KnotStronger This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Brendon Jones It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

edwagreen Let's face it- Mason and Hayward were not born to do comedy. The film should have been made years before with Irene Dunne and Cary Grant in the leads. Then, you would have seen something.Hayward seems to handle her social drinking since she had plenty of experience with that in "I'll Cry Tomorrow," and "Smash-Up."The two play college officials who are supposedly experts on marriage. In their lectures, they recount what happened when a Swedish girl, played with relish by Julie Newmar comes to visit. With her high intelligence, she tells it like it is. She comes on to Mason by telling him that she wants her him to be the father of the child.Even in comedy, Hayward's response was somewhat dramatic, and that is what was not needed here.The premise was not good here.

preppy-3 A happy middle-aged couple (Susan Hayward and James Mason) allow a Swedish girl (Julie Newmar)--a daughter of a friend--to stay in their house for a few days. While there she promptly tells Mason she wants to have a child with him because he's so intelligent! Predictable complications ensue.Silly sex comedy. This was based on a VERY successful Broadway play. However what worked on stage does NOT translate to the screen at all (this was not a hit). The plot is pretty dumb and probably an insult to Swedish people. It has incredibly dated sexual politics (even for 1961) and a discussion on infidelity is more funny than shocking. What saves this from being totally unwatchable are the actors. Mason and Newmar are very good in their roles and Hayward is excellent in hers. Also their house is stunning to look at. But, all in all, this is a forgettable movie. I give it a 4.

sligocait 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.

MarieGabrielle 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.