A Guide for the Married Man
A Guide for the Married Man
NR | 25 May 1967 (USA)
A Guide for the Married Man Trailers

A man gives his friend a series of lessons on how to cheat on one's wife without being caught.

Reviews
SoftInloveRox

Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

... View More
Bereamic

Awesome Movie

... View More
SparkMore

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

... View More
Winifred

The movie is made so realistic it has a lot of that WoW feeling at the right moments and never tooo over the top. the suspense is done so well and the emotion is felt. Very well put together with the music and all.

... View More
Dalbert Pringle

Ah! Yes! The "Swinging 60s" - Clearly a product of its time - This 90-minute, one-note-joke, "adult" comedy spent it first 89 minutes trying its damnedest to convince every married man in the audience to cheat on his wife.And then "Zap!" in its very last minute it did a total u-turn and told the guys to forget about it and just be happy with the little, obedient wifey waiting faithfully at home.In this movie (where all women were portrayed as being mincing, mini-skirted Barbie dolls whose only thought was to be a dutiful wife) - It was clearly suggested that it was, in fact, a man's obligation, as a man, to cheat on his spouse and not feel in the least bit guilty about it at all.In many ways this film's story was just a more racy, up-dated remake of 1955's "The Seven Year Itch". The only thing that managed to hold this viewer's interest was the numerous celebrity cameos that continuously punctuated the story. This film's director was veteran, Hollywood actor, Gene Kelly.

... View More
tmaj48

Between the implied sexiness of '50s films, and the much more overt sexuality of '70s cinema, there existed a period in which Hollywood films presented sex comedies depicting the halting steps toward sexual liberation of middle-class, middle-aged Americans of the 1960s. Sometimes, the results were engaging and funny, hinting at naughtiness while still remaining innocent (THE FACTS OF LIFE, with Bob Hope and Lucille Ball as a pair of would-be adulterers; GOOD NEIGHBOR SAM, starring Jack Lemmon as a happily married man who agrees to live with the divorcée next door--all for a good cause, of course). Some of these attempts at portraying the "swinging '60s" among the suburban set came off as decidedly icky viewing experiences; this film is one of those.Walter Matthau, happily married to beautiful wife Inger Stevens, nevertheless finds himself increasingly distracted by various body parts of other women around him (frequent closeups of the behinds and breasts of every woman he sees, accompanied by his slack-jawed reaction shots, abound throughout the film). His weaselly friend, Robert Morse, who believes that serial adultery is healthy for a marriage, agrees to offer him advice on becoming a successful cheater. The lessons he offers are depicted in the film by short vignettes in which many stars of the period appear; some of these are actually quite fun to watch. Art Carney, Carl Reiner, Jayne Mansfield, and Jack Benny are amusing in their cameos; the scene featuring Joey Bishop ("Deny, deny, deny!") is a priceless comic masterpiece. The main plot, Morse's training of Matthau for his career in adultery, is tedious and tawdry. Both Matthau and Morse are physically unappealing here; Matthau mugs and slouches his way through the film, while Morse oozes sleaze. I found myself secretly hoping that both their wives would run off with other, more attractive men by the end of the film; it might have made a more satisfying ending. Does Matthau succeed in his attempts to become a suburban swinger? Well, in the end, keep in mind that while this was made in the midst of the hippie, free-love era, it's still a staid, old-Hollywood film, with an old-Hollywood ending. And it just feels old. And tired.If you decide to watch it, skip the Matthau/Morse interplay and move the DVD ahead to some of the vignette sequences. The Bishop scene, at least, is worth a look.

... View More
moonspinner55

Married financial consultant, who hardly seems to notice his curvaceous, efficient wife at home, gets tips on cheating from his smarmy neighbor, a divorce lawyer. Somewhat unfair suburban comedy from writer Frank Tarloff gives us a group of neighborhood wives who congregate only to make chit-chat about what spoiled little boys their husbands are--only single women or divorcées are on the make. Accentuated by sketch gags and pantomime bits featuring an array of '60s celebrities, the film is a plush and cozy commercial (for many idle things, including Hertz Rent-a-Car). Walter Matthau does a few amusing double takes, and the finale--where he finally checks into a motel room with a woman--is funny; unfortunately, director Gene Kelly stages the leering material like old TV routines. The whole picture feels like a rerun. ** from ****

... View More
Bob Bernet

I was 12 years old when this film was made. I remember the sex comedies from the 60s and this is no comedy. I recently watched this movie with a friend who wanted to see it because Leonard Maltin gave it 3 1/2 stars. Well, good old Leonard must have been seeing stars when watching this one. I would have given it a BOMB rating. It was intended to be a comedy. The only thing missing was a laugh track. And it sure needed one. If you enjoyed TV shows like "Love American Style" or "Three's Company," then you might enjoy giving up 90 minutes of your life to watch this very poor film. First of all, the premise was not even believable. As one reviewer mentioned, Walter Matthau plays a character who has not even lost interest in his wife played by knockout beauty Inger Stevens. He's just toying with cheating on her because he thinks he is supposed to because it's the liberated and sophisticated 1960s. Oh, brother. I am embarrassed for director Gene Kelly. Think about it. There a reason why this film is rarely mentioned. It's a waste of time.

... View More