning society, how could anyone begin a sentence with that massively obvious lie??

    Both are correct. We have a society that is both individualistic and conformist. That’s because all the social bonds (family, church, local community, etc) have been dissolved. So all that is left is the individual and the nation. And increasingly the social bonds of nationhood have dissolved as well, so all that is left is the individual and the globalist “community.”

    So what we have are alienated individuals motivated on the one hand by greed, selfishness, hedonism, the reckless pursuit of sexual and other pleasures and consumerism and on the other hand motivated by rigid conformity to values promoted by globalist elites.

    There’s nothing socialist about it. This has been deliberately engineered to serve corporate interests. Engineered by Woke Capital. It’s closer to a kind of internationalist fascism than to socialism.

  289. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Priss Factor

    She was vain & egotistical and got Egypt involved in Rome’s civil war. She didn’t play it cool but hot. She got burned and so did Egypt along with her.

    She was playing a dangerous game and she lost. She may well have made very foolish choices. Her judgment may have been poor. Diplomacy is a dangerous game, whichever weapons you use (threat of military power, money, sex, love, influence). Sometimes queen have to play that game. Sometimes they lose. It doesn’t make her a slut. At worst she was an unsuccessful diplomatist.

    • Replies: @Alden
  290. Mike P says:
    @Priss Factor

    No one watching the movie can possibly believe that the people in the ward aren’t without serious problems or issues.

    That is true. However, the main message of the movie is that psychiatric hospitals and their staff are cruel and abusive, and that the inmates, wacky as they may be, need to be liberated.

    At med school, I was even treated to a viewing of the movie in a psychology course, and the instructor – a terminally vain psychologist with carefully groomed curls – clearly bought into this crap and tried to propagandise the class with the movie.

  291. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Mike P

    In the film, McMurphy was in jail for having sex with a 14 year old girl. He had gotten off lightly because the girl admitted lying and claiming to be 19. So he was sent to some minimum security work camp for a sentence of 18 months. Previously, he’d had a record for aggravated assault so he was unable to get probation. Nobody told him that he could be committed indefinitely, which he only finds out when he threatens the black orderly with “I’ll see you on the outside”.

    What is the moral of the film? Don’t fake your way out of a short jail sentence because you can be committed involuntarily to mental hospitals?

    In the seventies, there was much sympathy.

    Another prison film like this one was MIDNIGHT EXPRESS where after multiple smuggling trips Billy Hayes is caught with four pounds of hashish on him. He then goes through hell in a Turkish prison.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  292. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    That was a movie, not history

  293. Alden says:
    @Priss Factor

    Indeed it was, rye bread toast. I remember it well. The drug dealer harassing a waitress because the restaurant was out of rye bread.

    Typical liberal intellectual sneering at a working person.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  294. Alden says:
    @Mike P

    It was just propaganda in preparation for closing down the mental hospitals. Just as Mockingbird was propaganda that White rape victims of black rapists were lying racists who just wanted to get random, totally innocent black men imprisoned.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  295. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Alden

    He wasn’t playing a drug dealer. He was an ex-pianist who had become an oil rigger. You’re confusing Easy Rider and Five Easy Pieces.

  296. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Alden

    Kesey’s book was written long before Reagan did that. Decades before. Just saying.

    • Replies: @Alden
  297. Alden says:
    @dfordoom

    50 BC I believe that was one of the centuries Rome conquered every country it invaded. Rome was in the middle of a massive expansion. It couldn’t be stopped any more than Ghengis Khan and the Mongols could be stoped

    Egypt and the Queen/Pharaoh who happened to be the sovereign is remembered because she was a woman.

    Some of the men like priss factor in this site are just misogynistic women haters. More than 2,000 years ago obsessing about Cleopatra’s sexual morals while ignoring the adultery of Cesear and Antony. Woman hater for one of the obvious reasons.

  298. Alden says:
    @Jeff Stryker

    Regean did not close down the mental hospitals sometime between 1/ 1981 and 1/89.

    The Supreme Court closed them down in 75-76 The movie Cuckoos Nest was part of the propaganda effort to close down the mental hospitals. The public was safer when mental patients were locked up. Mental patients were housed fed and clothed.

    • Replies: @Liza
  299. Mike P says:

    The public was safer when mental patients were locked up.

    Major violence by proper psychiatric patients (psychotics) is actually pretty rare, even among those who labour under delusions with violent content.

