Rating: 
Summary: A predictable and average movie for a Spielberg-Cruise film.
Review: I expected a lot more of this film, and wasn't left with much in the first place. Basically, most of the plot twists are quite predictable and not very intelligent. Nothing in it really provokes feelings of amazement, except the opening. The surprises and twists that come along are not executed very well. I kept wishing that there would be something to really surprise me or throw me off cue in the film, but it stayed too safe and linear.From a person of Spielberg's calibur, you would expect some impressive content. In fact, you do receive impressive content, but most of that is superficially based and not based on a solid plot. You can predict a lot of what is coming, and in the end it's just a good movie and not a great one. I had lofty expectations because of the people involved with the film, but those expectations were never met.
Rating: 
Summary: Brilliant "Report"
Review: What do you get when you team one of the world's most bankable actors with the greatest director alive today? In the case of Tom Cruise and Steven Spielberg, the result is "Minority Report", a thrilling and intriguing crime drama which will most certainly become a sci-fi classic. The year is 2054, and Washington, D.C. has been murder-free for six years, thanks to the implementaion of Pre-Crime, in which gifted psychics (or Pre-Cogs) are used to predict murders before they occur. The Pre-Crime police force, led by Chief John Anderton(Cruise), are able to arrest and "halo" the accused before the crime is committed. Anderton believes fully in the pre-crime system, despite the skepticism shown by federal agent Danny Witwer(Colin Farrell), who has been assigned to find flaws in pre-crime. It doesn't take long for Anderton himself to be predicted of committing a murder, which leads him to believe that Witwer set him up in order to make pre-crime fail. Nonetheless, Anderton must go on the run to prove his innocence....or is he unknowingly on the path to murder? This was undoubtedly the best film I saw in 2002(and I saw quite a few). It's a huge rebound for Cruise, who was last seen in 2001's dismal "Vanilla Sky". I never particularly cared for most of his other performances, but he is remarkably good in this film. Oscar-worthy? Quite possibly. And Spielberg demonstates why he is the greatest director of the last 30 years. Yes, he's had some misses("1941", "Always", "A.I.:Artificial Intelligence"), but as with all hs great films, he can thrill you one moment, elicit a laugh the next, even scare the pants off you, but his best films are the ones you talk about afterwards. No, "Minority Report" is not the most interesting title of a film, but it does figure into the plot. What's most surprising is the film's rating-somehow, it received a PG-13, when it should have been rated R for violence, suggested drug use, language and adult subject matter. However, it does not change my rating, as the film is a marvelous blend of special effects, top-notch acting and a fascinating story, which is hard to come by in a lot of films these days. See it!
Rating:
Summary: Close, but no cigar...
Review: Steven Spielberg has joined the ranks of Ridley Scott and Paul Verhoeven in adapting a Philip K. Dick story to the big screen. As such, one would expect a dose of urban dystopia, of cold despairing existentialism, to temper his sentimental streak. It almost does. For most of Minority Report's 146 minute running time, it was beginning to look like Spielberg's considerable cinematic craft was not going to undermine itself. It was taut, suspenseful, and - for the most part - credible, in that the film did not violate its own logic. But even early on, there were cracks starting to appear. For example, pre-crime cop John Anderton (Tom Cruise) has to get back into a secure area unnoticed, so he has his eyes replaced to fool the retinal scanners (this IS the future after all, and such things are possible). He has to do this because he is wanted by the police for a crime he WILL commit in a couple of days, and he is after evidence that he thinks will clear his name. He not only has replaced his eyeballs, but also paralyzed his facial muscles so his countenance will be unrecognizable (although he still looked a lot like Tom Cruise, to me). But then there's the problem of the lock on the door. How do you suppose he gets past? Why, by using his old eyeball fished from a zip-lock bag. Uh...you mean, when a cop is wanted for murder they don't immediately revoke his clearance? Erase his user account from the lock computers? Flag his retinal scan as inoperative? And even if they stupidly failed to do so, would the computer not alert someone that a wanted man had just gotten in? Finally, if he was going to use his own eyeball to gain entry, anyway, why didn't he just LEAVE IT IN HIS HEAD?! Yet, this incredible lapse of logic I was almost willing to forgive, as one amazing set-piece followed another: Gritty future-DC locations. Fascist-looking cops in riot-gear. Cruise missing arrest by the closest of margins. Exciting, noirish stuff, like the best scenes in Blade Runner. Then came the last 20 minutes. I mean, the plot flew apart like a jet engine hit by a frozen turkey. It ends with Cruise explaining everything in a long, dull monolog to the killer. This monolog is necessary for the audience because the third act is so poorly structured that we can't figure it out for ourselves. (Spielberg should have watched Chinatown a couple of times - its complex plot came together clearly with nary a word needed.) Worse, the killer (Max Von Sydow) already KNOWS what Cruise has to say because - DUH! - HE'S THE KILLER! And, of course, the well-oiled machine of the pre-crime unit becomes conveniently rusty (why are there no law-enforcement people at a LAW-ENFORCEMENT CONVENTION?!) to allow time for a nice, long showdown between Cruise and Max Von Sydow. The final insult to the intelligence is when Von Sydow uses a gold-plated ceremonial award pistol as an actual weapon. It even conveniently has live ammunition in its red velvet display case. This last bit is something I would expect from a bad made-for-cable film, not movie that cost the GNP of a small country to make. Sheesh! The technical credits are outstanding, with great special effects and first rate cinematography by Janusz Kaminski. Cruise and Von Sydow are good in their rolls, as are Samantha Morton as the "pro-cog" Agatha, Jessica Capshaw as Evanna, and Peter Stormare as the creepy eye surgeon. Ultimately, though, it just doesn't hold up. The first parts are so good and the last so terrible that the sense of being cheated knocks Minority Report down to a mere two stars.
