Question:
Don't read the spoiler unless you've seen the film.
Why did the psy-cogs see Anderton kill crow? He went looking for Crow to find out why he killed him, or rather why the psy-cogs saw him kill him, only because he saw that vision of him doing it. Without that vision he wouldn't have found out where Crow was, unless maybe he got word of a police investigation into him, but even then why did the vision have one of the psy-cogs in it? aaaagh heeellllp
I've still not sorted out Donnie Darko in my head, and then this comes along...CHEERS :rolleyes:
Still think the biggest shocker for me was...
That they lifted the twist almost scene for scene from L.A. Confidential
Watched it last night. Thought it was quite enjoyable but I did think I'd seen the ending before, thanks for clearing it up Mr Stanton. :)
.
Originally posted by BlueDwarf
Why did the psy-cogs see Anderton kill crow? He went looking for Crow to find out why he killed him, or rather why the psy-cogs saw him kill him, only because he saw that vision of him doing it. Without that vision he wouldn't have found out where Crow was, unless maybe he got word of a police investigation into him, but even then why did the vision have one of the psy-cogs in it? aaaagh heeellllp
Simple. The vision they saw was setup by Burgess(Sydow) to make Anderton go and kill Crow.
The psy-cogs saw this happen and that's what Anderton saw(which then led him to find Crow and kill him).Agnetha was with him when he killed Crow, so that's what the psy-cogs saw.
The fact that the vision itself was the trigger for all of it to happen doesn't alter the fact that it was going to happen.
The whole thing was a plot hole.
A lot of it was quite well made, but it's hard to believe that so many top rank screenwriters worked on it for years to come up with that. And yes, the scene from L.A. Confidential was remade near-identically. **** poor show for the most part, more so because it had some potential.
But stoopid is the new clever this year so don't worry about it. Minority Report and Bowling For Columbine have had record uses of the word 'intelligent' in their reviews. And they're the two dumbest films of the year by a mile!
...erm... iynsho, of course!
. . . :| . . .
...erm yes. That's how this whole posting thing works. If you disagree then feel free to post why. Or just post dots and smilies, what the hell.
lol :D
Ummm, no, it's not a big plot hole.
It's all a case of cause and effect. As soon as Burgess hired Crowe, gave him the photos and told him what to say, he triggered a sequence of events that would inevitably lead to Anderton killing Crowe.
Cheers,
Ryan
Agreed it was self-fulfilling, but I guess Spielberg didn't want to concentrate on that aspect of "precrime".
Tbh, the thing I found most annoying was the bleached out transfer, it made the film seem pretty much mono throughout, therefore making the scenes in colour jarr for me.
The image has been so obviously manipulated and the light bleed effects are overused (i.e. when characters have light behind them) I just kept getting reminded I was watching a movie.
I';m sure it's exactly what Spielberg intended but I would have preferred a less oppressive tone to the image.
I don't know why he didn't just hide somewhere until after the crime was due to happen. If Crow was still alive after the alleged time of the crime, Anderton (Cruise) could hardly be arrested for the pre-murder, could he?
Don't get me wrong - I loved the movie and thought it was one of the best sci-fi's in ages. The DVD's got some great extras, too
Has anyone else read the short story this was based on? It has a lot more about all this cause and eggect malarky and how seeing the precogs vision made Jon do thing etc... Well worth a read
I enjoyed the film,but thought it had great potential to be a classic BUT it was just another visual treat with a weak
plot that left me unchallenged,unsatisfied and dissapointed-who didn't see the end coming early on?
Spielberg must try harder :|
I don't care that it was really predictable, I can't remember the last big budget mainstream film that wasn't. Minority Report was fantastic entertainment.
Another thought : (SPOILERS) Anderton is a free man at the end of the film, but unless i'm mistaken, he DID actually kill Crow, even after Crow admitted that it was all a set up. I know Crow tried to seize the gun off him, but i'm not sure who actually pulled the trigger.
Indeed Brody - Im pretty sure Anderton DOES shoot Crow - Which is why he's locked away remember. However, it would've made the film far more drawn out if they had showed Anderton trying to clear his name. Instead he probably would've showed the authorities the Pre-Cog vision and they would've taken it from there.
