Minority Report Movie Analysis

[Wickenstein 0]

Minority Report doesn?t seem to be as deep a movie, but it?s filled with just as much symbolism as AI was. Though the film has a few faults, I think it was an excellent movie overall. This is intended to be a study of some of the things I found while watching the movie.

Anderton is a character that doesn?t live in the present. At work, he?s obsessed with controlling the future. He then goes home to an obsession with the past. He can?t give up the memory of his son Sean or his wife Lara. He physically tries to interact with the past through his holographic recordings, much as he physically interacts with the future by manipulating images of it. It?s interesting that both these interactions are brought on by drug use. The past through Anderton?s and the future through the drugs administered to the Precogs. In the end, this obsession with not living in the present dooms him. Both his future and his past finally catch up with him. His future makes him wanted for murder and his past makes him wanted for drug use (although the former takes much precedence over the latter). This forces Anderton to finally live in the present as he escapes from the law. It?s only when Anderton is able to give up the past (the memory of Sean) and the future (Pre-Crime) that he?s able to grow in the end.

Like Anderton, Agatha also lives only through the past and future. She can?t help but see visions not only of what will happen, but what has already happened. Like Andertong, Agatha is able to grow only when she begins to live in the present.

Witwer is a shadow of Anderton. He?s a man who, like Anderton, wants to control the future. In a sense, he wants Anderton?s life. He invades Anderton?s house, he invades his office, he even tries to invade Anderton?s former wife. Interestingly, once Witwer is cut off from the future when Agatha is taken, he too is forced to live in the present. It?s only then that he?s able to see things clearly and realize that Anderton is not the man they should be looking for.

?Can You See?? Much of the film is centered on the importance of sight. One is recognized in the future by scanning the eyes. Anderton literally carries around his eyes for much of the film. Sight has that obvious meaning of being able to see the future. Interestingly, the man who gives Anderton his ?Clarity?, the drug that enables him to live out the past, has no eyes. The Drug dealer has divorced himself from the future and the present, so that he may dispense the past to Anderton. After Anderton is on the run, he literally changes his eyes, a symbol of his new outlook or his changed perspective. He keeps his old ones because he still holds onto the past, as he needs that past to gain him access to the future. Interestingly, the drug dealers final words are something like, ?In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.? Well, Cruise literally loses one of his eyes as he progresses through the story. At this point he takes Agatha and negates the power pre-crime has over the future. He?s then free to do whatever he wants. His one remaining (original) eyeball could be a symbol that he?s finally living in the present or it could be a symbol of power. Lara is able to use it later to free her husband.

I had a few minor problems with the movie however. It seemed like a lot was cut out from it. I missed little things like, who the heck Leo Crow really was. Was he just some guy, or was he really a child kidnapper? He must have done something bad if he would rather be dead with his family receiving insurance money than in prison. Also, at what point was it revealed that Anne Lively was Agatha?s mother? Anderton just casually mentions it once like it was something they?d already gone over.

The climax seemed like it could have used some work to me. It didn?t feel real big to me. It was more of a tying up of loose ends than a finale. I admired its premise though. I liked how it was basically a face-to-face showdown between the pro and ant-agonist. Also, why was Anderton bald? Was it so he wouldn?t be recognized? Was it because he was in prison? It seemed weird that they would go to all that trouble if it didn?t really add anything to the story. The big unanswered question was what happened to Sean. I guess some questions are not meant to be answered.

It was a great movie in the end. It had some nice messages. Don?t become a slave to the past or the future. In the end, it is we who control our destinies. We all have the freedom to create for ourselves a New Beginning.

[Lurker 5]

It seemed like a lot was cut out from it.

I didn't have the problems that you had with it, but there must have been a sequence cut out where his face goes back to normal. Dr. Eddie said he'd go through extreme pain, and that seems to be the set-up for an event we never see. One minute his face is distorted and in the next scene, he's back to normal.

I'm also having a minor problem with the films internal logic. The murder of Leo Crow is not pre-meditated, Cruise even says he doesn't know him. This makes it a crime of passion, which the pre-cogs can't see that far in advance. It could be argued that because Cruise finds out about the murder (he has the "luxury" of seeing the future, which none of the other murderer's do) that once he finds out he's going to kill, he sets everything in motion, and this is how the pre-cogs can see it, but that just brings up a huge paradox. It makes my head sore just thinking about it. Best to just enjoy the movie, which is very easy to do.

Neil

[Morn 8]

Great post!

Also, at what point was it revealed that Anne Lively was Agatha?s mother? Anderton just casually mentions it once like it was something they?d already gone over.

I assume he already knew considering he worked with Agatha (in a sense).

Also, why was Anderton bald? Was it so he wouldn?t be recognized? Was it because he was in prison? It seemed weird that they would go to all that trouble if it didn?t really add anything to the story. The big unanswered question was what happened to Sean. I guess some questions are not meant to be answered.

