Morgan: A Evolução

Morgan is film that failed because it didn't know what it wanted to be. It doesn't have the boldness to justify as a R-rated horror thriller, nor does it have an intelligent screenplay to accompany its themes of an AI psych thriller - both of which it was trying to go for.

In the film, Lee Weathers (Kate Mara), a "risk-management specialist", is called to evaluate whether or not the company she works for, SynSect, is to terminate a humanoid being hosted at a rural site. The project refers to the humanoid as Morgan (Anya Taylor-Joy). And from the trailer, we see that Morgan shows concerning behavioral traits - including an incident wherein she stabs one of her doctors in the eye - which is why "corporate" has to step in. The doctors all seem to love Morgan, referring to her violent actions as honest mistakes. However, Lee Weathers is only there to do a job and doesn't seem to have any interest in humanizing Morgan. She is just there to weigh the risk of keeping the project afloat.

This film is not intelligent, especially considering others films in the same genre such as Ex Machina and the brilliant HBO series Westworld which released around the same time. The characters who all take care of Morgan seem to have developed a love for her, but the direction of the film doesn't lead the viewer to contemplate the relationships between genetically created organisms and humans. This is really just about a kick-ass robot (they don't explain why it can kick ass either). It had a great cast, good action sequences, and a satisfying ending which may have been obvious and predictable to some. Also, Paul Giamatti shows up halfway through the film to do a straight up ask-questions shoot-later psych evaluation. He has an excellent performance, although given the circumstance, his character made some questionable decisions.

I admit one of the primary reasons I watched till the end was Kate Mara (yeah, I have a bit of celeb crush on her not gonna lie). She is great in the film throughout. And Anya Taylor-Joy is excellent in her role as well. She does a fascinating portrayal of a machine displaying human emotions and human misunderstanding of them. I'm thrilled to see her continue on to great lead roles. Kate Mara needs to be in more films. I especially liked her in American Horror Story: Murder House as the crazed ex-lover and homewrecking patient, Hayden.

I like to see that Ridley Scott's kids are doing their thing. I suggest they keep experimenting with the artform. That said, Morgan is an experiment that could have succeeded, but underwhelmingly failed.

Morgan starts with a simple premise of the moral and ethical implications of genetically crafting a biological being from scratch. Even if such a being looks and acts human, is it? Is the being a "she" or an "it"–and does the being have rights or autonomy, or can it be owned like a pet, or an iPhone?

Based on nothing more than the trailers, the movie struck me as a sort of biological / genetic mirror of Ex Machina. That turns out to be true to an extent, but Morgan doesn't do as good a job of exploring the philosophical question or examining the humanity of the being. The question is sort of posed, and then quickly falls aside as Morgan turns into more of a blood and guts action flick.

There is a twist at the end that I actually didn't see coming. My son says it was obvious early on, but the first hint I got was only moments before the truth of the twist was revealed.

I enjoyed the movie–and I recommend you go see it. I just feel like there was much more potential there to really dig into the philosophical issues and ethical debates of creating a genetic hybrid.

I had a chance to speak to director Luke Scott after seeing Morgan, and we dove into those issues a bit further. Scott told me that in his opinion the basic premise of Morgan is entirely plausible. "A lot of the background science–of course it's a fantasy that we made–but a lot of the background science is rooted in truth."

We talked some about the similarities and differences between the premise of Ex Machina and the premise of Morgan–a cybernetic android being versus a genetic hybrid biological being. Scott shared his belief that the technical possibility of creating something as advanced as the android in Ex Machina is far beyond our abilities, but Morgan, and the ability to create a biological being, is within our reach.

"The science is there," explained Scott. "The only thing holding us back is a moral question."

It is a valid and important moral question, too. If a company like Monsanto can create genetically modified seeds to produce healthier or more bountiful crops and own a patent on that seed, would we allow a genetic engineering company to craft healthier or more capable gene pools and own a patent on those genes? Could we create a society where those with the financial resources are able to purchase superior genetics–thereby artificially widening the gap and creating a population of genetic "Haves" and "Have Nots"? Or, would we deem a genetically modified or engineered being to be less than human–a thing or creature that can be owned, rather than a sentient being with rights?

Those are all great questions to explore, but Morgan really just scratches the surface of them.

