Rating: 
Summary: Straight to the Top-5 list
Review: When I saw the first preview, I turned to my wife and said "Does it look like it's based on a Philip K. Dick story to you?" Even though it wasn't set in the same reality as Blade Runner, and had nothing in common with Blade Runner, it still had a feel that reminded me of Blade Runner. Keep an eye open for the owl. If there were other blatant blade runner references I didn't see them. The future was well visualised, and consistant. The tech was exciting and gee-whiz, but real world useful. The fight scenes were energetic and exciting, but they were filmed so you could see what was happening. The scene where Tom and the precog are dodging police using her vision of the future was great. Any story by this author is tight and complicated. You have to pay attention, and when it's done, you should have something to think about. There were a few details I would have done differently, and one thing I would have explained a little more, but they don't let me make movies.
Rating: 
Summary: COP OUT..........?
Review: A great deal distracts from this simple story, especially the in your face 2054 commercials ...... all of this could be said in far less time. AND are we still paying homage to Kubrick [the soft, misty focus], or is it a colorized Lang, maybe even Dreyer [especially the Samantha Morton/Falconetti/Maria-Metropolis look]? Ridley Scott said it much better in the earlier and far superior "Bladerunner". You just don't feel anything for the characters. And what's with the Medusa plants, and that stuff? AND what's also with the "Seventh Seal" reprise on the balcony at the end - complete with the original Bergman star? [The Hooded 'death-figure'???] Even 'Logan's Run' gave more fun. This one's awfully close to being a prequel to "A.I." Granted Colin Farrell and Samatha Morton bring a fresh breath to the screen, but the rest ...... all sound - little fury, emotion or anything else.
Rating: 
Summary: He's cute but,,,,
Review: Tom really has great looks it's just to bad that with each passing film his acting gets worse. I went to see this film knowing of the special effects which i always hate in movies but i did want to see Tom and see how this messures up to some of his other films. To me "Top Gun" is the only good film he ever made. As far as production value this film doesn't go anywhere and nothing ties it together except for Tom smiling, posing, and trying to look good and not get his hair to messed up.I've never been a big fan of Spielberg. He tries to hard all the time to make a good film and in my eyes doesn't have much success. Of course box office will always prove me wrong. But i don't think the american audience demands good acting pictures anymore and they count on special effects to pull them threw a movie which Spielberg is good at.I wasn't impressed but Tom is still good to look at. I wonder if he could make it on Broadway?
Rating:
Summary: An amazing and strikingly oringinal film
Review: In the year 2054, John Anderton (Tom Cruise) is the headstrong chief of the Washington D.C precrime unit which can see and stop murders before they happen thanks to three brain altered humans who have the ability to see murders before they happen. Anderton's drive in his work is the burning memory of the kidnap and murder of his son which happened only six months before the precrime system was put in place.
The systemhas never been wrong about who it picks as the murderers as it shows in the films opening scene. When Anderton is fingered for the murder of a man he does not even know, he whole-heartedly believes there is no way he can bring himself to kill another person, so he thinks he is set-up somehow and goes on the run to find out the truth about what will happen to him. Cruise gives a heartfelt performance that is also cold in Anderton's prusuit of the truth. Speilberg shows us he still has that special something in order to involve us and entangle us in the movies he makes. This film should not disappoint you. This, is Cruise and Speilberg in top form.
Rating:
Summary: MAGNIFICENT!
Review: Okay, this is the best movie of the year...so far. I believe I saw one guy criticizing it. You are entitled to your opinion buddy, but I'm sure all of America disagrees with you. I bet you went in the theater and already made up your mind that you were going to hate it because that's the most logical answer. Believe me viewers, this movie is extremely difficult NOT to enjoy. Tom Cruise is in it again at his best, and boy did he need it too! With a movie like Vanilla Sky redemption was necessary. What a wretch that was. But getting back to Minority Report: This film has has everything a viewer wants to see. It has hard core action, an extraordinary plot, symbolism, character development, plot twists, exemplary computer graphics, and the perfect actors for the job of creating this masterpiece. Now...they can't give viewers romance but this movie was not made for this aspect. And there were no, I repeat, NO plot flaws as everyone thinks there are. It's a new and difficult concept to grasp, I know, but watch the movie again. It fits perfectly. I walked in the theater and anticipated a "good" movie was going to be presented to me. However, I did not expect this movie would blow my mind. Afterwards, I simply left the theater in awe, jaw dropped. This movie deserves 5 stars and for good reasons. Steven Spielberg has added another all time bests to his list. I commemorate him.