As for it being Intelligent - Yes i agree it is. In a Summer of movies like Spider-Man, xXx, Bond, Scooby Doo - and there are others I'm sure - MR is definately an Intelligent movie.
As for the criticisms of the Film - well so far the only one that seems to be regurgitated at alarming regularity is that "Oh it's so been done before - Look at L.A. Confidential" - So what? A small 3 minute scene shouldn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
Plus there was far less script work done than you Imagine. There was 2 drafts written in the early 90's when Jan De Bont was going to make it, then came Scott Frank's 2 drafts a few years later and that was it. The rest of the work done was the 'Think Tank' stuff that was done and just standard Pre-production work - Which was a year in total.
Just to sum up - One of the Top 3 movies of the year (And Intelligent to boot!)
No one seems to have mentioned the possibility that the whole ending after Anderton is arrested is a dream.
"It's actually kind of a rush. They say you have visions, that your life flashes before your eyes, that all your dreams come true." - Gideon
if it was a dream then, that has been done before as well ...
... making MR even worse ;) :lol:
Originally posted by Arch Stanton
Still think the biggest shocker for me was...
That they lifted the twist almost scene for scene from L.A. Confidential
Oh come on. The oldest twist in film noir. You could see it a mile off in that film too!
I really enjoyed enjoyed MR, have seen it a few times now. My only question is this: (apologies for lack of use of character names :))
After Anderston fights his mates with their rocket packs in the alley, he runs out in front of the car with Colin Farrell in it. CF gets out and starts to chase him into the factory, but why do all his agents just sit in the car looking like a bunch of chimps rather than get out immediately and jumping on him? They just sit there looking out of the back window at Anderston running away?
Would have sacked them on the spot! ;)
They were dolites left over from the casting for Jamie Oliver's
kitchen show,and they couldn't be arsed :lol:
I quite enjoyed Minority Report, but didn't really think too deeply about the plot. Some scenes did have a "staged" feel to them, but...
..right at the very end, when we see Tom Cruise get back with his wife who also happens to be pregnant...that seemed to tie things up a little too neatly and it felt like an unconvincing "happy ending", at least in the context of what had gone before.
Burgess only had to leave evidence that Crow killed Anderton's son and his whereabouts somewhere that Anderton would definitely find it. When Anderton did find it, he would plan Crow's premeditated murder. The precogs sense this and predict the crime, which sets Anderton on the run and prevents him finding the evidence Burgess left for him BUT Burgess knows Anderton will use the precogs' visions to find out who Crow is and expects him to kill him anyway.
Still my favourite film of 2002 with only Chicago having any realistic chance of topping it.
I really enjoyed Minority Report and I cant wait to watch it again a few times just to see if it all holds together on repeat viewings :)
Originally posted by Roy Munson
I really enjoyed Minority Report and I cant wait to watch it again a few times just to see if it all holds together on repeat viewings :)
I've watched it a couple of times now, and still think it's excellent.
Another plot hole (more of an important detail) is the whole thing about Precrime going National - how exactly? Surely this must mean that the pre-cogs can already see murders going on all over the world (which they can't - they're hid away in seclusion at the end so they don't have the visions). So - they need more pre-cogs to be setup all over the country. Where are they going to get them from?
From what I gathered at the end of the film, Pre-Crime was disbanded because Anderton proved it was fallable(Burgess faking the murder vision), and the pre-cogs went off to live life away from their visions(which were enhanced by the electrode thingys attached to their heads in the pool)
In response to the original poster, the pre-cogs see a vision based on INTENTION not on the actual ACTION - otherwise, how would any potential murderer be caught pre-crime? Howard Marks was the same - he didn't actually do it, but the visions still occurred ....
I thought Minority Report was one of the best films of the year (right up there with Black Hawk Down in terms of DVD releases). Some of the quibbles are a bit weak. After all, if you tried hard enough, you could say that film X has a bit lifted from film Y.
To me it WAS an intelligent film, a thriller that made you think and second guess. If some of you saw the end coming (I didn't) then well done - but that's the nature of thrillers - a certain percentage of viewers will guess the end.
Am I the only one who thinks that movie would have been vastly improved by dumping the final act?
I thought this could have been a classic thriller and acheived everything that Swordfish tried to deliver but failed.
