Minority Report (mild spoilers)

See this film.

Yes, I know it has Tom Cruise in it, but SF hasn't been this good since the
"Terminator" films. Really.

Spoiler Space Follows ...














































































I thought it was going to be based on the Asimov short story called
something like "All the Troubles of the World". It isn't - it's based on
something by Philip K Dick, who also wrote "Do Androids Dream of Electric
Sheep", which was filmed as "Blade Runner". (If that doesn't ring any
bells, see "Blade Runner" too. But you can see that on DVD. See "Minority
Report" first.) He also wrote "We can Remember it for you Wholesale", which
was filmed as "Total Recall". Mr Dick wrote very filmable SF, you know.

The comparison I'd make is to "Terminator" and "Terminator 2". Any story
where information travels through time "the wrong way" is going to involve
bizarre and paradoxical plot-twists, and this film includes a lot of that.
(Time paradox haters, beware - this film will irritate you.) I like it, I
feel it is an SF staple, and in this case it is done very well. There is
one particular hunt scene where the main character is trying to shepherd an
all-but-helpless girl through a shopping mall while being hunted by large
numbers of police. The tension is superb, but so also is the shock as we
see quite how helpless she really is.

The end of the film is really very unexpected. We know that the murder has
been predicted, but we are still wondering right up to the last minute if
the main character is really going to do it. (You'll have to see the film.)
It really does turn out that what was going on was not what I, at least,
thought was going on. But then I still had that Asmiov story in mind.


The other thing that some people are going to ask about is the relation to
my storytelling. Some of you know that I have been running stories around a
predictive crime system for some time. The superficial similarities at
times beggar belief: the strange lady who started it all; the last-minute
police interventions; the start date (2048) and place (USA); many many
details. The main difference is that in "Minority Report" people are
punished for crimes they have not committed, whereas in the Administration
people are not. In terms of social forces, that (I believe) is the key
difference between the two stories.


But see "Minority Report". It's the best SF I've seen in a bloody long time.

I agree.

Well filmed, well paced, well acted.
You really can't predict the ending (and that's rare).

Lots of cute throw-away tech advancements that add effect without
distracting from the actual film.

You might not want to see it if you're easilly disturbed, but as long as you
remember that Philip K Dick was a sick and thoroughly screwed up individual,
you should be able to make that call yourselves.

Tom Cruise is fine - in fact, it's getting to the stage now where he's done
quite a few decent films, and maybe we should stop slagging him off? Parts
of the plot that seem trite, or contrived, or stereotypical, generally turn
out to either not be, or to be so because of a larger plot that made them
that way on purpose. Clever stuff.

It's serious, hard, SF - not space opera.

Maybe I'll consider reading some of Dick's books now, after being put right
off him by reading the astoundingly bad Deus Irae, and VALIS. Of course, he
was still a drugged-up paranoid schizo who wrote letters to the FBI and
posted them in his dustbin.

Dominic

Nah, he's now/still a scientologist, and thus deserves far more slagging
off. :-)

---

Nick Waterman. Senior Blackberry Unix Systems Administrator,
Research In Motion http://www.rim.net/ #include <stddisclaimer>
Sent from my Blackberry Wireless Handheld!

... but by definition, that means you're supporting the scientologists, for
he is one of their richest members, and thus, almost by definition, one of
their biggest contributors.

By paying for a ticket, you are paying him, thus paying them. How about
"sneak into / steal / pirate this film"? ;-)

... and for those who don't know who the scientologists are, see
http://www.xenu.com/

---

Nick Waterman. Senior Blackberry Unix Systems Administrator,
Research In Motion http://www.rim.net/ #include <stddisclaimer>
Sent from my Blackberry Wireless Handheld!

I enjoyed this film, but have a nagging question which
I can't answer...

Spoiler space as it's a plot-related question:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

How did Burgess set up Anderton?

He hired a man (Crow) to pretend to be a pedophile who
had kidnapped Anderton's son. He then arranged for
Crow to be at a specific location at a specific time,
with enough evidence to convince Anderton that Crow is
the kidnapper. We have a time, location and a motive.
I have no problem with that. My problem is that at
no point does Burgess appear to make sure that
Anderton will meet Crow. In order for the Pre-Cogs to
pick up the future murder, Anderton would have to be
at the scene of the crime, but he does not know where
the murder will take place until minutes before it
does, only the time it will take place. Anderton only
finds Crow as a result of the Pre cog vision, without
the pre cog vision, Anderton would not have found and
killed Crow, therefore its a nasty paradox.

If Burgess (for example) had given Anderton an
anonymous tip off to be in Crows room at a specific
time, then events would have been put in motion and
the pre cogs would have picked it up, but that did not
appear to happen.

