Promises..... Promises!

I liked this a lot, but would've liked it a lot more without the topless/nudity scenes. Don't get me wrong, I am no prude when it comes to sex and nudity in film, depending on the type of film it is and when it was made. And yes, I know this was the first of its kind- but I personally feel it came a little early.

This film is like a 1950s-60s sitcom episode, made into a movie. It feels innocent and clean, the way "Leave It To Beaver" or "I Love Lucy" did. So, to see such nudity in this sort of film was a real turn-off for me, as it just didn't feel right. It felt out-of-place for the period and that whole innocent sitcom world- so out of place, as to seem freakish- and it was only from the belly up nudity! There was no sex scene, but certainly enough allusion to sex in this- to the point of being rather shocking!

So yeah, would have liked this film handled in the more old-Hollywood way, where she would have been covered by a towel, and the sex subject was less obvious. That being said, I still can't help but to like it but in a very mixed-feelings way.

Terrible, terrible comedy. But if I were rating it, I'd give it 1 star for the script, photography, and performances, and 10 for the display of Ms. Mansfield's ample attributes. I think this is why they invented the fast-forward button

In a world where the cinematic landscape is regularly changing in many various ways, it's nice to know that there are some constants on which one can rely. One of these is that sex comedies, as a genre, are simply bad. They always have been, and they always will be. They rely on the cheapest and most boorish of gags, jokes, and plots, appealing to the lowest common denominator. They're frankly demeaning to all involved in their creation for how low the participants are made to stoop, the cast not least of all, whose "acting" forfeits all tact, nuance, or meaningful skill. From one picture to the next it's hard to say which is worse, yet there are two reasons 'Promises..... promises!' might be near the bottom of the barrel.

For one thing, set aside the sexual elements here and the movie is defined by sensibilities that feel ripped straight from TV sitcoms of the 1950s. I suppose one could argue that such perfectly charming, perfectly happy-go-lucky, perfectly pleasant ham-handedness could be intended as a send-up of such notions, though even if that's true, this takes the parodying spirit too far and becomes the object of its own intended mockery. Regardless, it's safe to say that the viewing experience is a little taxing as the dialogue, characters, scene writing, narrative, direction, acting, and even the music all seem to embrace pointedly artificial kitsch over meaningful humor or substance. Taxing - and not actually very fun. It's hard to get a real sense of the capabilities of anyone involved when they are all geared toward being as frivolous as possible - and, it seems, lazy and unimaginative.

Secondly, at a time in the film industry before nudity became commonplace, Jayne Mansfield's nude scenes here come off as an extra tawdry, desperate ploy for attention and viewership. A couple of these are pointlessly, shamelessly repeated, multiple times each, in what seems to me to be a tacit admission by the filmmakers that their production had no significant value otherwise, and they needed the boost themselves. I'm no puritan, and I've no objection to sex and nudity in media, but sometimes the inclusion is plainly gratuitous - and here, "gratuitous" is overly generous a description. "Vulgar" and "begging for relevance" seem more appropriate.

It's not that there aren't any good ideas here, but in both the writing and execution they are handled very blithely and even carelessly. The value, and indeed the plot, just kind of get forgotten for the preponderance of the length. This begins with what seems like a firm concept, then just scatters. Factor in all the other facets that are so uninteresting, or even irritating, and one struggles to say this is likable or enjoyable in any capacity. I'm glad for those who get something more out of this feature, and find it entertaining; I regret the 75 minutes I just wasted. Whatever it is you think you'll get out of 'Promises..... promises!' there are much better and more worthwhile ways to get it; just don't bother with this.

Jayne Mansfield generated some of the most heated publicity of her career (and that's saying a lot!) when she agreed to film nude scenes for the 1963 comedy, "Promises! Promises!" No American star of her magnitude had ever appeared undraped onscreen before, and the controversy led to the picture being banned, court hearings on obscenity, and Mansfield stoically bearing the bad press (and no doubt saving all the headline clippings). Watching the film is a sad, strange experience; the nude scenes have nothing to do with the plot, and were clearly filmed solely for sensation's sake. What it shows is a star badly on the wane, appearing in an extremely low budget production, and selling her body cheap for the resultant publicity. Jayne's two nude scenes come fairly early in the film, which means there's plenty of time left for highly strained, largely unfunny, mostly sex-less antics. The crux of the plot involves two married couples, Jayne/Tommy Noonan and Marie McDonald/Mickey Hargitay, on a cruise together. In a rather lewd plot device, both women end up pregnant, and because of some drunken revelry between the couples (never seen), no one is sure who the father is for which baby. One surreal scene has Jayne attending a shipboard party where female impersonator T.C. Jones does celebrity imitations, one of whom is Jayne Mansfield! In character as "Sandy," Jayne squeals with delight and does HER "imitation" of Jayne Mansfield. Unfortunately, it's the funniest moment in the film. On the brighter side, Jayne looks especially lovely and voluptuous, and, playing it relatively straight for once, doesn't rely too much on high-pitched ooohs and aahhhs. Micky Hargitay (Jayne's real-life husband) looks much too young to be marruied to former 40's pinup girl Marie McDonald, but displays a rather sweet, doltish charm as a Hungarian actor striving to lose his pronounced accent (it must've been a real stretch for him). For the die-hard Jayne Mansfield fan, this is basically a harmless, actionless, sexless sex comedy, and a chance to see the star rather perfunctorily topless. For everyone else, it's a historic curiosity, and nothing more.

There was a time when you could not show nudity in films. And then all of a sudden you could. Who better to use to display this newfound freedom than Jayne Mansfield? So, in Promises! Promises! Mansfield takes off her clothes. Anything else worth saying about the film? Not really. It's a comedy of mishaps and misunderstandings. Unfortunately there is practically nothing that is at all funny in this supposed comedy. How desperate is the film for laughs? Well, there's a female impersonator, a character who is the most wretched thing in the largely wretched film. He does a Jayne Mansfield impersonation. Mansfield's character responds that she does her too. Hilarious, right? No, not at all. The plot, about who exactly is impregnating whom aboard a cruise ship, is rather inane. There's not even enough story to stretch the film out to a proper feature length. The film clocks in at a mere 75 minutes but it seems interminable. In a sign of true desperation Mansfield's brief nude scenes are repeated over and over again in dream sequences or flashbacks. At least the filmmakers were honest with themselves and the audience. They knew people were only coming to see this film for one reason. Well, two reasons to be precise. Mansfield's acting in the film actually isn't half bad. But the story's a dud and the rest of the cast gives Mansfield very little support. As a film Promises! Promises! fails miserably. But nobody cares about its quality as a film, the thing only exists as a vehicle to show off Mansfield's prize assets. In that, if nothing else, it succeeds.