Rating: 
Summary: Future imperfect?
Review: I liked this movie and would give it a solid 8 out of 10, and at least a 7 out of 10. Except for the first 1/3 of the movie, where it drags sometimes (although the opening scene with the prevented murder is good), the rest of the movie is very suspenseful and keeps building all the way to the end. Some of the scenes and backdrops are really striking, such as the future city-scapes with their futuristic cars and highways, which are one of the cooler things in the film, and overall, it's a great-looking movie. Also, it's good to see Max von Sydow is still working. Although not his best, Tom Cruise turns in a good performance as the former head cop on the run, trying to solve a mysterious murder and in the process clear his name. Based on the Phillip K. Dick story (whose story, "We Can Remember it for You Wholesale," was the basis for the Schwarzenneger movie, Total Recall), overall, it's a good flick. Big Steve says go see it and don't Bogart the popcorn.
Rating: 
Summary: Great Effects but Surprisingly Weak
Review: I had been looking forward to this film for a long time. With a director like the great Steven Spielberg and a cast including Tom Cruise, Max Von Sydow and Colin Farell, I had incredibly high hopes for this film. The film claims to contend the ideology of justice for the American people, but it does not address this issue at all in the course of the film. Instead, it leaves this up to you to ponder. The special effects, acting and plot were extraordinary. The reason I had cut the rating down to three stars (actually more like 3.5) is because the film was lacking in depth and scope. There is little character development, so I had trouble identifying with Tom Cruise's character. To be honest, I really didn't find myself caring too much. I just stayed in the theater for the amazing visuals and I had some hope that the conclusion would make the experience worthwhile. Unfortunately, I had been wrong. The conclusion was very amateurish and it should be of great shame to Steven Spielberg. It was more of a brainless action flick. I would describe this film as "The Fugitive" of the twenty-first century. If you are looking for an intellectual film as I had been, avoid this film. You will be disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: Not bad, but left me wanting more.
Review: The movie was very enjoyable. At one point I thought I had it all figured out, when suddenly there was an unexpected twist. I think the most anoying thing for me was the washed out color throughout the movie. It seems to be a trend in Hollywood these days to use one over all color such as yellow or green to try and reflect the mood of the movie (for example Traffic), but for me it simply ruins the overall experience. I'd rather be affected by the plot and the acting than color tones. The final scene was also a let down. After a dramatic twist the ending becomes predictable. I give it three stars.
Rating:
Summary: I have a few questions...
Review: Why did this potentially great movie have to look as if it were shot entirely with old washed out cheap film? The skin tones had a deathly pallor and nothing else looked the color of real material. There was an insipid bluish cast to everything. This was the most disappointing feature of the movie. It seems that this particular "look" has become a cliche. Think how dated it will appear in a few years. Why did Lamar Burgess know that he could murder agent Ed Witwer without being detected by the pre-cogs? I thought that we were going to get a really clever explanation. But alas, nothing. I have very few quibbles with the film. The length was fine. It took as long as it needed to tell the story. The idea for the plot was great and I was captivated by the mystery. But, I must say that I expected fewer cliches and stylistic conventions. Tom Cruise can actually act (see "Rainman"), but he didn't have much of a chance to do so, given this typical action part. Overall, I believe it's definitely worth seeing once, but not necessary to own.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent. Is there any better word?
Review: I'm not sure how he came from Jurassic Park to this, but way to go Steven! This movie is an awesome science fiction thriller. I loved A.I. Artificial Intelligence, but this is ten times better. I loved every minute of it! The 2h40min was all worth it. It was something I wouldn't expect in a movie. It was different and origianl which was one of the things I loved about this. This chilly tale of one man's haunted past AND future is a must see!
| 
