Futuristic Film Noir

Rating: 9/10 (26 June 2002)

I loved A.I.', Spielberg's last foray into science fiction. It wasn't perfect  but for me, science fiction is about the philosophy of scientific progression; the wrongs, the rights, the gains, and the consequences of making the human being closer to our perception of efficiency. In Spielberg's tribute to the late Stanley Kubrick, he explores the morality and responsibilities in creating' life. Does intelligence dictate life form, and if so, who owns the right to take that away? Would killing an artificially created life form be considered murder? It is not the actual questions that attracted me so, but how these questions are played out in Spielberg's universe  how the movie works with these issues.

This is also why I feel Spielberg's follow-up to A.I. is so wonderfully extravagant in its telling. The year is 2054. Murder has been all but eliminated thanks to a new technique called pre-crime'. This term refers to the ability to see murders before they happen  giving the police (pre-cops) time to find the place, and people involved in the murder, and hopefully prevent it. Even though this system has seen continued success, much of the population still doubted the idea of preventing something before it happens. The scenario is laid out wonderfully by a meeting between John Anderton (Tom Cruise), an accomplished pre-cop, and a representative/cop from the government, Danny Witwer (Collin Farrel).
Witwer's main purpose is to find flaws in the system  somehow prove that although it is possible to predict the future, it is impossible to be certain that it will happen unless it happens. Anderton, who we find early on is one of the best pre-cops in the business, and believes that the system is sound, rolls a ball along a table in which Witwer catches. Anderton asks him why he caught the ball, in which Witwer replies, `Because it was going to fall'. The answer, in every sense of the word, was a prediction  an educated one at that, but still nothing more. From this, we can extrapolate the greater scope of this example: Is it possible to predict  for certain  that something will happen? Is it right to condemn someone for a crime that he/she has not yet committed? From this moment, Anderton and Witwer, because of their opposing beliefs, are immediately split into their own proverbial corners of the ring.
Philosophy aside, this is above all an action movie; something Stephen Spielberg is no stranger to. His experience in working behind the camera shows in almost every aspect of motion picture from the shot to the timing. In the climax to an amazing scene were little spider-like robots are sent in to an apartment complex to find Anderton, one of the spiders creeps under the door to a bathroom where Anderton is hiding under water. We watch as the robot looks around the room and turns to leave after not noticing the submerged subject. We cut to a shot of a tiny air bubble that barely escapes Anderton's nose. The bubble bursts just as the last moving leg of the spider is about to leave under the closed door. Suddenly, the spider stops, and turns around for a closer look. The description of the scene is very mundane. However, with Spielberg's ability to masterfully time the action on screen, he is able to create a huge sense of tension.
Spielberg's eye is as masterful as his timing. One of the most interesting shots in the movie comes near the later stages, where Anderton and Agatha are embracing. It is a two shot (very commonly used in modern Hollywood cinema), but used in a manner in which I've never seen before. The profile of the two characters looking away while talking to each other is wonderful, and lends itself perfectly to the subject matter of the scene; a stroke of genius during a scene that could have been just another scene.

I also have to comment on the special effects of the movie. In many movies, some recent one which come to mind include `Attack of the Clones' and `Spiderman', the special effects, were used in a way such th at it seemed like the filmmakers were building the movie around the special effects. For me, this is a huge distraction  possibly intended to take our eyes off some horrible acting (I'm not naming any names here!). In `Minority Report', the effects are used to help and compliment the movie, never poking its way to the centre of attention, and letting the movie and its characters tell the story. Amongst the huge firecracker explosions and web swinging computer graphics of the modern day action movie, this was a refreshing change for me, and I hope the filmmakers take note and follow suit.

Aside from these scenes, Spielberg's ability to play with the audience is consistent throughout the length of the film. It is so easy for him to startle, play with, and manipulate the viewer  and all the time being so very discrete. Much of the film is shot with a filter that makes whites seem oversaturated. This helps contrast dark shadows and retain a great film noir feel. It also lends itself to the idea of how hard it is to hide in a city illuminated by light and surrounded by tiny cameras.
The casting is solid, and everyone played their roles convincingly. Samantha Morton was surprisingly convincing, and Collin Farrel was great at making us dislike him right from the start. People who are looking for something to calm their appetite for an action movie will surely be satisfied with Minority Report'. The fact that this action movie comes with a brain is a welcomed bonus.
In a summer that has so far been filled with mediocre blockbuster fare, Spielberg unloads what is sure to be one of his most technically challenging and rewarding works.
Larry www.crankyfilms.com