Metascore
27

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 28 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2 out of 28
  2. Negative: 19 out of 28
  1. Reviewed by: Kyle Smith
    Apr 18, 2011
    75
    As for Grant, who hasn't been this sharp since "Love Actually" six years ago, he is once again the prime minister of cute comedy.
  2. Reviewed by: Robert Wilonsky
    Apr 18, 2011
    70
    It's a thoroughly delightful throwaway--the kind of movie for which cable television was made, from the maker of "Music & Lyrics" (Marc Lawrence), who knows his way 'round a snappy tune.
  3. Reviewed by: Olly Richards
    Apr 18, 2011
    60
    Neither good nor bad. Scales dizzying new heights of okay. Aims for mediocrity... and nails it.
  4. Reviewed by: John Anderson
    Apr 18, 2011
    60
    But the charm of the film is that it resists turning people into cliches and lets Parker and Grant work their particular magic -- before they get to Wyoming, their performances are as stressed out as their characters, and while it's a dubious conceit that going cowboy is a cure-all, they put the notion across as convincingly as possible.
  5. Reviewed by: Rene Rodriguez
    Apr 18, 2011
    50
    Hugh Grant and Sarah Jessica Parker are supposed to pass for a married couple, but they have all the chemistry of two actors who just met and shook hands moments before the cameras rolled. They don't even seem to like each other much.
  6. Reviewed by: Frank Scheck
    Apr 18, 2011
    50
    Not even the estimable comic chops of Hugh Grant and Sarah Jessica Parker can lift it above the level of ordinary.
  7. Reviewed by: Lisa Schwarzbaum
    Apr 18, 2011
    42
    You should hear instead about Sam Elliott and Mary Steenburgen, who whip up cowboy fun as married U.S. marshals assigned to protect the pair in Wyoming.
  8. Reviewed by: Joshua Rothkopf
    Apr 18, 2011
    40
    While the movie isn't "Witness," you know that comic scenes of target practice are going to make sense around the bend.
  9. Reviewed by: Stephen Holden
    Apr 18, 2011
    40
    There are barely enough titter-worthy one-liners in Marc Lawrence's good-natured romantic comedy Did You Hear About the Morgans? to prevent it from sinking under the weight of its clichés.
  10. Reviewed by: Claudia Puig
    Apr 18, 2011
    38
    Everything about this fish-out-of-water romp is tired.
  11. Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    Apr 18, 2011
    38
    What possible reason was there for anyone to make Did You Hear About the Morgans? Or should I say "remake," because this movie has been made and over and over again, and oh, so much better.
  12. Reviewed by: Carrie Rickey
    Apr 18, 2011
    38
    Here is a movie with everything going for it and nothing working.
  13. Reviewed by: James Berardinelli
    Apr 18, 2011
    38
    Did You Hear about the Morgans? Yes and, to be perfectly frank, I wish I had been spared the experience.
  14. Reviewed by: Mike Scott
    Apr 18, 2011
    38
    Grant and Parker's talents are wasted on a boring, made-for-TV story punctuated by a contrived, throwaway third act.
  15. Reviewed by: Joe Williams
    Apr 18, 2011
    38
    Given the creator and the cast, "Morgans" is as drearily predictable as a plague of locusts.
  16. Reviewed by: M. E. Russell
    Apr 18, 2011
    33
    The movie's a fish-out-of-water romantic-comedy thriller that forgets to be romantic, comedic or thrilling.
  17. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    Apr 18, 2011
    30
    The movie is like a car wreck in which no one is injured but the onlookers.
  18. Reviewed by: Betsy Sharkey
    Apr 18, 2011
    30
    Grant has never been less charming and Parker never less fashionable or more grating than they are as Paul and Meryl Morgan.
  19. Reviewed by: J.R. Jones
    Apr 18, 2011
    30
    Soporific comedy.
  20. Reviewed by: Michael O'Sullivan
    Apr 18, 2011
    25
    Did you hear about the Morgans? Trust me, you don't want to.
