User reviews

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.

James Mason and Susan Hayward two big film names replaced Broadway stars Charles Boyer and Claudette Colbert for the film version of the play The Marriage Go Round. Mason and Hayward were both at or near the top of their careers, Hayward being just three years away from her career Oscar winning role in I Want To Live and Mason was off a big box office hit in Journey To The Center Of The Earth.

The two play a pair of married professors and the film is done in the format of both of them giving a lecture on some recent trial their marriage went through. The trial came in the person of blond statuesque Swede Julie Newmar who is the daughter of a colleague that Mason knows. He knew Julie as a child, but she's all grown up now and fully developed in all the right places.

Mason's considered a genius and Newmar who has an IQ to match her measurements is brutally frank in what she wants. She wants Mason, but she's not clear in why she wants him at first. Simply for breeding purposes. She wants him to father a super genius child. Today I'm sure Mason might just donate his sperm.

Well whether for romance or breeding Hayward ain't having any. Such is the basis of this comedy which on Broadway had a 431 performance run for 1958-1960. It's slight and amusing and probably played better on stage on the one scene in the living room of the Mason/Hayward home. Still fans of the stars will like it.

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.

Take three competent actors, James Mason, lovely Susan Hayward and Julie Newmar, and an idiot script with a lame premise and what do you get? Right. A mediocre movie. But, it's OK. Mason plays a cultural anthropologist who Newmar wants to share genes with. However, Mason's wife, Hayward, is having none of it. It goes down from there. Lamewitted writing, silly situations but always good acting and hey, Newmar was ALWAYS worth the price of a ticket. Hayward too is great but you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear, the saying goes and a poor script does not a great movie make.

The outside scenes of this movie were partially filmed in Lakeland, Florida (my hometown) on the Florida Southern College campus. The buildings were designed by Frank Lloyd Wright and are situated adjacent to Lake Hollingsworth. It made a beautiful setting for this romantic comedy. Co-star Susan Hayward was one of my favorite actresses and of course, Julie Newmar was almost as smashing as Bo Derek in "10". I thought the plot was a bit sophisticated for the time (1961). More to my liking were the Doris Day - Rock Hudson comedies of the same period. A little less sophistication and more "slapstick" type fun films. Tony Randall's masterful comedic genius added greatly to most of them.

In The Marriage-Go-Round, a Swedish exchange student comes to stay in the home of a happily married couple. The wife welcomes her with open arms, but she really shouldn't. We find out pretty early on she has designs on the husband; she wants him to father her child! Told in a funny he-said-she-said format, James Mason and Susan Hayward tell the audience about the time in their lives when their marriage was tested by the ridiculously attractive Julie Newmar.

While it's totally believable that James Mason would be propositioned in such a way, it isn't quite believable that he would be tempted to stray with Susan Hayward at home. She's far too strong and independent to portray a housewife who's let herself go. There are several jokes about her putting on weight and not being alluring enough for her husband. But it's Susan Hayward! Onstage, Claudette Colbert originated the role. She's a beautiful woman, too, but she would have been middle-aged at that time, still retaining the vulnerability of her youth, and far more convincing. Julie Newmar is wonderful, though; and she also played the role on Broadway. Hilarious, physically perfect, a flawless Swedish accent (patterned after her mother), and a master of intellect and sportsmanship, she fits the description of every man's fantasy and every woman's nightmare.

The fun part of the movie is, of course, James Mason. His delighted grin is hilarious, and you can clearly see him having a ball during the filming. It's no stretch to see why he was asked to play Hubert Humphrey in Lolita after being paired with a young girl in this movie. As this is a comedy, and he's the pursued not the pursuer, we can all have a good laugh.

A pretty rarely seen 1960s sex comedy, if the view count on Letterboxd does any indication. I didn't love it, but I liked it a lot, just for being a rom-com of its time. There's something relaxing and carefree about movies of this sort from the 1960s - especially the early 1960s. That being said, this one didn't full me over like The Facts of Life (1960), but they do make a great double feature.

Julie Newmar was gorgeous in a very Anita Ekberg kind of way, and I was very pleased with her performance. But I kept thinking about To Wong Foo: Thanks for Everything Julie Newmar - the 1990s comedy that had little to do with her, but the title does stay in one's mind.

Julie Newmar played a Swede in this movie. I don't know if she's actually a Swede though. Either she is, or she studied her accent from Greta Garbo movies. All Swedes sound like Greta Garbo to me. At least, when they are at their most Swedish.

The real standout star of the film though, was the house. Wow, they don't make them like that anymore! The layout and everything, so distinctly 1950s / 1960s. In other words, just beautiful!

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.

20th Century Fox produced this film version of the Broadway hit play starring Claudette Colbert (who hoped to reprise Broadway role in the film but lost the star role to Susan Hayward). Charles Boyer starred with Colbert on Broadway.

20th assembled a fine production team starting with Walter Lang and and Susie gave it her all top billed over James Mason and Julie Newmar but comedy wasn't really her forte.

Susan Haywood looks beautiful as always and would return to 20th a few years later playing Helen Lawson in this smash hit Valley of the Dolls. Susie was greeted with an orchestra upon her arrival at the 20th lot with the music "if you knew Susie the way we love Susie oh what a gal." Truly Susie was quite a woman a great box office, a great actress and a great lady who died far too young.

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.

This really is dreck. What a waste of James Mason who still manages a decent performance despite having to deal with not so sophisticated sophisticated dialogue. The sript combines pop pyschology popular in the early 60s with sitcom like witticisms masking as Noel Coward level repartee. Not to mention that it's stagey and setbound with the main premise being pummelled to death. Newmar looks fantastic and was a decent enough actress but then you have Susan Hayward. A looker no doubt , but I've always thought she was a terrible actress who constantly seems to read her lines off of a greeting card. And what's with that voice ? A Joan Crawford baritone? Forget this one.

I was working in a first-run movie theater when we showed this. I thought the plot line was extremely weak then, and I still do. Julie Newmar plays a Swedish beauty in search of a father for her planned child. She wants to find someone with a lot of intelligence so her child will grow up to have both beauty and brains. She finds James Mason's character who is a professor, and not a bad looking one at that. Having settled on him as a potential father, she finds there is only one hitch: he is already married, and his wife, not being into the liberated Swedish lifestyle, will have nothing of her husband's being unfaithful. How they managed to squeeze 98 minutes out of this plot line still mystifies me. Another thing that is puzzling is why two top-rate actors, Mason and Hayward, would have touched this script with a 10-foot pole. Like good coffee grounds won't make good coffee out of bad water, good acting just can't salvage a bad plot. They must have had to pay some bills. If you are desperate for a movie to watch, I recommend "Rocky XXIII" instead.

When I saw both James Mason and Susan Hayward I was excited to check out this Marriage-Go-Round. Julie Newmar does a swell job and I will agree is quite fetching to look at here. While I do really enjoy Mason and Hayward I'm wondering if perhaps they might have been miscast? Not sure what if anything could have actually brought just a smidgen of comedy into this so called sex comedy of a film. The story is very tame, even for 1961 actually. On top of that it never really progresses or gains any momentum whatsoever. I guess on one hand it might be considered slightly interesting as a time capsule of this particular time period, but that alone is not enough. It actually feels quite redundant throughout. Despite a solid cast and great sets and costumes I had a hard time getting through to the end of The Marriage-Go-Round.