    Mental patients were housed fed and clothed.

    That’s the more important point – some patients are just too ill and too dysfunctional to be cared for as outpatients. Besides, I have seen my share of psychiatric hospitals from the inside, both due to my profession and because of a family member requiring treatment, and they simply had no resemblance at all to that preposterous parallel universe depicted in “cuckoo’s nest.”

    • Replies: @Alden
  300. @Mike P

    That is true. However, the main message of the movie is that psychiatric hospitals and their staff are cruel and abusive, and that the inmates, wacky as they may be, need to be liberated.

    The message of the movie seems that people need to liberate themselves. After all, except for McMurphy and Taber and few others, most people in the ward are voluntaries. They can walk out ANY TIME they wish. The thing is they CHOOSE to be there.

    So, if the film has a message, it seems to be that even people with normal or manageable issues choose to regard themselves as sick or helpless, when, in fact, it’s normal to have problems and issues. Life is tough; it’s a struggle. Granted, the institutionalized culture encourages such thinking, urging drugs and therapy on all of us by categorizing every behavioral problem as a psychological or medical problem(while saying stuff like homosexuality and tranny-ness are totally normal).
    Possibly, the loss of common culture and values led to the explosion of psychological issues. When all of society was into God and Church(or some such), even people with emotional or mental issues believed there was something bigger and deeper than ‘muh problem’. But without a common culture or object of worship, everyone fixates on ‘me, me, me’ and every molehill problem is turned into a mountain. We went from Sermon on the Mount to Therapy on the Molehill.

    Mental wards have been opened up, but it seems all of society has been turned into a mental ward. Consider the number of people on unnecessary prescription drugs or under some form of therapy.

    And the bigger problem isn’t crazies out in the streets but crazies in the institutions. Consider the mass delusion of ‘Russia Collusion’, ‘man is a woman’, ‘tranny kids’, ‘gay marriage’, ‘Magic Negro Worship’, and Jewish supremacists accusing OTHERS of supremacism.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  301. @Jeff Stryker

    In the seventies, there was much sympathy. Another prison film like this one was MIDNIGHT EXPRESS where after multiple smuggling trips Billy Hayes is caught with four pounds of hashish on him. He then goes through hell in a Turkish prison.

    Prison movies will always have a certain appeal. Even when we know the protagonists are killers, louts, or vermin, we end up sympathizing with them because we like to root for the rebel against the system. In prison, whether the person is innocent or guilty, he is repressed and ordered around. So, naturally, we root for his freedom. Consider COOL HAND LUKE, ESCAPE FROM ALCATRAZ, RUNAWAY TRAIN, and LONGEST YARD.

    Even free people identify, on some level, with prisoners. After all, at work you gotta do as the boss orders. The government says you can’t do this, can’t say that, and have to pay, pay, pay.
    A funny twist on this prison tale was TRUMAN SHOW where the character has been made to feel he is free and happy in the best of all possible worlds. But in fact, his freedom is an illusion. He is really a prisoner in a biosphere of entertainment. In a way, all of us are in a TRUMAN SHOW. We are told we are free living in a liberal democracy with free speech and etc, but the Power(that is now Jewish) put out all kinds of obstacles to prevent us from going ‘there’.

    There are stories where a person is seeking to escape prison and stories where all of society is a prison. The entire world of THX 1138 is like a vast prison colony. MAN ESCAPED is like both. It is about a man escaping from prison, but there is an indication that freedom leads to yet another prison. After all, even out of prison, he’s still in German-occupied France. And even with the Germans gone, people are prisoners of mortality and sin.

    Other than jailbreak stories, there is the appeal of the trespass stories. One side of us wants to escape from repression, but another side of us wants to break into the zones of power and privilege. So, we root for bank robbers in heist movies. Or with Tom Cruise slipping into the mega-mansion in EYES WIDE SHUT. And we follow K in THE CASTLE as he seeks entry.

    • Replies: @Jeff Stryker
  302. Liza says:
    @Alden

    The Supreme Court closed them down in 75-76 The movie Cuckoos Nest was part of the propaganda effort to close down the mental hospitals. The public was safer when mental patients were locked up. Mental patients were housed fed and clothed.

    Not just mental hospitals, but institutions for retarded and disabled people (intellectual disabilities).

