For a virtually plot less movie, this is pure genius. It's almost a prequel to the controversial "Myra Breckenridge", complete with a variety of nutty situations involving the extremely wealthy Peter Sellers and his adopted son Ringo Starr, finding adventure in one exotic spot after another as they test the monetary greed of humanity. Cameos by a variety of veteran actors pad out (some pretty surprising for a film of this nature) this delicious black comedy that comments without judgment on the vices of a decadent world.Some surprises here are too worth keeping, but the presence of greed as the theme is mixed with lust, a desire for power and control. There's also an increased usage of gay references, probably shocking and offensive to some in the late 1960's, and perhaps considered homophobic nearly 50 years later, which it isn't. This is a roller-coaster ride of a sexual farce that is delightful as a social commentary and the opening of the door of extreme liberal values. I think this is the type of film that you could watch over and over and pick up new things you didn't notice before and even find new ideals you didn't realize were there the first time around.

"The Magic Christian" may have the finest cast ever assembled. If you know anything about the history of post-war British cinema, television and radio, you can see for yourself that this flick has an extremely impressive turn-out. And it is headed by no less than Peter Sellers and the Beatles' own Ringo Starr, who were both on top of the world in the late 1960s. Even some extremely well-known American stars fall into the mix. Unfortunately, the whole is much less than the sum of its parts.Ostensibly about a father and son who try to show everyone has their price, the movie is comprised of various hit-and-miss skits that fall (broadly) under that rubric.Instead, "The Magic Christian" is a crass and repugnant study of two grown men with more money than sense. Bored out of their skulls, they make everyone else dance on their strings. They are not people you want to know, unless you sell out easily. The sketches are only loosely sewn together by the presence of Sellers, Starr, or Sellers and Starr, who are nearly always shown giving the lead actor in the sketch his pay-off.Some of the sketches work well. Laurence Harvey is delightful in his "Hamlet" take-off. An extremely young John Cleese neatly steals the show from Sellers and Starr put together. Patrick Cargill's turn as the Sotheby's auctioneer is a masterpiece of understatement. In an extraordinarily short -- and unnecessary -- bit of nonsense, Raquel Welch appears to extremely good effect (it was impossible for her to look bad on-camera in those days) Others do not fare so well. Since the writing and direction and editing are more to blame than the game performances, we will pass over them in silence. Let's just say most of the sketches lay an egg, and not a fresh one.A few name actors have so little to do their parts might have been played by anybody -- or nobody. Richard Attenborough falls into this category. (Raquel Welch does not; only she could have played that small part -- if "small" is the operative word -- though Ursula Andress might have given it a damn good try) The film builds toward the maiden voyage to America of "The Magic Christian" (captained by Wilfred Hyde-White, doing the shtick he could perform in his sleep -- and probably did in this case). All the sketches prior to the ship are self-contained, with their own points -- usually. Actually, it would be more correct to say "The Magic Christian" repeatedly makes the same point in various, if not varied, ways.During the voyage, the film becomes increasingly disjointed until pandemonium breaks loose. A lot of big stars run around doing silly things. This isn't normally bad. Some of my favorite movies have big stars running around doing silly things. But these things are not particularly funny, and many of them appear utterly utterly pointless. The film reaches a satisfying (and not unwelcome) conclusion immediately after the voyage. Then it inexplicably lapses into an unfortunate denouement that hammers in its point, just in case we were too stupid to get it after ninety minutes of having it shouted at us. This movie is a model for talking down to its audience. The makers of this film realize that they are oh, so much smarter than the poor, dumb, uneducated dolts, they (1) gave us a movie that requires no attention span and then (2) hammers the same point home until it's pounded all the way through the wood to penetrate our simple brains. "The Magic Christian" is worth a peek for Sellers fans (where I fall), or anyone else who wants to see a favorite actor doing a bit that would have died in Vaudeville.If you want a better movie starring really good actors in disjointed sketches that make various points, try "The Magnificent Seven Deadly Sins" (directed by Graham Stark, who has an infinitesimal part in "The Magic Christian").