I can see three explanations:

1) I missed something in the film (highly likely).
2) Burgess created the Pre cog vision and put it into
the system (can't see how he could of done this).
3) Agatha set it all up. This is not entirely
unlikely as she is the most powerful Pre cog, she has
the vision, she led Anderton to Crow, Burgess killed
her mother (the Ann Lively murder) and the end result
is freedom for the pre cogs.

This may be all explained in the original short story,
but I've yet to read it (still trying to get my head
around VALIS).


Also...

Did anyone notice that there were no actual Minority
Reports in the film?

The Crow murder did not have one.
The Ann Lively Murder missing file was actually an
echo (or not as is revealed later in the film) and not
a minority report.

Just thought I'd start some debate.

Cheers,

Paul







__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

How it actually happened was the precog had a vision where they'd had a
vision, and.... it's all consistent, but it's supporting its own weight.
Yes, Burgess needed some plan for how Anderton was going to find out. Once
it was fixed that he was going to find out, it was fixed that the guy was
going to die, and then that Anderton was going to see the report, etc. etc.
but I agree that he must have had a plan in the first place.
However, the vision of the precog was entirely correct - there was just a
bit missing in the middle.
All the actual events did take place - the pointing of the gun, the words
spoken, the gunshot, and the guy flying out the window...
NO! DON'T!
Stop now before it's too late!
Throw it away!
Flee for your life!

Ye gods, you'll be reading "Crash" next.....
I said that, and was soundly contradicted by someone for it, but I'm woolly
on their reasoning.
So it WAS a minority report then, it was just misdiagnosed.

Dominic

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
It's not really shown. But there are a few
clues.

The precogs provide 3 pieces of information
(along with the video footage).

i) The victim
ii) The killer
iii) The nature of the crime

It's the third that's out of place. It shows
as a pre-med, when to Anderton it had to be a
crime of passion.

The pre-meds obviously pick up the death at
the time it was conceived. Thus it shows as
pre-med. The victim and killer all follow
through from there.

The timeline is probably skewed from that point
in.

But there is another explaination. This I call
the Brazil hypothesis.

When Anderton is put in storage, the warden state
"It's kind of a rush, they say all your dreams
come true".

My theory is the whole Burgess conspiracy, the
escape, the freeing of all the prisoners,
the precogs on their own island and the new
baby is some happy pipe dream conceived whilst
he was in prison.

Mine is a slightly darker film, I'm looking forward
to the directors cut! :-)

Cheers,

Adam

---

_______________________________________________
Download the free Opera browser at http://www.opera.com/

Free OperaMail at http://www.operamail.com/

Powered by Outblaze

Damn. That's a good point.
They SAY it's a pre-med, and ke KNOWS it isn't.
I hadn't picked up on that one.

That's the flaw in it. It doesn't show WHO pre-meditates it, only who
commits the crime.
Hmm.
No - the pre-med glitch above, plus the grabbing of his arm, and the
pre-cog's obsession with the watery murder all have to have a meaning.

Dominic

On Tue, 23 July 2002, "Dominic Thomas" wrote
Or rather, he knows that it wasn't him that premeditated it.
It's not quite true, either. In the opening scenes they
say "red ball - crime of passion" and then start talking about
how they get so few pre-meditated ones. But they define a
pre-meditated crime as "one where they get plenty of warning",
not one where the murderor actually plans it.

If someone else plans it, that still fits into their system.
The ball-colour is purely defined in terms of lead-time, as
I understood it.
Or doesn't.

The funny thing is, if rather than their system where citizens
are "punished for imaginary crimes" (Dungeon Keeper quote, for
those that bother about these things) they were stopped from
committing the crime, then offered support to help with the
feelings that led to the crime, then their experiment would
have been judged a success. To my mind, the big problem
with this utopia is how they treat the predicted murderors.
Yes, I heard it from Richard last night. It's not such a good
idea, really: generally the "because it was all a dream" ending
is poor storytelling. "Brazil" does it well, but only because
it is so dreamy (or nightmarish) anyway that it's not a betrayal
of the audience in the same way.

It's a cop out - a way to avoid tying up the loose ends.

--- Adam Hattrell <adamh@> wrote:
Yes, that makes sense. The Pre cogs sense the murder
when it is conceived, but only show the actual murder,
not the person who conceived the murder. That
explains how Burgess (almost) got away with killing
Ann Lively (i.e two murders, same victim, conceived at
the same time).

So if Mr big, the Mafia Don decided to murder Fred the
grass, then goes and (separately) tells 10 different
hit-men to kill Fred, you have one (conceived) murder,
one victim and ten different visions. That will give
the Pre Cogs one hell of a headache (and lots of
'murderer' balls) ;-)

Cheers,

Paul




__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

Someone has the HTML syndrome. There's a quote character
that reads "& g t ;". Sort it out, there's a good chap.



On Tue, 23 July 2002, Paul Ilsley wrote
It should only give them a headache if Mr Big insists
on dictating the time and place. Otherwise it's
just ten murders.