Pre-cogs predict the crime. The accused denies any possibility of it happening. The chase ensews. The accused commits the crime. End of movie.
Why do we need to have the tacked on happy ending? The only thing I was looking for in this movie was a convincing reason for Anderton to commit the crime, they found the reason so why add all the additional cr@p?
Originally posted by Rob
[B]In response to the original poster, the pre-cogs see a vision based on INTENTION not on the actual ACTION - otherwise, how would any potential murderer be caught pre-crime?
It's been a while since I saw it but .....
The impression I had was that in MR the future was all predetermined. It is unchangable.
The events seen by precrime ARE going to happen, hence their confidence about locking people up. Tom Cruise couldn't just sit in a room and wait it out the 'universe' would ensure he was there.
Surely the whole thing about the precogs seeing something happen that will only happen because the precogs saw itis that classic of time travel (which is basically what the precogs do) SciFi: the paradox. Surely that was half the point of the movie? :confused:
_
Originally posted by Dave L
Am I the only one who thinks that movie would have been vastly improved by dumping the final act?
Absolutely. :thumbs:
This is exactly what I said after having viewed it for the fast time. Why do they always have to go for the 'happy' ending where everything gets tied up nicely. Just look at Se7en and Memento as two examples of where a slightly less conventional ending gives a much more satisfying film.
It would have also lead to so much more discussion in the vein of BlueDwarf's original question. Instead it became more of a throw away effects laden marketing vehicle. Don't get me wrong, I did quite enjoy it for what it was but it could have been so much more.
Oh, and did anyone else laugh at Tom Cruise waving his hands about working the computers at the beginning? I've been sitting here for ages trying to do the same but in the end resorted to using the keyboard and mouse, so much less effort. ;) :D
The short story went a slightly different (and better) direction.
It turned out there were 3 minority reports.
2 had Anderton killing the general in 2 different ways, 1 had him not killing the general.
If he killed the general one way it resulted in imprisonment (or death I think), if he failed to kill him it proved that the pre-crime system was a failure so giving the general reason to shut it down. So he killed him the third way (assassination) to save the system.
So he ends up getting banished from earth with his wife but the pre-crime system survives..as it turned out this scenario could only occur with Anderton or his replacement
Originally posted by Dave L
Am I the only one who thinks that movie would have been vastly improved by dumping the final act?
Couldn't agree more, I'm looking forward to watching this on DVD so I can stop it before the cheesy tacked on ending.
AI did the same, IMO. If Speilberg just had the cohenes to end on a low note, they would both have ended up far better films.
As it is, I hate AI, but Minority Report ranks as one of my highlights of the year. Its has some of the most convincing CGI effects of any film.
Okay for anyone who hasn't seen the movie SPOILER cover. Here's the point about the 'final act':
It's a dream.
Anderton is still 'haloed' and Von Sydow is never found out. When he's put in the machine the caretaker points out that they do say all your dreams will come true, and I think something else.
The guy early on states that 'in the kingdom of the blinde, the one-eyed man is king'. He is the one-eyed man and he's in that kingdom.
Note how after the 'haloing' sequence the movie suddenly becomes fairly far-fetched (the eye-ball still working, etc.), and also we suddenly have a voice-over. Listen to the Seven commentary and you'll see how unliked it is to have a voice over when no precident for one has been set up earlier in the movie. It suddenly becomes 'personal' - because Anderton is dreaming...
This is a familiar theme to Dick's other works - is Deckard's life real? Is Arnie all along having a Schiztoid Embolism?
Essentially this is a reason I love this movie. We have an ending that if we just want 'happy' we can accept and if we want depth, we can see where it comes from...
Big :thumbs: to TheoGB, the 'is this real?' theme of all Dick's stuff can slip by unnoticed by many unless somebody actually says a stooopid 1980s Hollywood 'Is this real?' line at the end!
Nice one TheoGB...
Really want to watch this again now, that never even occured to me, but having thought about it, and Dick's other work, it makes perfect sense...
Before my head swells too much to let me out of the building I should point out I thought much as the rest of you did after seeing at the cinema!! :D
It was on reading a lot of the discussions about the movie at the HTF and similar places that I discovered this 'alternative' view of the ending. ;)
If only I were that deep and intellectual. :lol:
You're starting to try my patience James/Brian/GorssePointeJack.
