It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

In many ways this film is remarkable. The story is a classic love/convenience triangle. And helplessly jealous Morgan is cut out to be the big loser from the start. A working class hopeful and a painter, he is just not willing to become an adult and prefers to descend into lunacy instead. His attempts to win back his upper class ex wife, an insecure character herself, are childish and quixotic in nature and enlighten the basically sad story with slapstick moments. The acting is mostly very good. David Warner is sweet and unforgettable – why he was chosen to play so many villains later in his career remains a mystery to me. Vanessa Redgrave's Oscar nomination was well deserved. Irene Handl as Morgan's mother is also very good. She represents the family background with its Marxist tradition. Apparently her generation hoped that lads like Morgan would become the enlightened new leaders of their movement! Instead, her son is a good for nothing character, for him the emblems of communism are just a decor to shock the petty bourgeois. At the time this movie was made, it became chic again to be orientated toward the left. In China Mao started the Cultural Revolution, being a Red meant (in the West, at least) being unconventional, hip and somehow liberated. This romantic, pubertal New Left lasted more ore less until the genocide in Cambodia, then their supporters integrated themselves into the existing system or indulged in esoteric activities (or both). To me Morgan somehow represents the New Left which then emerged.

............................................................from Pasto,Colombia...Via: L.A. CA., CALI, COLOMBIA and ORLANDO, FL "Movies That Stand the Test of Time" is a list I recently compiled... "Morgan" WON'T be on it! Granted, the basic concept is starkly original, with outstanding performances by both David Warner and Vanessa Redgrave (In her first leading screen role!) There are a few savagely funny lines and bits sprinkled throughout here and there. But on the whole, a lot of the film comes across as anachronistically as the hammer and sickle Morgan insists on drawing or carving everywhere.Also, the constant insertion of Keystone Cop Slapstick bits (Ala "Hard Days Night") gets old really fast, especially since most of them fall flat. And my biggest gripe: I saw this movie 3 times at age 18 and 19, during its theatrical release and I clearly recall footage (1 minute?) where a then VERY HOT Vanessa Redgrave was romping around the bedroom being chased in a state of semi-undress. The scenes managed to be simultaneously humorous and sexy (Very risqué in 1966, but not more than PG by today's standards!) These scenes were about the best in the film and the main reason I rented it. COMPLETELY EDITED OUT! Does anyone else recall them? Ironically, at the beginning, the British Cinema Board announces, "This film is to be viewed only by Adults!" On EXTRAS, watch the Original Trailer and you'll see a couple seconds of snippets of the bedroom romp scene that was edited out of the DVD release! You decide what you want to do with this one! 6* (Being a bit generous?) ....ENJOY//DISFRUTELA?!?!?Any comments, questions or observations, in English o en Español, are most welcome! KissEnglishPasto@Yahoo.com

I was moderately charmed by 'Morgan' when I first saw it in 1966, partly because it afforded a (romanticized) view of Swinging London and it has its absurdist moments. Watching it again after 42 years, however, I was repelled by Morgan's vandalism and obsessive behavior--we would now call it stalking--and the seeming helplessness of the people he is determined to harass. Morgan's 'eccentricity' wears very thin very quickly, and he becomes tedious and offensive; in the end, one longs for him to be punished and suffer. Stuffed shirts like his nemesis Charles Napier are always cinema villains, but I found him sympathetic under the circumstances. Irene Handl, as always, is delightful as Morgan's long-suffering, class conscious, Marxist mum, and we see Vanessa Redgrave before her Madame DeFarge period. In the end, a waste of David Warner's considerable (comic) talents.

Boy, did I love this movie in the Sixties when I was a left-wing radical college student. Everything about goofy Morgan (David Warner) was funny or likable or just plain cool, in a weird sort of way. This movie was so '60s with its mores and humor. If they had VHS tapes back then, I would have bought this in a heartbeat.When I began seriously collecting movies in the mid '90s, I was excited to see this again. Wow, what a disappointment. What was so great back then now looks so incredibly stupid. The film was so bad, and Warner was so annoying (hardly 'fab' anymore), I couldn't finish the film. I couldn't believe how incredibly inane this was and how much I used to like it. Like another '60s period piece, "Easy Rider," it's amazing how differently we see things depending on our age and/or how we have changed culturally, politically or religiously. I wonder if Warner looks back at this film and cringes, too.