    • Replies: @Alden
    , @Alden
    , @jack daniels
  303. Jeff Stryker [AKA "GO"] says:
    @Priss Factor

    Tom Cruise’s character took huge risks to see a bunch of older business guys having sex with some call girls. I just didn’t think that the ending of EYES WIDE SHUT was that remarkable.

    My point was that we were supposed to sympathize with Billy Hayes after he got caught smuggling 4 pounds of hashish. We are supposed to sympathize with Nicholson, even though he is a small-time troublemaker who probably belongs in jail.

    In real life, I’ve read (And ALDAN the ex-parole office might agree) that one reason white crime plummeted was because of both long sentences and harsh prisons where African sex tourism was the norm. We don’t have much white crime anymore compared to the early nineties. Younger posters would believe that whites simply don’t commit holdups, carjackings, armed robberies, burglaries or rape or have gangs. They used to, but the Three Strikes Law really changed this. Gone are the “sophisticated” white crimes like armored car robbery or chop shops.

    Also, juveniles are now tried as adults. Reform schools like the ones in SCUM or BAD BOYS are now gone.

  304. Miro23 says:

    Breakfast at Tiffanys is nostalgia for a US that is long gone, but Andrew Niccol’s “In Time” is a much more relevant and interesting preview of where we’re going.

  305. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Priss Factor

    The message of the movie seems that people need to liberate themselves.

    Maybe neither the book nor the movie was really about mental hospitals. Maybe they just used that as a metaphor. Society is like a prison, man. And we choose to stay in that prison. We should leave the prisons ands like find ourselves and be free. Just hang loose and smoke lots of dope and have sex with everything with a pulse and then everything will be cool and no-one will be uptight. And it’s not like you’ll have to worry about getting a job because when everyone is free no-one will have to work (work being another prison).

    Or the message may have been that it’s society that makes these people crazy in the first place. All those social rules. We should abolish those rules.

    It’s also worth pointing out that the book came out in 1962 and the film in 1975. This was the era in which intellectuals were madly in love with rebels, outsiders, criminals and lunatics.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  306. Alden says:
    @Liza

    O’Connor VS. Donaldson 1975 422 US 563.

    It’s an excellent example of how liberals lie and twist the facts. Most people believe the liberal lies that Regean did it during his administration which began 6 years later.

    How I enjoy lambasting liberals with undisputed facts.

  307. Alden says:
    @Liza

    There was that too.

    There was a wonderful, physically beautiful California School For The Blind the satanic supreme closed down with O’Connor VS Donaldson 1975 422 US 563. The students received such wonderful training they were able to get jobs and function as well as the sighted. All the states had such schools.

    Now the burden rests completely on parents of disabled children to wander through the maze of useless programs.

    Always, always remember it was the ACLU and it’s offshoots that funded and litigated the Hodge and Donaldson cases.

    • Agree: Liza
  308. Alden says:
    @Mike P

    I well remember when Napa State Hospital closed down. They were put on buses to the nearest city without even a change of clothes or the address of the welfare office.

    Those who were between 18 and 65 were considered able bodied adults and not eligible for welfare unless they had minor children which the newly released inmates obviously didn’t have and the men could never have.

    Approval for disability often takes an attorney and at least a year between the initial application and the first check. And in most cities the disability check is less than the cheapest rent in the city. But all the welfare and disability offices are in the cities.

    Whether Rockefellers Illiuminatti, jews jesuits federal reserve deep state or Satan himself who’s behind all this, it’s the Judiciary that carries out the orders.

    • Replies: @Mike P
  309. Mike P says:
    @Alden

    Jesus Christ. That sounds truly horrific. You have any insight into what happened to them? Was there some sort of volunteer effort to help these people?

    Thanks, M.

    • Replies: @Alden
  310. @dfordoom

    Just hang loose and smoke lots of dope and have sex with everything with a pulse and then everything will be cool and no-one will be uptight.

    Ken Kesey was a strange case. Also, in the book and movie, McMurphy fails to get away because of too much drinking and partying. He could have gone out the window but he was more interested in getting Billy Bibbit in the sack with the whore. Also, the Indian warns him about what happened to his father, an alcoholic whose life was sucked out by the bottle. McMurphy brings life and joy to the ward, but he also spreads chaos that ends up doing more harm to everyone.

