MovieChat Forums > Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961) Discussion > What's In Breakfast at Tiffany's OTHER T...

What's In Breakfast at Tiffany's OTHER Than Mickey Rooney's Offensive Japanese Character.

posted 9 months ago by roger1 (3692)
42 replies | jump to latest

"Breakfast at Tiffany's" is seen nowadays as a sort of "second tier classic" in American studio filmmaking. It was released in 1961 by Paramount Pictures.

Of comparative note: ANOTHER classic -- a "first tier classic" in American studio filmmaking -- was released the year before, 1960, by Paramount Pictures: Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho.

Now what do those two movies have in common? Not much. One supporting actor: Martin Balsam. That's about it, content-wise.

But I see THIS in common this way:

Psycho was a classic movie, a big hit, etc -- but all these years later it always seems to be called out for one "not good" scene at the end: the long scene in which psychiatrist Simon Oakland describes-- at great length for minutes of screen time, WHY the film's psycho killer IS a psycho killer. It seems modern film historians can't discuss Psycho(even with its world-famous shower murder scene) without saying 'but this classic has a horrible psychiatrist scene that forever blemishes the movie.

With Breakfast at Tiffany's, its roughtly the same : "but this classic has a horrible and offensive Japanese character played with buck teeth by Caucasion Mickey Rooney."

In both cases -- with both films -- its like they come with a 'warning label: "Beware the awful scene in this otherwise great movie."

Its too bad really. But we so often see the bitter over the sweet.

Up front, I'll say: I think "the psychiatrist scene" is a great scene in the great movie, and a lot of critics(including Ebert) almost missed entirely that the shrink actually solved a lot of mysteries in that monologue(including that a young man murdered his own mother, stole her corpse and stuffed it to keep around the house)...its not just psychobabble.

Meanwhile, over at "Breakfast at Tiffany's":

I recall some years ago in the news a story about some city deciding to cancel a free "Outdoor Movie in the City Park" screening of Breakfast at Tiffany's because word got out about the Rooney Japanese character. Yep...cancelled, and probably within the context of modern mores...necessary (though I'd say, oh come on, man up and get over it.)

But by cancelling that screening of Breakfast at Tiffany's over that ONE element, the City Fathers chose to ignore all the rest of the film...which is pretty good, and in at least two cases "classic for the ages."

Here are some great things in Breakfast at Tiffany's that should obscure Rooney's performance(which is intermittant, anyway., not much screen time at all)

ONE: The theme song, "Moon River." Yes, we are leaving much of the culture of the past behind us now(it is the 21th Century after all) but when that song hit, it HIT. Veteran songwriter Johnny Mercer was the lyricist(and the lyrics are great) but Henry Mancini put himself on the map for the entire decade. He'd already hit paydirt with a Blake Edwards TV show -- "Peter Gunn" and its way-too-cool thumping jazz theme. Now he scored a Blake Edwards movie and the two were "joined at the hip" until Mancini died in 1994.

"Moon River" is a lush and poignant instrumental over the opening credits -- as Audrey has her Breakfast at Tiffany's in a ghost town empty NYC -- the breakfast is a roll from a bag. "Moon River" gets a movie "choir sing with lyrics"(unforgettable lyrics) at the end over the film's so-happy-you-cry final scene. And those lyrics would become a popular song on the radio and on TV -- a huge hit for Andy Williams (HIS theme song as surely as "Que Sera Sera" was for Doris Day.) But everybody else sang "Moon River" too, from Frank Sinatra (with a sad arrangement) to James Taylor(just a few years ago.)

And oh, Audrey Hepburn sings the lyrics to Moon River in Breakfast at Tiffany's itself, in a novice's slightly weak (but lovable) rendition - she would be dubbed with a POWERFUL singer's voice for My Fair Lady.

And oh, a famous story -- maybe true, maybe not: Some Paramount exec in a meeting where Hepburn was present said "well, we need to get rid of that song." Hepburn strongly objected: "Over my dead BODY." It stayed. Its a nice story.

"Moon River" won the Oscar for Best Song(back when Best Song mattered more TO movies), and for Best Dramatic Score(its one of those movies, like The Way We Were, where the theme runs through the entire movie, start to finish. ) It won all the major Grammys for 1961, too.

And it lasted -- maybe its forgotten by the youth of today, but James Taylor helped keep it before the last of the Boomers.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

TWO: Audrey Hepburn.

"Breakfast at Tiffany's" might well have the definitive ICONIC Audrey Hepburn performance (and "look") even as she was great in "Roman Holiday," "Charade," "My Fair Lady," and "Wait Until Dark." But for a generation or two, when you thought about Audrey Hepburn, you SAW her in Breakfast at Tiffany's --as on the iconic movie poster, as in the opening scene of the film -- that dress, that hairstyle, that cigarette holder. I daresay -- as a matter of controversy -- that in the modern year of 2023, the trans individual who landed a contract to promote Bud Light beer chose to wear Hepburn's "Breakfast at Tiffany's" look (hair, dress, cigarette holder) as part of the campaign!

Honestly, the combination of "Moon River"(the song AND the Mancini score) and Hepburn's iconic role(rendered in the classic opening scene) was probably enough to put "Breakfast at Tiffany's" in the record books as a bonafide classic.

But the overall story itself can join that stalwart list of movies "made on the cusp of the 50s into the 60s" that took turns poking holes in the Hays Code as an advance regiment to the "freedom of the screen" that R and X(NC-17) would bring at the end of the decade. I count among those movies Some Like It Hot, Anatomy of a Murder, North by Northwest, The Apartment, Psycho, Spartacus, Judgment at Nuremberg and...Breakfast at Tiffany's. Because:

Hepburn seems to be a call girl of sorts -- though it is left unsaid if she ever actually "does it" for money rather than just teasing men to GET money.

The male lead, George Peppard, is "kept" by a wealthy older woman(Patricia Neal.)

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

Hepburn is revealed to be a sophisticate who was actually a "poor hillbilly girl" who, it is revealed, married a man 30 years her elder(Jed Clampett himself, Buddy Ebsen, right before he got The Beverly Hillbillies) which suggests "early sex" and a past to hide. (As the Hollywood agent played by Martin Balsam says: "I say she's a phony...but she's a genuine phony."

And there is family tragedy hiding behind the sophisticated comedy.

But also:

That famous party scene. Here was Blake Edwards establishing his talent: total adult sophistication mixed in with childish slapstick humor(very funny slapstick humor.) Plus, "boys and girls together." Sex is in the air at this party. As it turns out the success of the party scene in Breakfast at Tiffany's inspired Edwards to co-write an ENTIRE MOVIE about an even bigger party. It was called The Party , natch. 1968. Peter Sellers playing a sweet and child-like Hindu Indian who can't help turning a Hollywood party into utter chaos.

