Under the Yum-Yum Tree (1963)

Ben Mankiewicz noted on TCM that Jack Lemmon was not happy being assigned this film version of a semi-hit Broadway sex comedy from 1960, and you can see why. As the libidinous landlord of a California complex who rents out only to nubile young things, he's playing an absolutely awful man, and for all his comic finesse, he's charmless and irritating. In Lawrence Roman's oversexed plot (he adapted his play with director David Swift), Lemmon's Hogan mistakenly rents a beautiful one bedroom (for $75 a month; oh, to be in 1963) to undergrad Carol Lynley, who plans to share it platonically with her fiancé, Dean Jones, who had played this part on Broadway. And from there it's one long smirk, with Lynley wiggling her fanny in short-short outfits, Jones bemoaning how difficult a no-sex policy is, and Lemmon mugging and being thoroughly unpleasant. Edie Adams, as Lemmon's ex and Lynley's aunt, is a pro, and Paul Lynde, as a horny-for-young-girls (ha) gardener, and Imogene Coca, as his disapproving wife, wring what laughs they can out of repellent material. If you want to know what '60s sex comedies were like, with endless jokes on will-she-won't- she-lose-her-virginity, this is a good example, typically over lit and supplemented with a cutesy Frank DeVol score. And Lynley and Jones are charming. But given the change in morality in intervening years, it looks it was made on another planet.

Back when it debuted, I am pretty sure that "Under the Yum Yum Tree" made a bit of a splash with its plot that was strongly infused with sex. However, despite the novelty of the story, the film, down deep, just isn't very good. Mostly it's due to the writing--as the characters are more like caricatures and are very, very difficult to believe. As a result, I found it an absolute chore to watch this movie.The film is set in an apartment complex run by a creepy guy (Jack Lemmon). I am sure back in 1963, he was seen as a great comic character by the filmmakers. However, today he really comes off as a guy you'd expect to see registering as a sex offender--he was THAT creepy. A young engaged (Carol Lynley and Dean Jones) move in together. She sees it as a great experiment to see if they are compatible--he sees it as Purgatory, as this is supposed to be a sex-less experiment. Throughout their stay, their nosy landlord keeps dropping by to either offer Jones unneeded advice or to try to score with Linley. However, neither one seems to understand the true nature of Lemmon's attention--he is neither helpful nor innocent but a perv who thinks of nothing but sex 24-7.The sad fact is none of the people in the film are the least bit believable or likable. Lynley is an oblivious idiot who talks and talks about modern love and relationships but she obviously knows nothing. She speaks in platitudes and faux intellectualism so much that she sounds more like a comic book character than a real woman. Jones is a bundle of sexual tension and nothing more--and his character is given no opportunity to be any more. And, as for Lemmon, well, I have already talked about how he's just super-creepy.By the way, the IMDb summary describes Lemmon as a "love-struck landlord"! This is NOT at all accurate. Love is not what he's interested--the guy is a sex offender. He likes to climb on windows to peek at his female residents--hoping to see them naked. This is not what I'd call love-struck!! Overall, the film tries very hard to be adult and edgy--pushing the 'new morality'. However, instead of making you think or being clever, it just comes off as badly written. All the characters are unlikable and plastic and the film never engages.By the way, I sure found it surprising to see Dean Jones in a movie like this considering his squeaky clean image and promotion of family values. It just didn't seem to fit in this case.

This movie is a real stinker. I confess that I never have understood the comic appeal of extremely annoying characters. They just grate on my nerves. That describes Jack Lemmon in spades in this so-called comedy (which is really a farce). If a farce depicts mostly unbelievable characters portrayed by hammy actors in situations that defy any credibility, then this is a farce, and for those of you out there who enjoy such movies, this is the one for you.Almost as annoying as Mr. Lemmon's character is the boyfriend, portrayed by Dean Jones. I was, however, surprised to learn via this film that Mr. Jones appeared in films made outside of Disney - where he really belongs! Although Carol Lynley is no great shakes as an actress, she is beautiful - never more so than in this film. She is the only positive in this whole mess.This is a prime example of Hollywood's implosion after the golden age - due in no small part to the Code. Hollywood was totally incapable of depicting the 60's in a way that remotely reflected the reality. To prove the point, you only have to listen to the soundtracks of films that attempt to reflect the Pop Culture of the time: NONE OF THE MOVIES OF THAT ERA use any contemporaneously popular music! It is always some Hollywood producer's ersatz imitation. The soundtracks are a joke! Films like Under the Yum Yum Tree have that same hopelessly out-of-touch feel, even though music is not a critical element. The bizarre distortion of those times in films such as this is just as annoying as Mr. Lemmon's character.The equally bizarre concoction of morals - from hokey prudishness to monumental lecherousness - is not depicted with humor, but with that same Hollywood perspective that bears so little resemblance to reality that it is a hollow basis for humor.

A skirt chaser manages an apartment complex in which all the residents are beautiful women. He regularly wines and dines the ladies, and is a charming, although rascally fellow. He brings in a new tenant and begins his game on her, much to the annoyance of her boyfriend. Most of the film is spent with the landlord trying to get into the new tenant's pants, and her boyfriend making every effort to keep him out. Fairly funny spoof on the California lifestyle.