Still no sign of Shaolin Soccer R3, i'd appreciate a reply too.
Failing that i will contact your local police & the bank.
I will continue to post this on every thread you post on until I get a reply & the disc.
Daliah.
ok i cant really remember the movie that well, should be getting the DVD soon
if it was a dream, what is the point to the movie ?
Originally posted by KeyserSoze
ok i cant really remember the movie that well, should be getting the DVD soon
if it was a dream, what is the point to the movie ?
Um well
Only the end of the movie is dream, after he gets taken by the pre-crime unit. And that's only an interpretation. I don't think Spielberg has ever confirmed or denied it.
That's if you want it to be.
Of course one might well ask that of the Wizard of Oz, Total Recall, Blade Runner, couldn't you?
ok thanks
looks like i need to watch this again.
Watched it again this morning, and I still think it's a cracking movie. The 'ending' may well be too neat, but after the love-fest at the end of AI I was expecting something really bad from Senor Spielbergo. And as for the voice over, it doesn't 'suddenly' appear after the haloing sequence. It only narrates the coda, something done in many movies before. I like TheoGB's post, but that aspect just doesn't hold true, to me anyway. Hang on a sec! Musings on a VO in a movie inspired by Phil Dick's work? It's like deja vu all over again.
Originally posted by Niceguygeoff
Watched it again this morning, and I still think it's a cracking movie. The 'ending' may well be too neat, but after the love-fest at the end of AI I was expecting something really bad from Senor Spielbergo. And as for the voice over, it doesn't 'suddenly' appear after the haloing sequence. It only narrates the coda, something done in many movies before. I like TheoGB's post, but that aspect just doesn't hold true, to me anyway. Hang on a sec! Musings on a VO in a movie inspired by Phil Dick's work? It's like deja vu all over again.
Hmm, well I only think the narration's one aspect but which other movies only narrate the coda?
Seven is the only other one I can think of off hand (in recent memory certainly) and from the commentary we know that this is entirely down to the studio not something the director felt was a good idea - to suddenly have a narration out of the blue.
But like I said, it is only one way fo interpretting it. Personally I think I prefer happy endings.
The other aspect people have pointed out (and this is tenuous) is a connection in overall style and filming to 'Brazil'. I've not seen this movie so I can't comment...
Originally posted by TheoGB
Personally I think I prefer happy endings.
I have nothing against happy endings, but I don't like happy endings in total contrast to the rest of the picture...
Big spoiler below, don't read unless you've seen the film...
I REALLY don't like the cheesy way it does the :
"so, its a shame she was murdered eh?"
"yes, it is a shame she was STRANGLED..."
"hey, how did you know she was strangled, I just said she'd been murdered..."
Killer shifts uncomfortably
If this is a dream, then I can accept it slightly more comfortably, because its Anderton's fantasy about Von Sydow's character getting caught...Rather than Von Sydow's character stupidly giving the game away.
Oh, and about the "love-fest" at the end of AI, what was your interpretation of that Niceguygeoff? Aliens? That was my take...but I've since been given another explanation of the end of AI which I might be more comfortable with...
Originally posted by dan13l
Oh, and about the "love-fest" at the end of AI, what was your interpretation of that Niceguygeoff?
It was a dream
Originally posted by Urban Tiger
I really enjoyed enjoyed MR, have seen it a few times now. My only question is this: (apologies for lack of use of character names :))
After Anderston fights his mates with their rocket packs in the alley, he runs out in front of the car with Colin Farrell in it. CF gets out and starts to chase him into the factory, but why do all his agents just sit in the car looking like a bunch of chimps rather than get out immediately and jumping on him? They just sit there looking out of the back window at Anderston running away?
Would have sacked them on the spot! ;)
More importantly, when you first see Anderton's flat, how come he's got three fake plastic dog turds on his bedside table? (Have a look) Or in a PK Dick way, could they really be real?;)
Why did the psy-cogs see Anderton kill crow? He went looking for Crow to find out why he killed him, or rather why the psy-cogs saw him kill him, only because he saw that vision of him doing it. Without that vision he wouldn't have found out where Crow was, unless maybe he got word of a police investigation into him, but even then why did the vision have one of the psy-cogs in it? aaaagh heeellllp
I've still not sorted out Donnie Darko in my head, and then this comes along...CHEERS :rolleyes:
Answers:
Still think the biggest shocker for me was...