And finally (for now):

The final sequence. I saw Breakfast at Tiffany's with my parents when I was very young -- too young to understand much of it at all . But I DID understand the end as i watched it. Audrey Hepburn THREW HER PET CAT out of a taxicab and onto the rainy streets of NYC. Mancini's music came on heavy and dramatic...like his thriller music for Wait Until Dark or Charade. I was crying(very young , no shame now.)

And then, in an alley, Hepburn found the cat. And Peppard found Hepburn. And they embraced and kissed with that poor wet cat cradled between them. "Moon River" with a chorus comes up, Paramount Mountain comes up. The End. A classic tearjerker into happiness ending.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

Post-script: many years later, I dated a woman with a great sense of movies, and a great sense of romance. In her apartment she had a few "movie kissing scenes" blown up and framed. The centerpiece to one entire ROOM was a portrait of...Hepburn and Peppard kissing in the rain with that poor cat smushed between them.

Was this woman a keeper? That's for me to know..

[–] GolfnGuitars (2915) 9 months ago

As always, I enjoyed reading your posts/observations very much. This is one of those films I watched after my dad passed away in 2016. I really liked it a lot...it made me feel "nostalgic" for what life might have felt like in 1960/1961.

I agree that there is just something so..."charming" (for lack of a better word) about Audrey Hepburn singing "Moon River" that makes it such a classic scene. Hepburn's singing just fits the song (and scene) perfectly, IMO.

One of my big "takeaways" from watching BAT (as someone who wasn't born until 1969 and not having near the movie/Hollywood knowledge that you have) was getting to see George Peppard as a younger actor. I think the first thing I got to see Peppard in was the old NBC series "Banacek" (My family would watch it when I was a kid). However, the role I remember him for is Capt. John "Hannibal" Smith in "The A-Team." His character in BAT is interesting....a "man's man" in some ways, but also flawed. It was cool to see Peppard in that role.

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

This is one of those films I watched after my dad passed away in 2016. I really liked it a lot...it made me feel "nostalgic" for what life might have felt like in 1960/1961.

---

Thank you for your kind words, I'm sorry for your loss and...it is interesting the extent to which these movies are "time machines" to another time.

ANY movie from the past is a "time machine to another time," but as I've mentioned elsewhere, I personally have a real affinity for what I call the "50s/60s cusp," as the movies (and movie stars) of the 50s gave way to the somewhat more "hip" time at the movies -- and even a major 50's actress like Audrey Hepburn "got hip" too. The actress of Roman Holiday and Funny Face and The Nun's Story(!) was suddenly playing a sexually active possible call girl mixed up with the mob(in BAT) and a "damsel in distress" against some REALLY dangerous men in "Charade"(with Cary Grant to help her) and "Wait Until Dark"(with NO ONE to help her against psychotic killer Alan Arkin.)

I've decided to cash this in rather than hide from it: I saw Breakfast at Tiffany's FIRST RUN at a drive in, from my usual perch in the backseat while my parents discussed the film along the way. I remember these things: the opening theme of Moon River "got me" emotionally even as a kid -- I remember my mother opining "this sounds a lot like a Western" -- because of the harmonica. Hah. I remember finding the now-disgusting Mickey Rooney's Mr. Yunioshi actually quite funny -- to a CHILD(I was) -- and as a way to "escape all the adult stuff I didn't understand"-- Yunioshi was rather like Jerry Lewis was to me at that age -- do not both Yunioshi and The Nutty Professor of 1963 have buck teeth?

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

And I mainly remember the ending, with Audrey Hepburn upset and crying and THROWING THE CAT OUT OF THE CAR. This was quite devastating to me -- a reminder that maybe parents shouldn't always take their kids to the movies at too young an age. But she rescued the cat, Peppard rescued her, the CHORUS(with words) of Moon River came up and EVEN AT THAT YOUNG AGE -- I felt some emotion and sophistication.

Seems that most people at Moviechat were children in the 90s and later. Some in the 80s. But us folks all the way back to the 60s? A dying breed(but not YET).

And I found that being taken to all these movies with all the great emotional(Moon River) or hip(Pink Panther) Henry Mancini music gave me SOME sophistication in taste as a very young age and (better still) SOME sophistication about the adult world that other kids didn't have.

"Movie music" -- often but not always by Mancini -- often got "album versions' by artists who "brought the movies to your record player."

I recall a mid-sixties Andy Williams album played by my parents featured these songs from these movies: Breakfast at Tiffany's(Moon River), Days of Wine and Roses(title song), Emily(The Americanization of Emily), Dear Heart(title tune)
--rock was waiting for me but those songs played by my parents created a sense of emotional sophistication tied to the movies themselves. (And Moon River and Days of Wine and Roses won Oscars) Another movie composer named Neal Hefti did emotional jazz work for the theme from Harlow(and its secondary pop hit, Girl Talk), How to Murder Your Wife, Barefoot in the Park(from Neil Simon's first play) and the piece de resistance, The Odd Couple(from Simon's second play.) Also Hefti did the campy psuedo rock TV "Batman" theme song(the lyric was simply: "Batman" over and over and over.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

I agree that there is just something so..."charming" (for lack of a better word) about Audrey Hepburn singing "Moon River" that makes it such a classic scene. Hepburn's singing just fits the song (and scene) perfectly, IMO.

--

Yes. For all the fame of the instrumental orchestra theme at the opening, and the chorus at the end, and Andy Williams on the radio -- Hepburn's slightly strained, slightly weak rendition(on dubbed guitar) ties us directly into her character. But alas, when she got My Fair Lady(taken away from great singer Julie Andrews by Jack Warner), Hepburn was REQUIRED to take a dubbed singer(Marni Nixon?) in her place. Rather betrayed the Moon River voice.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

One of my big "takeaways" from watching BAT (as someone who wasn't born until 1969 and not having near the movie/Hollywood knowledge that you have) was getting to see George Peppard as a younger actor. I think the first thing I got to see Peppard in was the old NBC series "Banacek" (My family would watch it when I was a kid). However, the role I remember him for is Capt. John "Hannibal" Smith in "The A-Team." His character in BAT is interesting....a "man's man" in some ways, but also flawed. It was cool to see Peppard in that role.

