Interesting idea; excellent movie

Rating: 9/10 (7 July 2002)

I really enjoyed Minority Report, found it to be excellent, even great, though not a movie like Bladerunner or the Matrix, which changed your view of what could be done or shown in a movie, or which presented a truly unique view of what the world could become.
However, it seems like the movie is getting some knocks for elements which are strengths rather than weaknesses. For example, the product placements are ironic - they help paint a negative view of the world, where there is zero privacy; your identity is instantly established and used to sell you pants. The scene in The Gap did not make me want to buy Gap products; rather it showed the Gap in Hell... the personalized ads weren't even helpful - people were simply offered what they had already bought.

Spoilers follow:
The plot was simple, to induce John (Tom Cruise's character) to commit murder by presenting him with his son's killer. There is no Minority Report on this; John *will* kill this man. However, what precogs can't deal with is the case in which the murderer is presented with the facts before committing the crime. John holds the gun up, knowing he is to kill this man, but also knowing he still has a choice. John's choice is the center of the movie - it proves that people can alter the future by knowing the future. This is in fact precisely what the Precrime police are doing - creating alternate futures by stopping murders. So if the police can do it, why can't the potential perpetrators do it, if fronted beforehand?
John proves it is possible to choose, even without a Minority Report.
Clumsy plot points included the Justice Dept jerky-guy figuring out where John was by seeing the random name of this random dude on John's home-made computer equipment, right in the nick of time to continue the chase. That was really stupid and unnecessary. Also, as has been mentioned, using John's eyes to gain access to headquarters - of course his ID would have been revoked after he became a fugitive; I thought John was going to use his old eyes to create a distraction, so he could sneak in.
The greatest character in the film is the mother of the precog project, a geneticist who has created a world evolved beyond anything going on outside of her walls. Tom Cruise's acting was good in this, but a little too neat for me. If he's a drug addict, it would be nice to see some evidence of that at work - his drug use seemed too contained in his home life, and didn't do any recognizable damage; we don't even get to seem him collapse in a stupor... I would have played the whole viewing-of-the-holograms much darker, maybe complete with him collapsing in his own puke. Also, some tears would be good, or rage, or despair. He just seemed sorta sad, which damaged the payoff in the scene showing John's Choice. However, having made that complaint, they must have done something right, because the main thing which stayed with me after the film was the feeling of loss for the missing child - it didn't help to see the wife pregnant or to see the trio hanging out (by the way, when they read, don't they already know the endings? ... no who-done-its for them)... I missed the kid at the end. So any film that is capable of making you feel that deep a sense of loss for a character never viewed in the present must be doing something right.
Finally, what was up with the nurse and the old lady copping feels off of John? Was that some comment from Spielberg on Cruise's popularity?