That they lifted the twist almost scene for scene from L.A. Confidential
Answers:
Watched it last night. Thought it was quite enjoyable but I did think I'd seen the ending before, thanks for clearing it up Mr Stanton. :)
Answers:
.
Answers:
Originally posted by BlueDwarf
Why did the psy-cogs see Anderton kill crow? He went looking for Crow to find out why he killed him, or rather why the psy-cogs saw him kill him, only because he saw that vision of him doing it. Without that vision he wouldn't have found out where Crow was, unless maybe he got word of a police investigation into him, but even then why did the vision have one of the psy-cogs in it? aaaagh heeellllp
Simple. The vision they saw was setup by Burgess(Sydow) to make Anderton go and kill Crow.
The psy-cogs saw this happen and that's what Anderton saw(which then led him to find Crow and kill him).Agnetha was with him when he killed Crow, so that's what the psy-cogs saw.
The fact that the vision itself was the trigger for all of it to happen doesn't alter the fact that it was going to happen.
Answers:
The whole thing was a plot hole.
A lot of it was quite well made, but it's hard to believe that so many top rank screenwriters worked on it for years to come up with that. And yes, the scene from L.A. Confidential was remade near-identically. **** poor show for the most part, more so because it had some potential.
But stoopid is the new clever this year so don't worry about it. Minority Report and Bowling For Columbine have had record uses of the word 'intelligent' in their reviews. And they're the two dumbest films of the year by a mile!
Answers:
...erm... iynsho, of course!
. . . :| . . .
Answers:
...erm yes. That's how this whole posting thing works. If you disagree then feel free to post why. Or just post dots and smilies, what the hell.
Answers:
lol :D
Answers:
Ummm, no, it's not a big plot hole.
It's all a case of cause and effect. As soon as Burgess hired Crowe, gave him the photos and told him what to say, he triggered a sequence of events that would inevitably lead to Anderton killing Crowe.
Cheers,
Ryan
Answers:
Agreed it was self-fulfilling, but I guess Spielberg didn't want to concentrate on that aspect of "precrime".
Tbh, the thing I found most annoying was the bleached out transfer, it made the film seem pretty much mono throughout, therefore making the scenes in colour jarr for me.
The image has been so obviously manipulated and the light bleed effects are overused (i.e. when characters have light behind them) I just kept getting reminded I was watching a movie.
I';m sure it's exactly what Spielberg intended but I would have preferred a less oppressive tone to the image.
Answers:
I don't know why he didn't just hide somewhere until after the crime was due to happen. If Crow was still alive after the alleged time of the crime, Anderton (Cruise) could hardly be arrested for the pre-murder, could he?
Don't get me wrong - I loved the movie and thought it was one of the best sci-fi's in ages. The DVD's got some great extras, too
Answers:
Has anyone else read the short story this was based on? It has a lot more about all this cause and eggect malarky and how seeing the precogs vision made Jon do thing etc... Well worth a read
Answers:
I enjoyed the film,but thought it had great potential to be a classic BUT it was just another visual treat with a weak
plot that left me unchallenged,unsatisfied and dissapointed-who didn't see the end coming early on?
Spielberg must try harder :|
Answers:
I don't care that it was really predictable, I can't remember the last big budget mainstream film that wasn't. Minority Report was fantastic entertainment.
Answers:
Another thought : (SPOILERS) Anderton is a free man at the end of the film, but unless i'm mistaken, he DID actually kill Crow, even after Crow admitted that it was all a set up. I know Crow tried to seize the gun off him, but i'm not sure who actually pulled the trigger.
Answers:
Indeed Brody - Im pretty sure Anderton DOES shoot Crow - Which is why he's locked away remember. However, it would've made the film far more drawn out if they had showed Anderton trying to clear his name. Instead he probably would've showed the authorities the Pre-Cog vision and they would've taken it from there.
As for it being Intelligent - Yes i agree it is. In a Summer of movies like Spider-Man, xXx, Bond, Scooby Doo - and there are others I'm sure - MR is definately an Intelligent movie.
