History YMMV / BreakfastAtTiffanys

* AdaptationDisplacement: No, really, a novella, not just a movie.

* BrokenBase:
** The movie vs the book. The book is an anti love story, and specifically very queer focused; the unnamed narrator is gay and Holly is bisexual, they're not love interests and Holly in fact is a much different character (being based on Creator/MarilynMonroe). The movie is a RomanticComedy, where the two protagonists are obviously heterosexual love interests, there are new characters not in the original text, and Holly is a much more wholesome character. The jury is still out on which one is superior, or whether the movie can stand on its own even if it's basically an InNameOnly adaptation.
** Audrey Hepburn as Holly is another one. Fans of the book tend to think she was miscast (and she herself even thought she was) - as noted above, Holly is far more like Marilyn Monroe (who was Truman Capote's preferred choice) than Audrey Hepburn's brand of wholesome sophistication. But there are just as many who love her in the role, and her Holly has gone down in pop culture history (also noted as being quite ahead of her time by the values of 1961).

* SignatureScene: Audrey Hepburn wearing a LittleBlackDress and a string of pearls approaches Tiffany's, and eats her breakfast while looking in the shop window.

** During the climax inside the taxi, while trying to convince Holly not to go to Brazil, Paul roughly grabs Holly and says that she "belongs to him," because he loves her. Considering the only romantic interactions the two were shown to have previously had was a single unexpected kiss which was implied to be a one-time thing, Paul's grossly entitled notion that just because he continued to have feelings for Holly even though she went on to get engaged to another man and presumably moved beyond their one-time kiss (she even explicitly refers to their "romance" in the past tense in one scene) is pretty hard to excuse today, even if they do become a couple afterwards. While Paul's speech about how Holly's fear of settling down in any way is running her into the ground is a significant wake-up call for her, it's still inexcusable to treat someone this way, especially when they've given you no reason to assume they are still interested in you (the opposite, in fact!)
* WTHCastingAgency: Ms. Hepburn has stated that she was terribly miscast (Creator/TrumanCapote wanted Creator/MarilynMonroe for the role). And yet she made it work. Creator/MickeyRooney as a Japanese man, on the other hand...

* CommonKnowledge: Holly isn't actually a prostitute. Truman Capote referred to her as "an American {{Geisha}}" (which is the rare thing as acknowledging the difference between the two in American media). She attends parties and dinner dates with various men, with the expectation that she'll be given an expensive present in exchange or else "$50 for the powder room". Sex only happens if she's willing.

* IAmNotShazam: The protagonist's name is "Holly", not "Tiffany" (and even less known is the fact that "Holly" actually stands for "Holiday"). "Tiffany's" is a jewelry store and the breakfast in question consists of consuming a pastry and coffee while browsing the shop window display. (Despite that being the authentic experience from the film, which many fans did replicate outside the shop with pastries and coffees of their own, when Tiffany’s opened a café in 2009 fans flocked there in droves to have breakfast at Tiffany’s.) This didn't stop the movie from becoming a BabyNameTrendStarter for "Tiffany."

* IAmNotShazam: The protagonist's name is "Holly", not "Tiffany" (and even less known is the fact that "Holly" actually stands for "Holiday"). "Tiffany's" is a jewelry store and the breakfast in question consists of consuming a pastry and coffee while browsing the shop window display. This didn't stop the movie from becoming a BabyNameTrendStarter for "Tiffany."

* AdaptationDisplacement: No really, a novella, not just a movie.

* EthnicScrappy: Creator/MickeyRooney's character. With {{yellowface}} makeup, silly accent, thick glasses and buck teeth (along with being a general ButtMonkey UpToEleven), Mr. Yunioshi is one of the most notoriously racist caricatures in American film. In retrospect, both producer Richard Shepherd and director Creator/BlakeEdwards expressed their regret for casting Rooney. Rooney himself stated he was heart-broken over this [[ImplausibleDeniability and had never received a complaint about his portrayal]].

* EthnicScrappy: Creator/MickeyRooney's character. With {{yellowface}} makeup, silly accent, thick glasses and buck teeth (along with being a general ButtMonkey UpToEleven), Mr. Yunioshi is one of the most notoriously racist caricatures in American film. In ''Film/DragonTheBruceLeeStory'' it is used as an example of how Asians were depicted in Hollywood and how Lee was about to provide something better. In retrospect, both producer Richard Shepherd and director Creator/BlakeEdwards expressed their regret for casting Rooney. Rooney himself stated he was heart-broken over this [[ImplausibleDeniability and had never received a complaint about his portrayal]].

* IAmNotShazam: The protagonist's name is "Holly", not "Tiffany" (and even less known is the fact that "Holly" actually stands for "Holiday"). "Tiffany's" is a jewelry store and the breakfast in question consists of consuming a pastry and coffee while browsing the shop window display.

* AwardSnub: The film received five UsefulNotes/AcademyAward nominations and won two - Best Score for Music/HenryMancini and Best Song "Moon River". Creator/BlakeEdwards wasn't nominated for Best Director and Creator/GeorgePeppard wasn't nominated for Best Actor.

** The movie vs the book. The book is an anti love story, and specifically very queer focused; the unnamed narrator is gay and Holly is bisexual, they're not love interests and Holly in fact is a much different character (being based on Creator/MarilynMonroe). The movie is a romantic comedy, where the two protagonists are obviously heterosexual love interests, there are new characters not in the original text, and Holly is a much more wholesome character. The jury is still out on which one is superior, or whether the movie can stand on its own even if it's basically an InNameOnly adaptation.