--

In Quentin Tarantino's "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," Leo's Rick Dalton talks about competing for movie roles with the "three Georges": George Peppard, George Maharis, and George Chakiris. For once, I think QT got his trivia WRONG. Maharis left the Route 66 TV series and rather crashed and burned fast in movies(Walter Mirsch, producer of 1965's The Satan Bug, said they tried to get a bigger star than Maharis and Maharis couldn't carry the movie.) George Chakiris had a Supporting Actor Oscar for West Side Story but didn't "carry" to traditional leading man roles.

But George Peppard was a "right guy, right place" young actor took roles Steve McQueen turned down -- or lost(Breakfast at Tiffany's) and became a movie star. Just not for very long.

61 and 62 brought Peppard Breakfast at Tiffany's and How the West Was Won(seen by EVERYONE) and in 1966 he headline the major roadshow WWI air drama ('The Blue Max.") But his movies kept getting worse and worse as the 60's wore on into the early 70s and when he did Banacek in 1971 for TV -- we all knew he wasn't a movie star anymore.

No matter. He used "Banacek" for a little while and "The A Team" for longer and...survived in TV. (He got The A Team after being fired from Dynasty -- John Forsythe took the role and got late breaking fame.)

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

I once served George Peppard a free coke at a charity carnival. He was in his Banacek period then -- pretty cool in person. Working the booth with me was a pretty co-ed who said this to Peppard:

Co-ed: Remember me? I was your teammate on Password.
Peppard: (After a moment and politely) Yes..yes I do. (Why not? She was pretty.)
Co-ed: You lost for us, remember?
Peppard: Oh.

And Peppard walked away. Pretty coeds get to be mean to TV stars.

We also served James Garner that day. In his Rockford period. No trouble that time. I will tell you that man was BROAD in upper body. Its like his upper body was as tall horizontally as vertically. Garner is another one who got to be a movie star in the 60s and then went back to TV where he came from (Maverick.) And then got to go back to movies again.

[–] GolfnGuitars (2915) 9 months ago

roger1: "I once served George Peppard a free coke at a charity carnival. He was in his Banacek period then -- pretty cool in person. Working the booth with me was a pretty co-ed who said this to Peppard:

Co-ed: Remember me? I was your teammate on Password.
Peppard: (After a moment and politely) Yes..yes I do. (Why not? She was pretty.)
Co-ed: You lost for us, remember?
Peppard: Oh.

And Peppard walked away. Pretty coeds get to be mean to TV stars.

We also served James Garner that day. In his Rockford period. No trouble that time. I will tell you that man was BROAD in upper body. Its like his upper body was as tall horizontally as vertically. Garner is another one who got to be a movie star in the 60s and then went back to TV where he came from (Maverick.) And then got to go back to movies again."

Me: Again, this is just "gold" for someone like me! 😃 Thank you again for sharing these! My mom probably watched Peppard's "Password" episode back in the day (and I may have also, if I happened to be sick or it aired during the Summer...I don't recall watching it, though).

I'm a big fan of "The Rockford Files" also and James Garner was just so awesome in that! (We were an "NBC family," for the most part...growing up in Southern Ohio out in the country, NBC came in better than what ABC and "CBS did, so we mostly watched NBC shows...with a few exceptions: e.g., "Happy Days" and "Laverne & Shirley"). I think James Garner was an awfully good celebrity golfer back in the day...he was supposedly a really good player. He was such an excellent actor...made it seem "effortless" in a lot of ways, naturally exuding that mix of "cool machoism" that made him so much fun to watch.

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

I'm a big fan of "The Rockford Files" also and James Garner was just so awesome in that!

---

Its odd how Garner started in TV(Maverick in the 50s), got to be a major movie star in the 60s (The Great Escape, The Americanization of Emily, Grand Prix and a Doris Day movie) but sort of "had to go back to TV" by the 70's. Just like the older Kirk Douglas and Tony Curtis, Garner was pushed back to
TV to make way for a "young new generation" -- Nicholson, Pacino, DeNiro -- Eastwood, Reynolds, Bronson. It was a tough time.

---

(We were an "NBC family," for the most part...growing up in Southern Ohio out in the country, NBC came in better than what ABC and "CBS did, so we mostly watched NBC shows...with a few exceptions: e.g., "Happy Days" and "Laverne & Shirley").

---

In this age of cable and streaming I think it is hard for people to conceive that it used to be you could NOT get all channels in clearly. You had to move rabbit ears around ON the TV; or shift the attena on the roof, or just put up with bad reception.

---

I think James Garner was an awfully good celebrity golfer back in the day...he was supposedly a really good player.

---

Yes..I think his brother was golf pro. He could have been.

---
CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

He was such an excellent actor...made it seem "effortless" in a lot of ways, naturally exuding that mix of "cool machoism" that made him so much fun to watch.

--

Yep. A favorite of mine. And if he had to go back to TV, "Rockford" was a great vehicle. Laid back, funny...but tough.

He got some movies AFTER Rockford -- notably in Victor/Victoria with Julie Andrews for her husband Blake Edwards(in a role Tom Selleck had to turn down..Magnum yields to Rockford.)

And Garner got his one Best Actor Oscar nomination for the charming "Murphy's Romance" with SAlly Field as his younger love interest. 1985. I saw Garner answer a quick question as he walked the Oscar red carpet, about his chances to win. He said in that lazy drawl, with a grin: "Oh, I'm guessing I'm fifth out of five." He wrote a good autobio in his amiable voice(with some toughness), and he wrote that not only was "The Americanization of Emily" his favorite movie of his -- he thought it was the best movie ever made. No Kidding.

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

Me: Thank you for the observations on Peppard! He's such an iconic actor to me...it's like Erik Estrada and Larry Wilcox from "CHiPs"...they just tie into a rather fond period of my life where I watched them on a weekly basis growing up.

---

People forget that TV actors have a different "pull" on one's life than movie stars. "You invite them into your home," and the TV formula of the time was "a pair of male buddies." Estrada and Wilcox in one era -- in mine(the 60's when I watched TV more) -- it was those spy teams: Culp and Cosby in I Spy, Robert Conrad and Ross Martin in The Wild Wild West(the movie with Will Smith and Kevin Kline ENTIRELY missed the friendship of the two leads), Robert Vaughn and David McCallum in The Man From UNCLE.

---

I'm thinking that Peppard had a reputation for being"difficult" (I think I remember reading that he was a "recovering alcoholic").

---

All true, from everything I've read. This may have contributed to his eventually not getting major movie roles - and getting fired from Dynasty. But...he hung in there and came back with The A Team.
Hell in the movie of The A Team, Liam Neeson not only plays Peppard's role, he wears Peppard's HAIR (style and blond color.)

--However, again, he was just one of those "iconic actors" of my generation...we all wished we could be as cool and calm as Captain John "Hannibal" Smith!