I asked Luke Scott what's next on his horizon, and he let me know he's working on a project that also comes with a moral and ethical dilemma, but this one is based on a true story. Scott told me he is working on a script based on a book describing the story of the Donner Party–a group of homesteading pioneers that got caught in bad weather and stranded on a glacier and had to resort to cannibalism to survive.

Before anyone reads this, I am glad to read that some movie goers found the movie great. However, this is just my personal take when I saw this film.

Without going into too much detail about what this film entails, I felt as though there were a few moments in the film which could have been better.

1/ The ending was slightly disappointing... and for those who do not understand why then I am sure it will become clear in the end. I just expected more.

2/ I felt as though more connection was needed between Morgan and the audience. I found the clips of her as a child sweet and warming. I even felt sympathy towards her after she had attacked her first and second victims. However, in the end I felt as though I lacked sympathy for her character, after she became more and more out of hand. This also ties into the first point to do with the ending. I was expecting to be moved, riveted. But instead I felt a mixture of "Really... after all that, that's how it ended?", along with a sense of the lack of what I felt was emotion.

3/ I wanted to understand more about why and how the members of staff loved her so much. OK, she was special - but why did they love her the way they did, even after it became clear that she was starting to become dangerous? Why didn't one of them even question themselves over how out of hand things were getting?

Just a couple of points. Apart from that, the film was good enough to hold the majority of my attention throughout and definitely had the potential to be very, very good indeed. Credit where it is due, the film's intentions did seem surprisingly in the right place, but certainly more spark... more depth was needed.

This is a very good movie. The bad reviews focus on expectations. Morgan is not a blockbuster by any stretch but it is clearly above average fair for sci-fi flick. It deserves better than the 5.8 on IMBD's scale and much better than the bad reviews listed here.

Luke Scott, Son of Ridley Scott, give us his feature debut, a sci-fi thriller that has similar elements to Ex Machina, Splice and even Blade Runner. The story is central to genetically created Morgan who is only five years old but displays immense intelligence and emotions beyond teenagers, which comes with violence.

Morgan, superbly played by Anya Taylor-Joy is housed in a confined facility in the middle of nowhere where she's raised by a group of scientists responsible for differences areas of her development like Behavioural Analyst, Amy played by GoT's Rose Leslie and an unrecognisable Boyd Holbrook who's the nutritionist or chef. I couldn't place his face at first but remembered him from Run All Night after looking him up. The team also includes Michelle Yeoh, Toby Jones, Michael Yare, Chris Sullivan, Vinette Robinson and Jennifer Jason Leigh, who all give convincing performances even if only brief.

Something goes wrong and Lee Weathers, played by Kate Mara, a corporate risk assessment manager is sent to do more than just investigate. Taking telephones orders from a Brian Cox who seems to have similar authority as his character in the Bourne saga. There's an eerie sense of conflict amongst everyone and there's even a hint of jealously from Mara's character.

Things go from bad to worse when Paul Giamatti comes to evaluate Morgan's behaviour and the film steps up a gear. Not that it's slow, it's paced very well, introducing each of the characters and then snowballing to the finale before you figure out what's happening. However, I figured it pretty early on, being suspicious of certain characters. If there was meant to be clever twist, it didn't work for me though still a good story and reminded me of Bourne.

There's a moral point here about genetics and human rights though not entirely thought provoking as the film's displays why compassion for Morgan is threw out the window. The finale is great with both Mara and Morgan showing their true colours.

I might be missing something, but could there be a hint at the film Hanna, as there's mention about the Helsinki incident. But there's nothing else to indicate that this is fact. It's very similar indeed, and the end gives away a larger picture.

There's a good score from Max Richter adding to the sinister backdrop of the movie, however I wouldn't as far to say this film is a horror. Eerie, and maybe a little suspenseful perhaps but not scary. It's quite cold, emotionless in parts, but that's possibly deliberate. It's a worthy watch and a great job by Luke Scott but it's not unfamiliar territory and nothing entirely original.

Running Time: 8 The Cast: 8 Performance: 8 Direction: 7 Story: 6 Script: 6 Creativity: 7 Soundtrack: 7 Job Description: 7 The Extra Bonus Points: 5 for being on point for a feature debut. Looking forward to seeing more from Luke.

69% 7/10