As for the criticisms of the Film - well so far the only one that seems to be regurgitated at alarming regularity is that "Oh it's so been done before - Look at L.A. Confidential" - So what? A small 3 minute scene shouldn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
Plus there was far less script work done than you Imagine. There was 2 drafts written in the early 90's when Jan De Bont was going to make it, then came Scott Frank's 2 drafts a few years later and that was it. The rest of the work done was the 'Think Tank' stuff that was done and just standard Pre-production work - Which was a year in total.
Just to sum up - One of the Top 3 movies of the year (And Intelligent to boot!)
Answers:
No one seems to have mentioned the possibility that the whole ending after Anderton is arrested is a dream.
"It's actually kind of a rush. They say you have visions, that your life flashes before your eyes, that all your dreams come true." - Gideon
Answers:
if it was a dream then, that has been done before as well ...
... making MR even worse ;) :lol:
Answers:
Originally posted by Arch Stanton
Still think the biggest shocker for me was...
That they lifted the twist almost scene for scene from L.A. Confidential
Oh come on. The oldest twist in film noir. You could see it a mile off in that film too!
Answers:
I really enjoyed enjoyed MR, have seen it a few times now. My only question is this: (apologies for lack of use of character names :))
After Anderston fights his mates with their rocket packs in the alley, he runs out in front of the car with Colin Farrell in it. CF gets out and starts to chase him into the factory, but why do all his agents just sit in the car looking like a bunch of chimps rather than get out immediately and jumping on him? They just sit there looking out of the back window at Anderston running away?
Would have sacked them on the spot! ;)
Answers:
They were dolites left over from the casting for Jamie Oliver's
kitchen show,and they couldn't be arsed :lol:
Answers:
I quite enjoyed Minority Report, but didn't really think too deeply about the plot. Some scenes did have a "staged" feel to them, but...
..right at the very end, when we see Tom Cruise get back with his wife who also happens to be pregnant...that seemed to tie things up a little too neatly and it felt like an unconvincing "happy ending", at least in the context of what had gone before.
Answers:
Burgess only had to leave evidence that Crow killed Anderton's son and his whereabouts somewhere that Anderton would definitely find it. When Anderton did find it, he would plan Crow's premeditated murder. The precogs sense this and predict the crime, which sets Anderton on the run and prevents him finding the evidence Burgess left for him BUT Burgess knows Anderton will use the precogs' visions to find out who Crow is and expects him to kill him anyway.
Still my favourite film of 2002 with only Chicago having any realistic chance of topping it.
Answers:
I really enjoyed Minority Report and I cant wait to watch it again a few times just to see if it all holds together on repeat viewings :)
Answers:
Originally posted by Roy Munson
I really enjoyed Minority Report and I cant wait to watch it again a few times just to see if it all holds together on repeat viewings :)
I've watched it a couple of times now, and still think it's excellent.
Answers:
Another plot hole (more of an important detail) is the whole thing about Precrime going National - how exactly? Surely this must mean that the pre-cogs can already see murders going on all over the world (which they can't - they're hid away in seclusion at the end so they don't have the visions). So - they need more pre-cogs to be setup all over the country. Where are they going to get them from?
Answers:
From what I gathered at the end of the film, Pre-Crime was disbanded because Anderton proved it was fallable(Burgess faking the murder vision), and the pre-cogs went off to live life away from their visions(which were enhanced by the electrode thingys attached to their heads in the pool)
Answers:
In response to the original poster, the pre-cogs see a vision based on INTENTION not on the actual ACTION - otherwise, how would any potential murderer be caught pre-crime? Howard Marks was the same - he didn't actually do it, but the visions still occurred ....
I thought Minority Report was one of the best films of the year (right up there with Black Hawk Down in terms of DVD releases). Some of the quibbles are a bit weak. After all, if you tried hard enough, you could say that film X has a bit lifted from film Y.
To me it WAS an intelligent film, a thriller that made you think and second guess. If some of you saw the end coming (I didn't) then well done - but that's the nature of thrillers - a certain percentage of viewers will guess the end.
Answers:
Am I the only one who thinks that movie would have been vastly improved by dumping the final act?
I thought this could have been a classic thriller and acheived everything that Swordfish tried to deliver but failed.