---

Yes, it really doesn't matter WHAT these guys are like in real life -- we gravitate to the character and the team. As I recall, they even brought Robert Vaughn(The Man From UNCLE himself) in as a regular on The A Team -- a throwback to another TV era of heroes.

[–] GolfnGuitars (2915) 9 months ago

roger1: "In Quentin Tarantino's "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," Leo's Rick Dalton talks about competing for movie roles with the "three Georges": George Peppard, George Maharis, and George Chakiris. For once, I think QT got his trivia WRONG. Maharis left the Route 66 TV series and rather crashed and burned fast in movies(Walter Mirsch, producer of 1965's The Satan Bug, said they tried to get a bigger star than Maharis and Maharis couldn't carry the movie.) George Chakiris had a Supporting Actor Oscar for West Side Story but didn't "carry" to traditional leading man roles.

But George Peppard was a "right guy, right place" young actor took roles Steve McQueen turned down -- or lost(Breakfast at Tiffany's) and became a movie star. Just not for very long.

61 and 62 brought Peppard Breakfast at Tiffany's and How the West Was Won(seen by EVERYONE) and in 1966 he headline the major roadshow WWI air drama ('The Blue Max.") But his movies kept getting worse and worse as the 60's wore on into the early 70s and when he did Banacek in 1971 for TV -- we all knew he wasn't a movie star anymore.

No matter. He used "Banacek" for a little while and "The A Team" for longer and...survived in TV. (He got The A Team after being fired from Dynasty -- John Forsythe took the role and got late breaking fame.)"

Me: Thank you for the observations on Peppard! He's such an iconic actor to me...it's like Erik Estrada and Larry Wilcox from "CHiPs"...they just tie into a rather fond period of my life where I watched them on a weekly basis growing up. I'm thinking that Peppard had a reputation for being"difficult" (I think I remember reading that he was a "recovering alcoholic"). However, again, he was just one of those "iconic actors" of my generation...we all wished we could be as cool and calm as Captain John "Hannibal" Smith! 😃

[–] GolfnGuitars (2915) 9 months ago

roger1: "And I mainly remember the ending, with Audrey Hepburn upset and crying and THROWING THE CAT OUT OF THE CAR. This was quite devastating to me -- a reminder that maybe parents shouldn't always take their kids to the movies at too young an age. But she rescued the cat, Peppard rescued her, the CHORUS(with words) of Moon River came up and EVEN AT THAT YOUNG AGE -- I felt some emotion and sophistication."

Me: Yes, it's such a shock watching that scene! It would have been such a terrible ending if the cat were never found! 😃

roger1: "Seems that most people at Moviechat were children in the 90s and later. Some in the 80s. But us folks all the way back to the 60s? A dying breed(but not YET)."

Me: Again, a big part of the reason that I love reading your posts are the perspectives that you bring when you write about them. And a big part of that is your "age." 😃 It's why I loved reading what you wrote on IMDb and why I love reading your posts on MovieChat. There's almost a "historical perspective" that your posts have...keep your posts coming!

roger1: "And I found that being taken to all these movies with all the great emotional(Moon River) or hip(Pink Panther) Henry Mancini music gave me SOME sophistication in taste as a very young age and (better still) SOME sophistication about the adult world that other kids didn't have.

"Movie music" -- often but not always by Mancini -- often got "album versions' by artists who "brought the movies to your record player."

I recall a mid-sixties Andy Williams album played by my parents featured these songs from these movies: Breakfast at Tiffany's(Moon River), Days of Wine and Roses(title song), Emily(The Americanization of Emily), Dear Heart(title tune)
--rock was waiting for me but those songs played by my parents created a sense of emotional sophistication tied to the movies themselves. (And Moon River and Days of Wine and Roses won Oscars) Another movie composer named Neal Hefti did emotional jazz work for the theme from Harlow(and its secondary pop hit, Girl Talk), How to Murder Your Wife, Barefoot in the Park(from Neil Simon's first play) and the piece de resistance, The Odd Couple(from Simon's second play.) Also Hefti did the campy psuedo rock TV "Batman" theme song(the lyric was simply: "Batman" over and over and over."

Me: Again, great observations and perspectives. I agree wholeheartedly about the greatness of Henry Mancini. My family liked Andy Williams a lot as well...both of my parents were from "Appalachia" and they listened to a lot of bluegrass music, country music, gospel music. However, I remember an album we had that had songs featuring Andy Williams, Jim Nabors, Perry Como, et.al. The music appealed to people in all different social classes.

[–] GolfnGuitars (2915) 9 months ago

roger1: "Thank you for your kind words, I'm sorry for your loss and...it is interesting the extent to which these movies are "time machines" to another time.

ANY movie from the past is a "time machine to another time," but as I've mentioned elsewhere, I personally have a real affinity for what I call the "50s/60s cusp," as the movies (and movie stars) of the 50s gave way to the somewhat more "hip" time at the movies -- and even a major 50's actress like Audrey Hepburn "got hip" too. The actress of Roman Holiday and Funny Face and The Nun's Story(!) was suddenly playing a sexually active possible call girl mixed up with the mob(in BAT) and a "damsel in distress" against some REALLY dangerous men in "Charade"(with Cary Grant to help her) and "Wait Until Dark"(with NO ONE to help her against psychotic killer Alan Arkin.)

I've decided to cash this in rather than hide from it: I saw Breakfast at Tiffany's FIRST RUN at a drive in, from my usual perch in the backseat while my parents discussed the film along the way. I remember these things: the opening theme of Moon River "got me" emotionally even as a kid -- I remember my mother opining "this sounds a lot like a Western" -- because of the harmonica. Hah. I remember finding the now-disgusting Mickey Rooney's Mr. Yunioshi actually quite funny -- to a CHILD(I was) -- and as a way to "escape all the adult stuff I didn't understand"-- Yunioshi was rather like Jerry Lewis was to me at that age -- do not both Yunioshi and The Nutty Professor of 1963 have buck teeth?"

Me: This is awesome! Again, I just love the perspectives that you give with your posts. Besides the examples that you gave...with you being such a huge fan of "Psycho," it's interesting to me (as someone who wasn't born until 1969) that there's only about a year's difference in these two movies, but they seem so different: "Psycho" being filmed in black & white, with a very serious vibe; "BAT," filmed in color with a bit of a "lighthearted" vibe. Two very different approaches...but I think both are "great movies."

And great for you seeing this "first-run!" I know you've seen so many movies over the years and figure you've seen so many more great "first-run movies" than I have. Thank you for sharing your experience of that...to me, things like that help to make this site so great!