Maltin the Leonard calls this pathetically pretentious comedy "fiendishly funny", which is in itself the best confirmation and most dire warning one can hope to get that a movie sucks. When Leonard gives a film his unholy blessing, then that sort of becomes "a seal of disapproval". If he says it's black then it must be white: that nerdy critic is the perfect anti-litmus test.Based on a novel by Marxist Terry Southern (who gave us lovely cinematic garbage such as "Easy Rider", "Barbarella", and Kubrick's vastly overrated and unfunny "Dr.Strangelove"), this absurdist experimental comedy makes the rather trite point that people are bribable, greedy, obsessed with money, la-di-da... What an amazing discovery Terry had made there: "Hey, I just figured out that people lust after money! I must write a novel in which I can hammer that point home, over and over, through a series of oh-so symbolic vignettes!" Money rules the world! Eureka! What a shock...You gotta love it when a hypocritical Western Marxist, of all people, drones on about the supposed evils of Capitalism and money. What I'D like to know is how much money Southern earned from his TMC book and movie profits, and to which charities he gave all his money away to, the generous and ungreedy Leninist that he is, totally and utterly incorruptible and uninterested in money, the hippie idealist that he surely must have been... Oh, but I forgot: the movie flopped, which means it made no money. How ironic. What sweet poetic justice. Apparently, the audiences made the strange error of expecting a movie billed as a comedy to be funny. How weird of them; don't they know that comedies are all supposed to be unfunny, dumb satires? A very rich man (Sellers) decides to adopt Ringo "The Lucky Beatle" Starr, and no reason is given. They then proceed to harass everyone in sight, but mostly rich people, but again no explanation is given. Sellers has two sisters, but their inclusion is pointless: they serve no purpose in the story at all. The movie is like a bunch of badly strung-together sketches that are almost never funny. The exceptions are the John Cleese scene and the mildly amusing Spike Milligan scene. The rest is a mixture of confusing, chaotic, weird-for-the-sake-of-it drudgery that just screams SIXTIES (in the negative sense). Watching Yul Brunner in drag as he caresses Polanski's nose and sings for minutes (which seemed like hours) is the absolute low-point in this crap-fest. In the meantime, most of the cast mumble half the time, making it difficult to understand half the bull...Even the music is garbage. Paul McCartney donated one of his "throwaway songs" to the movie. Sort of like: "You can have this one. I wouldn't even put it on a C-side - if there were such a thing - but it should do for your movie." "Come & Get It" is played AD NAUSEAM throughout TMC, but the vile repetitiousness of the movie's same-subject skits (greed, greed, greed...) blends in well with the annoying song.The movie's finale includes celebratory images of Che Guevara and Mao Tse-Tung, i.e. two mass murderers - and I, for one, believe that being greedy for cash is a comparably tiny sin when put in contrast to GENOCIDE. There is nothing quite as touching as the humanism of a Left-wing extremist. They so care about the proletariat and humankind... Sniffle. There is also a "Crush Capitalism" banner being waved in that appallingly chaotic, idiotic (and other "tic"s) finale. I do so regret that Mr. Terry Holier-Than-Thou Uninterested-In-Materialistic-Possessions Southern isn't alive today so that I could ask His Red Deity why he let CAPITALIST companies and corporations distribute his ineptly written novels and films, if he is such a back-to-basics back-to-the-cave Communist... The general rule with "humanists" is this: the more a "humanitarian" is known for his "selfless self-sacrificing work", the bigger his villas and the faster his private jets are. (At this point I would like to say "hi" to Bono, the Dalai Lama, Mother Teresa, Steven Spielberg, George Bernard Shaw, and Lady Di. May you all rot in Heaven, for ye are all so so utterly unselfish and wonderful.) TMC ends with Peter Sellers saying: "There must be a better way." How utterly poignant. Yes, Southern's idea of a better way is going back to nature, which is so veeeery cleverly symbolized by Sellers and Starr taking their sleeping bags into a London park. Southern was an anti-intellectual moron, hence his pitiful and arrogant attempts to "enlighten" us - the ready-to-be-brainwashed proletariat viewers - about this "Red New Way" deserves the biggest laugh. Meanwhile, while that movie was being released into UK and US cinemas, thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians were being killed in Mao's Happy China... Where are the 60s movies crying out for political change THERE?

A doodlebug of a movie that is required movie by those who want to understand the Sixties better - just don't expect to understand what is going on - a complete mi sh mash of satire and irreverent fun all played out in a series of sketches that are joined by hte characters of Sellers and Ringo Starr cavorting around.This is about as far from 50s British comedy and Ealing as its possible to get: surreal, surprising, cruel, vindictive, hilarious, and just plain weird in places.It lives up to its tag line of Antiestablishment etc; and looks and feels like Monty Python before Python and with more bite.while stretching the credibility and tolerance of the audience is places it is wild viewing - and can be enjoyed on many levels.Be in the mood and you'll have a riot...