Pre-cogs predict the crime. The accused denies any possibility of it happening. The chase ensews. The accused commits the crime. End of movie.
Why do we need to have the tacked on happy ending? The only thing I was looking for in this movie was a convincing reason for Anderton to commit the crime, they found the reason so why add all the additional cr@p?
Answers:
Originally posted by Rob
[B]In response to the original poster, the pre-cogs see a vision based on INTENTION not on the actual ACTION - otherwise, how would any potential murderer be caught pre-crime?
It's been a while since I saw it but .....
The impression I had was that in MR the future was all predetermined. It is unchangable.
The events seen by precrime ARE going to happen, hence their confidence about locking people up. Tom Cruise couldn't just sit in a room and wait it out the 'universe' would ensure he was there.
Answers:
Surely the whole thing about the precogs seeing something happen that will only happen because the precogs saw itis that classic of time travel (which is basically what the precogs do) SciFi: the paradox. Surely that was half the point of the movie? :confused:
_
Answers:
Originally posted by Dave L
Am I the only one who thinks that movie would have been vastly improved by dumping the final act?
Absolutely. :thumbs:
This is exactly what I said after having viewed it for the fast time. Why do they always have to go for the 'happy' ending where everything gets tied up nicely. Just look at Se7en and Memento as two examples of where a slightly less conventional ending gives a much more satisfying film.
It would have also lead to so much more discussion in the vein of BlueDwarf's original question. Instead it became more of a throw away effects laden marketing vehicle. Don't get me wrong, I did quite enjoy it for what it was but it could have been so much more.
Oh, and did anyone else laugh at Tom Cruise waving his hands about working the computers at the beginning? I've been sitting here for ages trying to do the same but in the end resorted to using the keyboard and mouse, so much less effort. ;) :D
Answers:
The short story went a slightly different (and better) direction.
It turned out there were 3 minority reports.
2 had Anderton killing the general in 2 different ways, 1 had him not killing the general.
If he killed the general one way it resulted in imprisonment (or death I think), if he failed to kill him it proved that the pre-crime system was a failure so giving the general reason to shut it down. So he killed him the third way (assassination) to save the system.
So he ends up getting banished from earth with his wife but the pre-crime system survives..as it turned out this scenario could only occur with Anderton or his replacement
Answers:
Originally posted by Dave L
Am I the only one who thinks that movie would have been vastly improved by dumping the final act?
Couldn't agree more, I'm looking forward to watching this on DVD so I can stop it before the cheesy tacked on ending.
AI did the same, IMO. If Speilberg just had the cohenes to end on a low note, they would both have ended up far better films.
As it is, I hate AI, but Minority Report ranks as one of my highlights of the year. Its has some of the most convincing CGI effects of any film.
Answers:
Okay for anyone who hasn't seen the movie SPOILER cover. Here's the point about the 'final act':
It's a dream.
Anderton is still 'haloed' and Von Sydow is never found out. When he's put in the machine the caretaker points out that they do say all your dreams will come true, and I think something else.
The guy early on states that 'in the kingdom of the blinde, the one-eyed man is king'. He is the one-eyed man and he's in that kingdom.
Note how after the 'haloing' sequence the movie suddenly becomes fairly far-fetched (the eye-ball still working, etc.), and also we suddenly have a voice-over. Listen to the Seven commentary and you'll see how unliked it is to have a voice over when no precident for one has been set up earlier in the movie. It suddenly becomes 'personal' - because Anderton is dreaming...
This is a familiar theme to Dick's other works - is Deckard's life real? Is Arnie all along having a Schiztoid Embolism?
Essentially this is a reason I love this movie. We have an ending that if we just want 'happy' we can accept and if we want depth, we can see where it comes from...
Answers:
Big :thumbs: to TheoGB, the 'is this real?' theme of all Dick's stuff can slip by unnoticed by many unless somebody actually says a stooopid 1980s Hollywood 'Is this real?' line at the end!
Answers:
Nice one TheoGB...
Really want to watch this again now, that never even occured to me, but having thought about it, and Dick's other work, it makes perfect sense...