I won't say too much about it, but Mickey Rooney's character did not bother me when I watched this. It was just a different time back then. I can definitely see how you found his character funny as a child.

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

roger1: "Seems that most people at Moviechat were children in the 90s and later. Some in the 80s. But us folks all the way back to the 60s? A dying breed(but not YET)."

Me: Again, a big part of the reason that I love reading your posts are the perspectives that you bring when you write about them. And a big part of that is your "age." 😃 It's why I loved reading what you wrote on IMDb and why I love reading your posts on MovieChat. There's almost a "historical perspective" that your posts have...keep your posts coming!

---

I thank you for all of your responses. Believe it or not, while I like "sending out these historical reports"(because, well, I WAS there for those things), I always get a little embarrassed when actual responses come in, and yet: it means you are reading this stuff and valuing it in the way I intend, so that is a good feeling.

I know of at least three "flame" arguments that can be made AGAINST such reminising on my part, and I'll refute them(this one time, hah) here:

ONE: "Just some old guy going down memory lane." Well, I don't feel that old, and in the current movie world, my age peers are guys like Kevin Costner, Mel Gibson, Tom Hanks, John Travolta -- all of whom are older men but still retain a certain youth, don't they? It CAN be that way out in the real world. Its all in the mind. As for "memory lane" well, I think it beats "just giving a review on a movie." You can put a DVD of Psycho or Breakfast at Tiffany's in the player(is that still done) and see EXACTLY the same movie people saw in 1960 or 1961 -- but no way you will get the experience OF being there and doing that..

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

I never saw Psycho in 1960, by the way. I didn't even know what it was yet. My 1960 memories -- both at drive-ins -- are Disney's Pollyanna(traumatic: the young heroine falls from a tall tree and the end and may be crippled for life) and "The Time Machine"(told to keep my head down by my parents when the Ugly Monster Morlocks came on, I peeked over the back set just in time for a close-up of a Morlock face to terrify me.)

I was another year older when I saw Breakfast at Tiffany's in late 1961 and -- I"ve read -- childhood memories sometimes last the longest in one's brain. So I remember the music, and the sad cat finale that turns happy, and yes, Mickey Rooney.

I saw Breakfast at Tiffany's at a drive-in, too. I realize now that my parents used the drive ins to "baby sit" their children without the cost of the sitter and keeping the kids close at hand. A lot of the movies we saw were too "dull and serious" to entertain a child, but I think the folks(rightly) figured the kids would just go to sleep.

The parents didn't take us to horror movies -- and NEVER would have taken us to Psycho -- but sort of "by accident" they took us to some traumatic drive-in movies as kids: How about To Kill a Mockingbird? Set aside the rough racial issues in the film - it had that TERRIFYING finale where a monster-man villain stalked two children through the dark woods at night and attacked them. My parents had their code phrase ready: "Get on the floor! NOW!"

"Get on the floor! NOW!" was also necessary for the murder scenes in The Manchurian Candidate(1962) and the opening scene in "The KIllers"(1964) but over the years, was needed less and less. The REALLY funny part was a lifelong desire to SEE the "get on the floor now" scenes in The Manchurian Candidate and The Killers. And I did. And my parents were right. At the time. For kids. Plus: I liked seeing the scenes I COULD see in those movies. Helped me feel old beyond my years.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

back to the insults:

TWO: "You must have had a rich and rewarding life." This was an actual troll comment meant to sting, no doubt for "wasting all your years going to movies." Nah..part of WHY my life has been rich and rewarding has been..the movies themselves. Just like going to ball games. Or plays. Or the ballet(for some.) Or the opera(for some.) All the memories of WHO I saw the movies with(parents who are long dead, siblings who aren't kids anymore -- friends, family and ultimately..quite a few ladies.) And WHERE I saw them. In big cities. In suburbs. In Los Angeles. In San Francisco. In New York.

When I was younger, favorite movies were the most exciting things -- you anticipated them -- for a year or so, maybe (like the year between Jaws filming in the summer of 1974 to its release in the summer of 1975) then the excitement of seeing the film -- EXPERIENCING the film, rather.

And this: no, movies are not a substitute for a full education, but my parents DID try to drag us to the "learn some history, take your medicine" movies -- at an early age, I saw Lawrence of Arabia, Dr. Zhivago, The Agony and the Ecstasy, Becket, A Man For All Seasons, 55 Days at Peking, Napoleon. Even Gone With the Wind. I mean, you know "once over lightly -- now go read about these people."

Not to mention all the foreign lands that international cinema takes you to: hell, the James Bond series alone has taken me to countries I will never get to visit in real life.

So, yeah, movies DID provide a rich and fulfilling life. And you only need to spare two or three hours a week to SEE a movie a week - and I didn't, always. Which is to say: plenty of rich and fulfilling life I don't talk about HERE.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

And one more insult:

THREE: " You're living in the past." Well, yeah, sometimes, and its great. I think one of the hosts on Turner Classic Movies said that once "Its not good to live all the time in the past...but its fun some of the time." True. I'll never feel the emotion I felt for and at movies when I was young, but I can REMEMBER it. And I do make a point to keep up with MODERN movies as we have them -- I still have a personal favorite movie each year, I keep up with the "big ones" (Spielberg and Scorsese and QT and Nolan and the Coens)..you can live in the PRESENT as well as in the past. And in my case, I can live in the FUTURE. I'm as excited right now about QT's final film(he says) "The Movie Critic" coming out in 2025 as I was excited for Jaws coming back in 1975.

To me, the "funniest' aspect of living in the past is my clinging to my two favorite movies of all time, Hitchcock's North by Northwest(released in the summer of 1959) and Hitchcock's Psycho(released a year later in the summer of 1960.) I didn't even SEE them in theaters -- TV first(then big screen revival houses.) But NXNW stands from my youth as the most exciting action movie (with that Mount Rushmore climax) and Psycho stands from my youth as the most terrifying shocker(with that great house and motel for atmosphere.)

Well...that's CRAZY, isn't it? There are 60 years of more action and scarier terror in movie history. But those are MY two, the ones that set the bar. The ones I will never forget. And -- there are some things abou them that ARE better than a lot of what followed. And from what I can see, back in 1959 and 1960 NOBODY was delivering the kind of "perfect entertainment' excitement of those two movies.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

I would like to put in a plug for the grand historical value of the movie drive-in. THATs perhaps what I most value from my movie-going life.

Two things up front:

ONE: A drive-in is a HORRIBLE way to experience a motion picture. And certainly it WAS worse in the olden days Tinny sound boxes muflling the music. Poor clarity on the screen.