  21. Reviewed by: Liam Lacey
    Apr 18, 2011
    25
    If you are expecting a pleasant evening of escapism, you will be cruelly fooled. The editor responsible for the trailer is clearly a genius.
  22. Reviewed by: Scott Tobias
    Apr 18, 2011
    25
    When the material gets really bad, as it does in the dismal Did You Hear About The Morgans?, Grant's pinched facial expressions become an inadvertent commentary on the movie he's making, as if he plainly realizes that his one-liners are tanking.
  23. Reviewed by: Mick LaSalle
    Apr 18, 2011
    25
    Sometimes it's unpleasant, sometimes it's insincere, and for long stretches it's boring.
  24. Reviewed by: Wesley Morris
    Apr 18, 2011
    25
    Grant and Parker stand around as if they're waiting for someone to yell, "Cut.'' He's in one movie. She's in another. Neither is any good.
  25. Reviewed by: Marjorie Baumgarten
    Apr 18, 2011
    20
    A forgettable and lackluster fish-out-of-water rom-com.
  26. Reviewed by: Joe Neumaier
    Apr 18, 2011
    10
    The loping pace, inconsistent tone and lack of imagination are all deadly.
  27. Reviewed by: Michael Phillips
    Apr 18, 2011
    0
    It's not just the sound of crickets you hear watching this movie. It's the sound of dead crickets.
  28. Apr 18, 2011
    0
    "Morgans" does bear the distinction of boasting the sourest cast ever assembled outside of a Lars Von Trier production.
User Score
5.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 12 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 4
  2. Negative: 3 out of 4
  1. Dec 12, 2013
    2
    ...if you didn't consider yourself lucky! In this film, Hugh Grant is paired with Sarah Jessica Parker in perhaps the worst pairing since Vanilla Ice and Naomi Campbell in Cool As Ice. They play a fashionably separated, New York City power couple, who are forced into witness protection after witnessing a murder. These two city folks are put in the care of an elderly U.S. Marshall and his wife, in the middle of nowhere Montana. Let the fun times begin! Didn't Tim Allen and Kirstie Alley do this a decade earlier in Amish country? At least For Richer or Poorer could get a few cheap laughs here and there, but not the Morgans. The Morgans have no chemistry what-so-ever and their film is painfully slow and predictable. Hugh Grant is usually funny, but in this film, every attempt at humor is snuffed out by Sarah Jessica Parker, who has no idea what she's doing. Parker is just one of these people who was lucky enough to find her perfect role and she was amazing in it, but everything I've seen her in since Sex & The City has been awful! Did You Hear About The Morgans has been done, more than once, and if you watch this movie and can't tell what's going to happen, twenty minutes a head of time, then you haven't seen too many movies. This has got to be one of the biggest waste of money in recent Hollywood history and if you decide to watch it, then you're dumber than the casting director who thought pairing Grant and Parker was a good idea. Full Review »
  2. Feb 24, 2013
    4
    This film received horrible reviews when it came out; both critics and viewers ripped it apart. It's not the best movie I've ever seen. In fact, it's as average as average gets. However, I enjoy this movie a lot. I've seen it multiple times and I never wished I were watching something else. I was entertained. Full Review »
  3. Mar 14, 2012
    0
    Poorly written, poorly acted, poorly directed piece of contrived, predictable and cliched **** How to these films get funding? I also never cease to wonder how so many Hollywood films have such poor plot and script development. It is the scourge of the film making industry. Take my advice, stop putting all your money into special effects and spend a little on plot and script development. Whilst this film doesn't have any special effects it's clearly a victim of the habit. This dog of a movie is not helped when the leads are out acted by the support cast (Sam Elliot, Mary Steenburgen, Elisabeth Moss) who made reasonable fists of their crappy lines. Don't even waste time renting it, wait until it comes on TV, and then don't bother. Full Review »