Answers:
Before my head swells too much to let me out of the building I should point out I thought much as the rest of you did after seeing at the cinema!! :D
It was on reading a lot of the discussions about the movie at the HTF and similar places that I discovered this 'alternative' view of the ending. ;)
If only I were that deep and intellectual. :lol:
Answers:
You're starting to try my patience James/Brian/GorssePointeJack.
Still no sign of Shaolin Soccer R3, i'd appreciate a reply too.
Failing that i will contact your local police & the bank.
I will continue to post this on every thread you post on until I get a reply & the disc.
Daliah.
Answers:
ok i cant really remember the movie that well, should be getting the DVD soon
if it was a dream, what is the point to the movie ?
Answers:
Originally posted by KeyserSoze
ok i cant really remember the movie that well, should be getting the DVD soon
if it was a dream, what is the point to the movie ?
Um well
Only the end of the movie is dream, after he gets taken by the pre-crime unit. And that's only an interpretation. I don't think Spielberg has ever confirmed or denied it.
That's if you want it to be.
Of course one might well ask that of the Wizard of Oz, Total Recall, Blade Runner, couldn't you?
Answers:
ok thanks
looks like i need to watch this again.
Answers:
Watched it again this morning, and I still think it's a cracking movie. The 'ending' may well be too neat, but after the love-fest at the end of AI I was expecting something really bad from Senor Spielbergo. And as for the voice over, it doesn't 'suddenly' appear after the haloing sequence. It only narrates the coda, something done in many movies before. I like TheoGB's post, but that aspect just doesn't hold true, to me anyway. Hang on a sec! Musings on a VO in a movie inspired by Phil Dick's work? It's like deja vu all over again.
Answers:
Originally posted by Niceguygeoff
Watched it again this morning, and I still think it's a cracking movie. The 'ending' may well be too neat, but after the love-fest at the end of AI I was expecting something really bad from Senor Spielbergo. And as for the voice over, it doesn't 'suddenly' appear after the haloing sequence. It only narrates the coda, something done in many movies before. I like TheoGB's post, but that aspect just doesn't hold true, to me anyway. Hang on a sec! Musings on a VO in a movie inspired by Phil Dick's work? It's like deja vu all over again.
Hmm, well I only think the narration's one aspect but which other movies only narrate the coda?
Seven is the only other one I can think of off hand (in recent memory certainly) and from the commentary we know that this is entirely down to the studio not something the director felt was a good idea - to suddenly have a narration out of the blue.
But like I said, it is only one way fo interpretting it. Personally I think I prefer happy endings.
The other aspect people have pointed out (and this is tenuous) is a connection in overall style and filming to 'Brazil'. I've not seen this movie so I can't comment...
Answers:
Originally posted by TheoGB
Personally I think I prefer happy endings.
I have nothing against happy endings, but I don't like happy endings in total contrast to the rest of the picture...
Big spoiler below, don't read unless you've seen the film...
I REALLY don't like the cheesy way it does the :
"so, its a shame she was murdered eh?"
"yes, it is a shame she was STRANGLED..."
"hey, how did you know she was strangled, I just said she'd been murdered..."
Killer shifts uncomfortably
If this is a dream, then I can accept it slightly more comfortably, because its Anderton's fantasy about Von Sydow's character getting caught...Rather than Von Sydow's character stupidly giving the game away.
Oh, and about the "love-fest" at the end of AI, what was your interpretation of that Niceguygeoff? Aliens? That was my take...but I've since been given another explanation of the end of AI which I might be more comfortable with...
Answers:
Originally posted by dan13l
Oh, and about the "love-fest" at the end of AI, what was your interpretation of that Niceguygeoff?
It was a dream
Answers:
Originally posted by Urban Tiger
I really enjoyed enjoyed MR, have seen it a few times now. My only question is this: (apologies for lack of use of character names :))
After Anderston fights his mates with their rocket packs in the alley, he runs out in front of the car with Colin Farrell in it. CF gets out and starts to chase him into the factory, but why do all his agents just sit in the car looking like a bunch of chimps rather than get out immediately and jumping on him? They just sit there looking out of the back window at Anderston running away?
Would have sacked them on the spot! ;)
More importantly, when you first see Anderton's flat, how come he's got three fake plastic dog turds on his bedside table? (Have a look) Or in a PK Dick way, could they really be real?;)
1 2