When I got older(teens) and understood the sub-standard nature of drive-in movie projection and sound, my friends and I would go to drive-ins in the summer -- with daylight savings time - and have to WAIT for it to get dark enough to SHOW the movie. But worse: the theater managers would start the movie BEFORE THE SUN SET...so you could only LISTEN to the movie and slowly watch the image finally come on. Hey: did we ask for a refund? Nah. Would the managers have given it? Nah. We simply put up with it. The key was to go to movies you didn't particularly want to see, or that you'd ALREADY seen indoors with good visiblity and projection. (As a teen my friends and I often chose subpar spaghetti Westerns and chopsocky films not to mentino stuff like "The Big Doll House" for grindhouse-style drive-in entertainment.

TWO: Drive-ins are pretty much gone and not visited much anymore where they are. History took them away. The coming of the VHS player allowed parents with kids to see movies at HOME with the kids. A rising demand for "perfect picture and perfect sound" turned everyone into "movie quality snobs." And evidently developers liked to make more money off of other uses of the land.

So yeah, I expect that drive-ins will be something for my generation to fondly remember as new generations reject them entirely.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

And here's the history if one starts with childhood:

Childhood(for kid's movies): The drive-in (with a playground) is a magical place, play with kids, hang with your family, remain in the presence of the parents without a sitter. Disney movies and cartoons if your parents wanted to treat you. (I saw "The Parent Trap" at the same drive-in where I saw "Breakfast at Tiffany's> The 1961 Parent Trap.)

Childhood(for adult movies): The R and X ratings weren't there when I was a kid, so generally the parents could bank on "family entertainment" at the drive-in. Still, they took us to a lot of dramas like "Advise and Consent"(which has one of the screen's first subplots about male gay culture, though I had no clue.) Is it borderline abuse to take children to adult dramas which they don't understand and will bore them? A little, I guess. But you had a choice in the car as your parents watched the adult-plot movie: go to sleep OR learn something about the adult world(I chose the latter.) By the way, I also saw Dr. Strangelove AND Fail Safe with my parents at the same drive-in where I saw Breakfast at Tiffany's and they had no compunction exposing me to the possibility of nuclear war and the end of the world. I thought it was FUNNY AND COOL when Slim Pickens bronco-busted that nuclear bomb. I understood the dark ending of Fail Safe. I wasn't terrified -- it felt more like I was being prepared for the possible end of the world..and that was that.

Teen years("with the group.") I was lucky to have a co-ed group (with no romances in the beginning) who liked to go to drive-ins, line up cars and chairs and..have fun. The movie was secondary to having fun, talking, drinking...and sometimes making fun OF the movie. Bigger deal: by those years, the R and X ratings WERE in place and...the drive ins just let anybody in. Got a little sex education at the drive-in in the 70's. MASH. Klute. Get Carter(Caine's phone sex with Britt Eklund.) Some of Clint Eastwood's movies. And those were major studio releases. Plenty of "Big Doll House" movies were available. Blaxploitation, too.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

Teen years and beyond(with dates.) Seeing movies at the drive-in with "the gang" was fun. But seeing movies at the drive-in with a date --- well, that was a whole new experience. Drive-ins knew they got THOSE couples in their audience now. Honestly, I wonder where the kids go now. I suppose they have money for motels. (A sudden memory: Wilder's "The Apartment" of 1960 in which a middle-aged insurance executive complains of having to take his floozie to a drive-in in lieu of Jack Lemmon's "sex den" apartment.)

By the time I got old enough for kids and to start things "full circle," the drive-in was already out of favor. Many of them in my vicinity closed -- I have gone back to the cities of my youth and found the drive-ins so "gone" and replaced by strip malls and hotels and apartments that you can't even GUESS where the actual theater was. The era is over.

Yes, I think if there is one "memory lane" worth going down it is definitely the one with drive-ins on it.

[–] ElizabethJoestar (946) 9 months ago

TWO: "You must have had a rich and rewarding life." This was an actual troll comment meant to sting, no doubt for "wasting all your years going to movies."
--
I love how they made this comment on a website designed for discussing movies. Like what even??

The trolls on this site are honestly why I don't visit it too often. They're so childish, it's like they never left fourth grade. If you can't discuss a movie civilly, I can only imagine how fun they must be to discuss anything else IRL.

I second the users on this thread who admire you for your insights into these classic films as well as your perspective as a person who got to see them first-run. It's fun to read.

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

And great for you seeing this "first-run!" I know you've seen so many movies over the years and figure you've seen so many more great "first-run movies" than I have. Thank you for sharing your experience of that...to me, things like that help to make this site so great!

--

Well, thank you for reading. I am trying to leave behind some personal history of these films as they came along.

And you will be seeing MORE first run films in the years to come than I will...

[–] mechajutaro (2788) 9 months ago

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

"What's In Breakfast at Tiffany's OTHER Than Mickey Rooney's Offensive Japanese Character"

Testament to just how lackluster an actress Emilia Clarke is, when we compare her portrayal of this same character on Broadway with Audrey Hepburn's work here

---

Was the play from the movie or from the novella (darker, bleaker.)?

Either way, it IS hard to compete with a major movie star from a classic in period in a movie that forged her persona from then on. Movie stars DO matter. Or at least, they DID.

[–] GolfnGuitars (2915) 9 months ago

I wanted to get back here and respond sooner...my apologies. But I just wanted to let you know again how much I enjoy reading what you post. I do not wish to make you feel "embarrassed" (or "uncomfortable") in any way. You are a terrific writer and have so much knowledge about movies, actors/actresses, directors, a lot of "behind the scenes in Hollywood" anecdotes, etc. I've seen some of the posts where people give you a hard time about your postings, but please don't let that stop you from posting. You have way, way too much to offer here...I'm not sure if you were ever a "film critic"...if you weren't, you definitely could have been! 😃

I would respond more to your postings, but it's kind of like me playing a golf match against Tiger Woods. I just don't have the game to keep up! In golf terms, it's like we're playing a Par 5 and you're on the green 10 feet away putting for Eagle, while I'm still in the woods trying to find my tee shot! 😃 I saw some movies when I was a younger person, but I was more into sports and music (and still am, to be honest). But I just don't have near the movie knowledge that you do.

And one more thing...I'm almost 55 now and I'm at that stage where I'm like, "Holy Smokes..."Schindler's List" is over 30 years old now!" (Picking that as an example...I did see that one in the theater when it first came out). It just doesn't seem possible in some ways...and, yet, it is. What you talk about so often about movies being different today and the"theater/Hollywood experience" being different today is so true. I see it in terms of my 3 boys...it's just different for them than it was for me. I think it's important for the past to be "catalogued" to a certain degree and your posts (sharing your "personal experiences") do a great job of that!