    Kesey was part of the Merry Pranksters who spread LSD culture but he was also the product of Northwest culture of the rugged pioneer and tough guy. His masterpiece SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION is about men who work very hard at dangerous jobs.

  311. 6dust6 says:
    @Liza

    Hate the movie or not, Audrey Hepburn’s elegance and eccentricities in that role
    created an iconic character. Both the book and the movie were character studies. Capote, in that setting and time was an aspiring novelist who lived in an apartment building occupied by oddball tennants and created a slice of his life during that period. “Nothing seething beneath the surface calling for justice; no uglness infecting the culture?” So what… you needed more diversity in the film and statements about social justice to enrich this simple story to have have it succeed for you? Good God. It’s lighthearted and comedic that in its own way refects a part of life and the human condition. No politics here. Not even a whiff about the torture of closeted homosexuals. (Capote, Gore Vidal, and Tennesee Willuams, by the way, seemed quite comfortable with their sexual inclinations). And implying that homosexuals are deeply superficial as evidenced by the naure of the story telling, tch, tch. Careful, where’s your sense of justice?

    • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
  312. Liza says:

    “Nothing seething beneath the surface calling for justice; no ugliness infecting the culture?”

    So what… you needed more diversity in the film and statements about social justice to enrich this simple story to have have it succeed for you? Good God.

    I wasn’t thinking about heaumeaux at all, or any other phony “oppressed” minority group. There were and are a dozen things seriously wrong with Amerika, for God’s sake, going back over 150 years, and certainly present when the novel was written and the movie was made.

    Honestly! How could you think I’m blowing a gasket over a bunch of ponces. 🙂

  313. @6dust6

    May I add to the superficiality?

    What I like best about Audrey Hepburn (putting her elegance aside for the moment) is her background: her father was an unrepentant fascist and her mother a Baroness van Heemstra, whose ancestral family seat was Huis Doorn, where Kaiser Bill spent his years of exile after World War One.

  314. Alden says:
    @Mike P

    Not that I know of. There were some overnight shelters, line up at 3/pm closed by 5/pm out by 7/am. Some food banks. There didn’t seem to be anything specifically to help the mentally ill newly homeless.

    It happened in every big city in the country mid 1970s when Supreme Court, not President Regean ordered mental hospitals closed O’Connor VS Donaldson US a federal case.

    • Agree: Mike P
  315. Alden says:
    @Kiel

    More than your repressed gay self.

    • Replies: @Kiel
  316. Angharad says:
    @dfordoom

    I have been very busy, so I haven’t checked back on this thread. I didn’t realize any-one replied, so thank you.

    I’ve never seen “Party Girl”. I’ll have to check it out! sounds terrific! I agree with your assesment on Robert Taylor. He was a very fine actor. His looks oftern overshadowed his genuine talent.

    I must tell you the first time I saw “Johnny Guitar”. Friends threw an at-home film fest, in Philadelphia, many years ago, during a blizzard. (The film party was planned long before the blizzard.) We attendees all lived in the same general radius, so slogging to the party during the blizzard, and slogging back home wasn’t really a problem. We had loads of food and booze. The blizzard raging outside merely added to the general festivities.

    The host was a dedicated film buff , but had never seen “Johnny Guitar” before, but he had “…heard wonderful things”. He told us we were all in for something really special. We were all crammed round the TV, in a very small living room – do you know what a Trinity is, re: housing in Philadelphia? Anway – we were all calmly watching the opening scenes of the film, sipping our drinks and munching our snacks, when Mercedes McCambridge arrives at Joan Crawford’s saloon, to confront Crawford over the death of her brother. When Crawford appeared on the balcony of the saloon, in her solid black cowboy shirt, glowing neon blue string tie, a gallon of blood red lipstick, and an expression of ferocity that approximates a female Tyrannosaurus Rex – the entire gathering sat bolt upright, yelled “AAagghh” and…jumped back against the walls as far as we could go.

