Minority Report question *muchos* *spoilers*
On Tue, 23 July 2002, Paul Ilsley wrote
sure the plot is watertight.
We know the precogs can do that, because every time precrime stops
a murder they have done so.
Presumably Burgess had some method of doing it, but it turns out
that Anderton's reaction to the precogs made this method
superfluous/unnecessary.
[...]
at the last minute (a phone call offering information
about Sean would do) and never had to use it.
Did you notice that the murder never took place? In the
end, it was a suicide.
4) Burgess had the method all organised, but because of
precog intervention it never happened. Having a faked
photograph and an anonymous note in the mail is all it
would need. 36 hours is about right for a mail, for
instance - and possibly the bit where Anderton returns
to his apartment and finds the letter is still lying on
the cutting-room floor. You know what Hollywood is like.
Anybody read the story?
from the others. According to that definition, the
Lively murder had one, dismissed as an echo, and the
Crow murder did not.
What is interesting in the second watching is the various
symbolism they have put in the film. All the plants I
identified in How^H^H^HHinneman's greenhouse were either
carnivorous or poisonous (or both). The stuff with the
Christopher on the Fed is ... interesting, and it's also
interesting how they change his makeup when it's revealed
that he is not the bad guy.
It's also interesting that the first thing that tells
Anderton that he has lost his son is seeing his watch
discarded into the water - presumably destroying it.
And watch the eyes. Anderton's are blue. Yakamoto's are
brown.
It's attention to detail that makes this film so good, in
my opinion.
I enjoyed this film, but have a nagging question which
I can't answer...
We went back to see it a second time last night. I'm prettyI can't answer...
sure the plot is watertight.
Spoiler space as it's a plot-related question:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
How did Burgess set up Anderton?
We don't know, because the precogs stuffed that probability line.-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
How did Burgess set up Anderton?
We know the precogs can do that, because every time precrime stops
a murder they have done so.
Presumably Burgess had some method of doing it, but it turns out
that Anderton's reaction to the precogs made this method
superfluous/unnecessary.
[...]
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,
Which he was 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.
Unless Burgess had a method of pointing Anderton there 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.
at the last minute (a phone call offering information
about Sean would do) and never had to use it.
Did you notice that the murder never took place? In the
end, it was a suicide.
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).
No, you didn't.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).
No, he didn't.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.
Orunlikely 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.
4) Burgess had the method all organised, but because of
precog intervention it never happened. Having a faked
photograph and an anonymous note in the mail is all it
would need. 36 hours is about right for a mail, for
instance - and possibly the bit where Anderton returns
to his apartment and finds the letter is still lying on
the cutting-room floor. You know what Hollywood is like.
Anybody read the story?
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.
I thought a minority report was where one report differedbut 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.
from the others. According to that definition, the
Lively murder had one, dismissed as an echo, and the
Crow murder did not.
Just thought I'd start some debate.
Fine by me. :-)What is interesting in the second watching is the various
symbolism they have put in the film. All the plants I
identified in How^H^H^HHinneman's greenhouse were either
carnivorous or poisonous (or both). The stuff with the
Christopher on the Fed is ... interesting, and it's also
interesting how they change his makeup when it's revealed
that he is not the bad guy.
It's also interesting that the first thing that tells
Anderton that he has lost his son is seeing his watch
discarded into the water - presumably destroying it.
And watch the eyes. Anderton's are blue. Yakamoto's are
brown.
It's attention to detail that makes this film so good, in
my opinion.