Glucedee
It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.
Maleplatypus
This Mara sister is beautiful. Acting was pretty good but the scenery (woods) is fantastic. Cast is good but I would swap some roles and give Mr. Giamatti more space and time. Direction is not bad, considering that the story borrows from here and there and mixes it all up. Pretty predictable outcome. All in all, not tiresome to watch and passes for a Saturday afternoon relaxation. But no more than that.
Richie-67-485852
I like sci-fi for its ability to get us to thinking as we are being entertained. This movie does that pretty well. The premise of a new life form is always a good story to tell and if you add mystery, intrigue and drama you get this movie. My only criticism is that it was too short and under-developed but nothing a sequel couldn't cure if handled properly. There are twists along the way which keep you glued to the screen and one wonders about the full premises of this story if it was truly unleashed. the movie goes there too! Here's to....
Floated2
Morgan doesn't offer much of anything new and from the plot synopsis, reminded much of Ex-Machina (which is a much better film). Morgan has a typical and predictable story line plot and overall not too much suspense or thrills. We understand within the film right from the beginning that "Morgan" would cause havoc and start causing problems potentially killing others. A clever but obvious twist from the ending was helped to save the film but it did not do much. Overall, Morgan is quite decent but could have been much better, as it is somewhat of a mess. The performance of Morgan played by Anya Taylor-Joy was good, though some issues regarding Kate Mara's performance (though some claim it was intended). We are not surprised as to why this film flopped and may be forgotten years from now.
Michael Kleen (makleen2)
Morgan (2016) was billed as a promising new sci-fi horror/mystery movie, but quickly falls flat. It stars Kate Mara as Lee Weathers, a "corporate consultant," Anya Taylor-Joy as Morgan, and Rose Leslie as a behavior specialist. Paul Giamatti makes a notable appearance as the only character with emotional depth. Going into the film, I thought it was going to explore the ethical issue of genetic manipulation and cybernetic enhancement. I thought it would pose an interesting dilemma to the audience about whether research of this nature should be pursued, like Ex Machina (2015) did for artificial intelligence. Boy, was I disappointed.First, the film was deceptively marketed. It's not a mystery and it barely passes for horror. Its IMDb summery is, "A corporate risk-management consultant must decide whether or not to terminate an artificially created humanoid being," but that's not actually the plot. Spoiler alert: the end of the film reveals that the corporate consultant was actually a genetically-enhanced assassin, and the whole exercise was an excuse to see whether her version could defeat the newer version, Morgan. So, in the end, there's never a question about whether Morgan should be terminated, and the protagonist never solves a mystery–she knew what Morgan was the whole time. The result was a boilerplate chase/assassin thriller.In one of the best scenes, Paul Giamatti's character, Dr. Alan Shapiro, attempts to evaluate Morgan's emotional development and ends up inciting her to violence, kicking off the second half of the film. In the context of the first half of the film, this scene makes no sense. Morgan had already demonstrated a propensity for violence. Why did Dr. Shapiro insist on entering the room with her? Why did he provoke her when he knew she was likely to assault him? Also, when they first met she demonstrated the ability to read his mind–why did he still believe he could manipulate her? It only makes sense as a plot device to set up a battle between Morgan and Lee Weathers.Of course, this raises a huge question. If Morgan was a genetically engineered assassin, why was the corporation and her project supervisor, Dr. Lui Cheng, so concerned when she exhibited violent behavior? Why did they consider more emotional assassins to be worthy of development in the first place? Lee Weathers' cold, impersonal demeanor didn't seem to inhibit her in any way. She still accomplished her mission. If you were a multinational corporation spending billions of dollars on genetic research, would investing all those resources into making a more emotional assassin make any sense? And, would it make sense to terminate her at the first sign your research had succeeded? There were little things that bothered me too. In one scene, Lee Weathers was locked in Morgan's enclosure and escaped by climbing up a shaft and breaking out the skylight. Why couldn't Morgan have figured that out and made a similar escape? Later, she is shown effortlessly driving and executing maneuvers in a high speed chase and besting Lee Weathers in hand to hand combat. Where did she learn these skills? If the research team was kept in the dark about her ultimate purpose, I doubt they were teaching her martial arts on the side. I also find it hard to believe Morgan could quickly pick up these skills, but then not be able to figure out how to escape through the skylight.Morgan was a promising concept with a decent cast. I actually like the actors and actresses in this movie, especially Kate Mara and Rose Leslie. It's almost worth seeing just for Paul Giamatti's performance. The movie as a whole, however, was poorly executed. The entire assassin angle seemed contrived and unbelievable.If Morgan was actually as advertised–a dilemma over the fate of a genetically enhanced child who displays violent tendencies–it would have been an interesting film. Instead, that plot is undermined by boring car chases and a prolonged duel between two sociopathic, superhuman characters. Finally, the revelation at the end made everything that came before it completely meaningless. It's unfortunate the writers took it in that direction.