Anyway...I just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed reading your responses here. Hope all is well...have a great day!

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

What you talk about so often about movies being different today and the"theater/Hollywood experience" being different today is so true. I see it in terms of my 3 boys...it's just different for them than it was for me. I think it's important for the past to be "catalogued" to a certain degree and your posts (sharing your "personal experiences") do a great job of that!

Anyway...I just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed reading your responses here. Hope all is well...have a great day!

--

Thank you very much for the kind words, GolfnGuitars. I can handle the harsh words(and I'm aware of my own faults which sometimes trigger them) but...at the end of the day, I have elected to use this board(as I once used the IMdb board) to try to "leave some information behind" history wise while at the same time invoking some fond memories of my own. Movies have not been the ONLY part of my life, but served big enough a role in my life to wonder why that happened and what that meant.

It is only in recent years that I have realized I had parents who REALLY liked the movies, and incorporated them into our family life early on. They would make the movies "special" in certain ways -- we pretty much always went out to a movie on Christmas Day( and not just a movie ABOUT Christmas; my favorite Christmas Day Movie Memory remains the 1966 rugged Western action film "The Professionals"

And: on our birthdays each child OR adult was given the "family gift" of us all going out to a movie together. I recall my mother picking Funny Girl. I once got Ice Station Zebra. Eh, it seemed big at the time.

I took all that movie-going for granted. I recall having some childhood friends who saw maybe two or three movies a YEAR. My household was different.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 9 months ago

And yet: there seemed to be SOME movies out there that EVERYBODY saw. In the sixties, among kids, it was Disney movies like Swiss Family Robinson or The Absent Minded Professor, but as I grew older I'd hear a lot about OTHERS seeing The Guns of Navarone, Irma La Douce and the "big one" of my childhood: Psycho. Either everybody SAW Psycho or wqs NOT ALLOWED to see Psycho(that would be me), but everybody TALKED about Psycho whenever it turned up(original release, two re-releases, TV.)

Anyway, the die was cast in my family: movies were on the menu, and I grew up with that special knowledge of a LOT of movies that, wouldn't you know, OTHERS have seen and talk about here on the internet. A big example in that regard is the 1967 Paul Newman-Richard Boone-Martin Balsam-Fredric March-Diane Cilento Western Hombre. I found all SORTS of people on these boards who love Hombre.

Anyway, those are the whys and wherefores that gave me this knowledge, and moviechat has allowed me to share. (Sharp eyes will notice I don't come by here all that often anymore, but it is still nice to know that it is here.)

For your part, Golf n Guitars, rest assured that it is enough to know that you read me from time to time, and I require no responses, detailed or otherwise, to this material.

PS. "Breakfast at Tiffany's," which I saw at a drive-in, triggered my reminisence of drive-ins above. Drive-ins certainly WERE a part of a rich and rewarding life: in childhood, as a teenager with friends, as a young fellow with dates. The memories of the movies are good, but the memories of the people I saw the movies with, are better.

[–] ElizabethJoestar (946) 8 months ago

You are a terrific writer and have so much knowledge about movies, actors/actresses, directors, a lot of "behind the scenes in Hollywood" anecdotes, etc. I've seen some of the posts where people give you a hard time about your postings, but please don't let that stop you from posting. You have way, way too much to offer here...I'm not sure if you were ever a "film critic"...if you weren't, you definitely could have been! 😃
--
I echo these sentiments! often roger1/ecarle's posts are the only ones worth a damn on this site.

[–] GolfnGuitars (2915) 8 months ago

Hello! I don't think we've ever corresponded directly, but I've read some of your postings/contributions on the "Psycho" board and have been really impressed with your writing, film knowledge, etc. It doesn't surprise me that you are a writer...you write beautifully and succinctly!

I would like to encourage you to post more on these forums, but perfectly understand why you don't. Like ecarle/roger1 and yourself, I really admire the posters here who make these thoughtful, informative posts here. I hope you continue to keep posting here when you can!

[–] ElizabethJoestar (946) 8 months ago

Thank you for the kind words!

[–] roger1 (3692) 8 months ago

..and from me too and to Elizabeth Joester as well. Knowledgeable! Both of you!

[–] davebuffalo (3470) 9 months ago

I thought BAT was painfully boring, having watched 👀 it for the first time in 2024. But Audrey Hepburn is fantastically beautiful.

[–] roger1 (3692) 8 months ago

PS. "Breakfast at Tiffany's," which I saw at a drive-in, triggered my reminisence of drive-ins above. Drive-ins certainly WERE a part of a rich and rewarding life: in childhood, as a teenager with friends, as a young fellow with dates. The memories of the movies are good, but the memories of the people I saw the movies with, are better.

--

After pondering the topic of "drive-in movie theaters" (not to be confused with "drive-in movies" -- the term given to the rather cheesy grindhouse type movies -- or 50's B SciFi flicks -- deemed ONLY worthy of drive-in exhibition), I return to....turn AGAINST drive-ins. But just a little bit.

I've noted that my parents took me(and others) to all sorts of first run, major movies at drive-ins in the 60s: Breakfast at Tiffany's, The Manchurian Candidate, To Kill a Mockingbird, Dr. Strangelove, and Fail-Safe among them. I've done some research: at some drive-ins, "children under 11 were free" and of course, babysitting costs were saved. (Over time, VHS, DVD, cable and streaming was how to watch in home with kids.)

Well, came young adulthood and the 70s;(perhaps even the late sixties), I became of a mind that INDOOR theaters were the ONLY way to TRULY see a movie. Even back then , before today's Stereophonic/THX/IMAX sound systems, I knew that I wanted quality in image and sound when I saw a movie.

That is, when I saw a movie I REALLY wanted to see, with great reviews and publicity. The Wild Bunch --indoors. The Godfather -- indoors. The Exorcist -- indoors. Jaws -- INDOORS! It had to be.

And this: there remains something to be said for seeing a movie with a FULL HOUSE AUDIENCE. It is my opinion that today's jaded audiences do NOT scream at the movies much anymore, we're too tough(unless it is a really good jump scare.) But "back in the day," I sat in theaters ROCKED by wall-to-wall screaming for Wait Until Dark(1967), Jaws(1975) and Psycho(a 1979 revival of a 1960 movie.)