Not really, it shows that he's been through a ruff time at prison, plus it makes the ending more kind of spooky as he looks weird, it increases the impact. And Sean? They don't seem to know themselves, I think it's realistic and acceptable because it could easily be that way in a reality.

I'm also having a minor problem with the films internal logic. The murder of Leo Crow is not pre-meditated, Cruise even says he doesn't know him. This makes it a crime of passion, which the pre-cogs can't see that far in advance. It could be argued that because Cruise finds out about the murder (he has the "luxury" of seeing the future, which none of the other murderer's do) that once he finds out he's going to kill, he sets everything in motion, and this is how the pre-cogs can see it, but that just brings up a huge paradox. It makes my head sore just thinking about it. Best to just enjoy the movie, which is very easy to do

Leo Crow was trying to kill himself, perhaps that let the pre-cogs see the future, and they would not have to be able to see suicides because it was a possible murder. Therefore it is pre-meditated, but not by Anderton (hehe, is this name a tribute to The Matrix?). And it is also a murder.

But I have a plot hole, how come Anderton's security clearance isn't cancelled? How come the pre-cogs can only see murders in washington and how can they then expand it over the whole country?

[Lurker 5]

Leo Crow was trying to kill himself, perhaps that let the pre-cogs see the future, and they would not have to be able to see suicides because it was a possible murder. Therefore it is pre-meditated, but not by Anderton (hehe, is this name a tribute to The Matrix?). And it is also a murder.

Watch the movie again. When Anderton is seeing the vision of the future, he is clearly shooting Crow. It's not a suicide at that point.

Neil

[Morn 8]

I know that, either way it is suicide and could have been murder and suicide, he wanted to be killed remember, so that is where you get the 'pre-meditated' from and in that way it is both murder and suicide.

[Lurker 5]

How can a murder be pre-meditated if you don't even know the victim in anyway? In the vision, Anderton clearly shoots Leo Crow. When we finally get to that point in the movie, Cruise knows he's supposed to kill Crow, and chooses not to. That's when Crow decides to take his own life. What the pre-cogs saw turned out to be wrong. Which brings up even more of a paradox. Another question would be why weren't the Pre-Crime officers at the crime as it was happening? All of the evidence in the film shows that they show up just before the event is to take place, but in this case they were late.

Neil

[Morn 8]

Well, remember Leo Crow was offered a pay out to his family if he would pretend to be the guy that murdered Anderton's son? That way, if Anderton shoots him or not it's still suicide and it's pre-meditated, which should be enough for the pre-cogs too see it ages before hand even though it's not like other cases. If they can only see murders, it was a possible murder as well.

The pre-cogs see what might happen, not what will happen, the film even implies this.

Why weren't the Pre-Crime officers at the crime as it was happening? Well in the other case we saw the pre-cogs were working to give them help. This time they were not, so they probably found it harder to get clues. Besides, this was a rather unusual case and therefore a good case to be the likely first miss.

[Hlao-roo 389]

Anderton (hehe, is this name a tribute to The Matrix?).

No.

[Wickenstein 0]

And Sean? They don't seem to know themselves, I think it's realistic and acceptable because it could easily be that way in a reality.

Very good point. I too think it makes the story more real. Also, I too was wondering why Anderton's security clearance was never changed! You could think up an explanations that works (the tech guys are slow, It's only been 36 hrs, etc.) but it seems contrived. Also, I too wondered how pre-crime would be expanded and why they only saw Washington murders. I could have to do with proximity, then how would they expand it nation wide? What are they going to do when one of them dies from old age? The only way it would work is if there were other people with precog abilities. The movie only makes us think they're unique though.

As for the Leo Crow logic, I think it makes perfect sense. As already said, Anderton was thinking about killing the kidnapper of his child for a long time. This makes it premeditated in a sense and that's why the precogs see 36hrs before-hand. Remember, the precogs see everything as it will play out from that moment. What changes everything is that Anderton consciously chooses not to kill Crow. Because he has seen the future, he is able to change it. And the precrime guys never got there because they weren't able to figure out the clues to the location in time.

Other things I noticed,

The very opening of the movie has those liquid water lines running throug the 20th Century Fox and Dreamworks logos. It makes you look like you're seeing it from underwater. Who in the movie is underwater? The precogs! In a sense, this little detail tells us we are watching a precog vision of the future! What is a science fiction movie but a possible vision of the future? Pretty neat huh?

I also noticed Anderton's cell number was something like 1009 or 1006, just like the room number of Leo Crow's.

As I said in my score analysis, wasn't it funny that both the latest Spielberg and Lucas movies have the main hero getting trapped on an assembly line? I always thought Anderton's Great Escape beared a resemblence to On the Conveyer Belt too.

NP: Minority Report

[Morn 8]

The only way it would work is if there were other people with precog abilities. The movie only makes us think they're unique though.

They could make more precogs.

Leo Crow? I think it makes more sense that it was pre-meditated in the sense he was set up, because Anderton never knew who the person was.

And it's cool that you worked out the water effect