    And it only got better from there….the hot pink negligee when dyes for hot pink didn’t exist….the penultimate scene wherein the townspeople are coming for Vienna, and she’s playing her piano, garbed in a full-length stark white lace 1950’s shirtdress gown, against a grotesque rust/blood colored “stone” wall, that looked like it was culled from a discarded set of Don Juan’s descent into Hell. And then, there was the final fight to the death shootout between Joan and Mercedes. We were all so entranced by the general craziness of the entire thing that I don’t think any of us could have delineated the actual plot, as we were watching. The entire battle between the 2 female characters was ostensibly a fight over a man – but tragically, the male characters were…incidental. Not compelling at all. We all agreed that this was really some type of prehistoric, primeval quest for turf. Deeply, deeply irrational and FEMALE. The film, at the time, was a flop, because the general audience response was “What is this? I thought this was gonna be a Western! what IS this???” It was never a Western. I still think my little crowd grasped the essential meaning; “Johnny Guitar”is perhaps the BEST depiction of the raw female “id” EVER.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  317. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Angharad

    I agree with your assesment on Robert Taylor. He was a very fine actor. His looks oftern overshadowed his genuine talent.

    He gave superb performances on both The Bribe and Rogue Cop. He had a natural affinity for playing morally compromised characters.

  318. arihalli says:

    I thought the music just beautiful, haunting too.

    The acting, especially Peppard, was dreadful.

    I watched this 45yrs ago, and i thought it was ‘dated’. lol

  319. @Priss Factor

    “Offensive” means “tending to give offend.” In 1961 America where political correctness was limited to Brooklyn basements and there were few Japanese it would not offend many. I was not offended when I saw the film in 1961.
    Remember, we fought a grisly war against these people. Was Hogan’s Heroes offensive?

  320. @Liza

    The larger mental hospitals acquired a reputation rather like that of nursing homes, only more violent. The patients, many of whom were merely elderly or alcoholic, were primarily tended by otherwise unemployable punks from the surrounding neighborhoods who routinely abused them. Moreover, there was a wholesome movement to regard mental illness as not justifying the deprivation of one’s freedom. Those nasty liberals, who are always out to revoke your liberties and have Big Brother tell you what to do, decided you should be allowed to live on your own if you wished to, even if your skills were sub-par. Do not suppose that everything bad was created by getting rid of something good.

    The most cost-effective solution of course would be mass euthanasia. And once we get started why not take out the lower 60% of the income graph, who increasingly cost more than they contribute and are annoyingly stupid to boot?

    I know this because I grew up on the campus of one of those large, abusive hospitals, which provided housing to some senior staff.

  321. Kiel says:
    @Alden

    You seem to have quite the fixation on the gays there good buddy.

    Something you want to get off your chest?

    • Replies: @Alden
  322. Dumbo says:
    @Priss Factor

    I prefer “Roman Holiday” over Tiffany’s. Hepburn looks more authentic there, and the film is better, too, at least to my tastes. It’s a real gem.

    Tiffany’s is a bit silly and Mickey Rooney as the Japanese dude is really over-the-top and takes me out of the movie. Maybe if they had used Peter Sellers? He could transform more convincingly into anything, and he worked well with Edwards…

    But I think the best contribution of Blake Edwards is to have popularized the music of Henry Mancini, this one yes a true genius.

  323. Alden says:
    @Kiel

    I’m a heterosexual woman you misogynist women hating sexually deprived sad old bachelor.

  324. Hibernian says:

    If your posts were fed into a computer the computer would say you were a slightly nerdish Northern European Protestant straight man. And not at all just because your handle is (John) Alden rather than, say (Priscilla) Mullins. Your accusations of misogyny directed at certain men (generally absolutely justifiable) sound a lot how straight guys sometimes talk about suspected gay guys. (Not the really gross instances or anywhere near it.) That’s just one indication. It’s just a matter of subtleties of word choices and probably an accident of the cultural influences you grew up with.

  325. Waco says:

    One thing I dont get is the title. Did jewelry stores serve breakfast back then?

  326. @Old Palo Altan

    The wife just got back from a week in Paris.

    I didn’t go because I didn’t want my Paris of the late 70’s 80’s 90’s diluted,
    She enjoyed it greatly, was perfectly safe and the only danger was the taxi driver who wanted 230 Euro’s for a 40 E ride from the airport,

    avoid the banlieue of course.

  327. Doug P. says:
    @anon

    I agree with you Zelda…And,yes,fuck the kikes who run Hollywood.

  328. Doug P. says:

    I started to watch BAT when it was shown on TV when I was in high school…10 mins. into it I thought to myself…”Man,this is some corny-assed bullshit” and turned the channel.But after reading this review,I think Ill get the book from the library and then try watching the movie again.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Trevor Lynch Comments via RSS