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 8 months ago

Articles about the 1960 release of Psycho included photographs of a "mile long line of cars" going into a drive-in theater in new Jersey for a night's screening of Psycho. I've always wondered: given that car windows have to be open to hold the drive-in speakers...what did it SOUND like in that open air drive-in theater in 1960 in New Jersey when the big scream moments hit in Psycho? Did screams emanate over the night air from the cars?

(Someone wrote of seeing Psycho at the drive-in with their parents in 1960 and on the moment of one of the biggest shocks in the movie -- the psycho Mother running out of her room to kill the private eye -- a moth flew in the window of the family car at the same time and struck him. BIG screams.)

I'm not sure that audiences scream anymore, but I think they LAUGH. But maybe they laughed even more "back in the day." I can remember scene after scene in the big comedies(from Mad, Mad World through The Pink Panther and on to Blazing Saddles and Animal House) where you COULD NOT HEAR certain lines being said for all the laughter.

Drive-ins wouldn't help with that experience, either..

Still, once I was a "movie sound and picture elitist" and a teenager, I selected for drive-in showings(with my friends and dates) either (1) movies I had ALREADY SEEN indoors or (2) movies I didn't much care about(I'll offer Kansas City Bomber and Hannie Caulder, two 1972 Raquel Welch vehicles, as examples) or REALLY bad cheapo movies (The BIg Doll House, sub-par Kung Fu and Spaghetti Western imports. I'd say Fists of Fury, but that's kinda beloved.)

I don't think we have the full blast of cheesy movies that so fed drive-ins in the 50's, 60s, and 70s, anymore, but they worked for drive-ins then.

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 8 months ago

A memorable 'second viewing" of movies first seen indoors...then OUTDOORS.

I saw The Godfather(after waiting in a very long line for a few hours) in March of 1972. Indoors. Big prestige theater(ONE screen, not a mulitplex.) I saw Woody Allen's very funny Play it Again Sam in May of 1972, I think. Indoors.

Much later in 1972 -- around November or so -- I went to the drive-in on a cold fall night with a few people -- a mix of males and females -- to see a "Paramount drive-in double bill" OF The Godfather and Play It Again Sam. I remember warning everyone: "The Godfather is THREE HOURS ...AND we're going to see Play It Again Sam?" No matter. Play It Again Sam is pretty short, The Godfather moves fast, its one of my favorite double-bill memories and part of it is because they were such great movies to see again and part of it was because I saw them at the drive-in(with some female interest growing over the long, long screening.)

[–] ElizabethJoestar (946) 8 months ago

I'm not sure that audiences scream anymore, but I think they LAUGH. But maybe they laughed even more "back in the day." I can remember scene after scene in the big comedies(from Mad, Mad World through The Pink Panther and on to Blazing Saddles and Animal House) where you COULD NOT HEAR certain lines being said for all the laughter.
--
Funny you should say that-- silent screen comedian Buster Keaton made the same argument in the 1960s. He felt the modern comedies then didn't rock the house the way the 1910s/1920s comedies did. Maybe it always feels that way, who knows?

I think the only time I can recall being in a theater were people screamed with laughter was at a college screening of Tommy Wiseau's so bad it's good drama The Room. My stomach cramped and my sides hurt from laughing so much.

[–] roger1 (3692) 8 months ago

I'm not sure that audiences scream anymore, but I think they LAUGH. But maybe they laughed even more "back in the day." I can remember scene after scene in the big comedies(from Mad, Mad World through The Pink Panther and on to Blazing Saddles and Animal House) where you COULD NOT HEAR certain lines being said for all the laughter.
--
Funny you should say that-- silent screen comedian Buster Keaton made the same argument in the 1960s. He felt the modern comedies then didn't rock the house the way the 1910s/1920s comedies did.

---

Well..he would know. Possibly he was speaking of generic "TV goes movie" Bob Hope comedies and things like "Bachelor Flat"(you could look it up.)

But I've heard big laughs at Mad Mad World decades later.

(And I'm flashing real quick on a moment in Silver Streak where elegant villain Patrick McGoohan angrily calls "waiter" Richard Pryor the N word and Pryor pulls a gun on him -- "Who you calling n-word, sucka!" The audience exploded and I couldn't hear the dialogue for about four more minutes.)

--

CONT

[–] roger1 (3692) 8 months ago

Maybe it always feels that way, who knows?

---
Probably. I"ve read 1963 reviews of "Mad Mad World" by "major critics" and they didn't feel it was very funny at all -- and ESPECIALLY versus Chaplin and Keaton(and Keaton is IN IT for one quick bit with Spencer Tracy.) They also felt it was too long and gargantuan to get laughs.

We didn't care. We LAUGHED. Especially anytime that Jonathan Winters had the screen and the lines.

Like when he is handed a small bicycle to traverse a desert highway and says:

"But...but...this is a GIRL"s bike. This is a bike for a LITTLE GIRL."

Huge laughs.

Also huge laughs in the sequence where Winters destroys a gas station and tells the two attendants briefly "Now I'm tellin' ya -- you two guys are really gettin' out of line! I've had about enough of this." Like its THEIR fault he is destroying their station. Wall to wall laughs.

---

I think the only time I can recall being in a theater were people screamed with laughter was at a college screening of Tommy Wiseau's so bad it's good drama The Room. My stomach cramped and my sides hurt from laughing so much.

---

Well, there you go...and were there minutes upon end where you couldn't hear the dialogue from the laughs?

Billy Wilder told a famous story about why he had Jack Lemmon(in drag) deliver lines about receiving a marriage proposal(from a man, Joe E. Brown), in Some Like It Hot, while shaking maracas every 30 seconds or so - to give the audience time to laugh before the next line.

I think I'll stand by my belief that screaming doesn't happen so much anymore JUST on suspense -- quickly on jump scares maybe, but that's it. I think I'll stand on my belief that good comedies(or "good bad movies" like The Room.) But I must say its been awhile since I've been at any modern comedy getting those kind of laughs.

[–] ElizabethJoestar (946) 8 months ago

And this: there remains something to be said for seeing a movie with a FULL HOUSE AUDIENCE. It is my opinion that today's jaded audiences do NOT scream at the movies much anymore, we're too tough(unless it is a really good jump scare.) But "back in the day," I sat in theaters ROCKED by wall-to-wall screaming for Wait Until Dark(1967), Jaws(1975) and Psycho(a 1979 revival of a 1960 movie.)
--
I envy these experiences. Jaded audiences are no fun. The horror movies that are the most enjoyable in a theater these days are inevitably the more comedic ones, like M3GAN.

I think the most enjoyable "theater" experience I ever had outside of superhero stuff or The Room was a revival of Casablanca. The people attending were clearly fans and we were quoting our favorite scenes as they played.