I am a long-time James Mason fan, and he showed his comedic side in several films, this being one of them. The premise is sweet and this film is perfect for a rainy afternoon or for when you just want to watch an enjoyable movie that does not contain violence, objectionable language or loud special effects. If you are a James Mason fan, this is a must-see. He is handsome, suave and dashing in this film and his touch for light comedy is fun to watch and a nice change from his more typical serious roles. He is in "A Touch of Larceny" and "Tiara Tahiti" form here, and carries the light comedy very well. I recommend this film to everyone who enjoys a nice romantic comedy, and especially to those who appreciate Mr. Mason's considerable charm, talent and touch for comedy.

I do like James Mason and what else can be said about Susan Hayward?. With the cast of capable actors, the story should be a given, and should work.Somehow it doesn't. Is it just dated?. Is it just that romantic romps with hip chicks (Julie Newmar) and rock music have no resonance?. Despite the backdrop of Frank Lloyd Wright's house in Lakeland Florida, the story comes up banal and empty.Perhaps it is the portrayal of Hayward and Mason as a married couple After the requisite jealousy, tantrums, and throwing around of suitcases, the couple gets back together. We still see formula like this today in recent films like "The Break Up". It just doesn't work, and leaves the viewer feeling they have witnessed somehow, another wooden version of Hollywood romance.

This movie seems to plod along with innuendos between Mason, Hayward, and Newmar. There is a fun scene between Hayward and Newmar in which Hayward advises that her husband is not for "borrowing." But Newmar's response is Hayward's equal when she responds that she is bigger, stronger, prettier, and smarter and she will only listen to what he has to say. It's a great scene but about the only one in the film that worked for me. The rest is pretty much blah, blah, blah. What IS redeeming about this movie, though, is the set decorating and the costumes. In my opinion the sets in this movie could be from 20 years in the future. Sleek, classy. The costuming is perfect: muted, elegant colors on beautifully trim bodies. Mason is impeccable in his wardrobe. Of course Newmar looks like Barbie in her swimsuit. It was, however, great to get to see her in a performance before Catwoman in the Batman series.The eye candy is worth the watch in this film.

It may not be enough to say that Julie Newmar is statuesque. Further hyperbole is probably needed, perhaps along the lines of "she defines statuesque" or "her picture is in the dictionary under statuesque." She is such a striking figure that she can basically carry a scene simply by walking around or striking a pose. That's good, because that's pretty much all that happened in this film.The story could have been vaguely insulting but instead was just boring. I won't detail it as the one-line plot outline is more than sufficient. No layered meanings, no depth, not much of anything. The performers, saddled with such a story, seemed like they gave it a real try where most may have just phoned it in. That's a plus.Recommended for Newmar fans only.