Rating: 
Summary: In the Land of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man is King.
Review: Perhaps in spite of themselves, Spielberg and Co. have made a movie that rises well above their usual box-office drivel. Oh yes, the stunts are spectacles, if not always spectacular. And gadgetry abounds -- enough to satisfy the geekiest of Star Trek fans. But this movie actually contains acting of genuine substance as well as a script that is fresh, smart, cohesive, and more than a little edgy. Underneath all the flash and pomp that one expects of 'Blockbuster' productions lays a story confidently making allusions to classical Greek tragedy, to the Romantic philosophy of Immanuel Kant, and to contemporary civil rights debates over surveillance technologies. And that's just the script. The photography too is excellent. It follows in the footsteps of earlier sci-fi suspense films like Gattaca, Alien, and especially Blade Runner. Like those films, the palette here is limited to the cool colors. The lighting is bare. Many scenes have a blue-gray sheen. But unlike those other films, Minority Report never descends utterly in to the shadows. Some scenes even drift towards the bright, the pastel, the downright cheerful. It's as if the camera itself is testing the ambiguity between our hopes of a bright and shining future, and our fears of increasing interference by the state. Many of the film's details appear oddly nostalgic. Take the soundtrack. Not some futuristic electro-techno noise, but rather Ella Fitzgerald and Henry Mancini fill in the gaps in the John Williams' composition. Especially satisfying is the way that the classic dystopian setting is made appropriately ambiguous. The viewer is presented with a world in which murders have ceased to occur. This is due almost entirely to the psychic powers of three young survivors of drug-abusing parents. Essentially the "crack-babies" of the future, they nevertheless have evolved the power to see in to the future. By scanning their brains, the police find they can predict murders before they occur. Thus giving them the chance to intervene before any killings take place. The would-be killer is arrested and sentenced. There appear to be no elaborate trials for their defense. Since the three psychics are never wrong, the would-be murderers go directly to the future equivalent of jail: a suspended animation capsule that functions like a perpetual coma. As the victim of a very serious violent crime, I could not help but be charmed by such a world. Our empathy for Cruise's character, John Anderton, extends partly from viewers' natural fear of homicide. Like the citizens of the future who clamor for precognisci law-enforcement, many of us yearn to prevent crime at whatever cost. Unlike the vision of Orwell's 1984, a world without murder might seem a worthy trade-off for widespread state surveillance. But this system that appears too good to be true eventually sheds a web of deceit. The bureau chief (played nicely by an aging Max Von Sydow) repeatedly compromises the lives of his staff. He intends to keep from the public the subtle disagreements that occasionally occur between the "oracles" (or precogsnosci). Of the three, one in particular occasionally makes dissenting predictions -- or minority reports -- by which alternative futures are hypothesized. This lone psychic, Agatha, is the greatest of the three and the lynchpin of the whole operation. But she is herself terrorized by the past... by a vision of her mother's murder. "Can you SEE?" she asks Anderton. Interestingly, the lab in which the three perform this function is called "The Temple." This is an allusion to the Delphic Oracle. It is merely one of many allusions to ancient Greek tragedy, especially Oedipus Rex. Like the strange comments of the Seer at Delphi, Agatha's question "Can you SEE?" takes on meanings of metaphysical proportions. Like Oedipus, Anderton must confront his father figure (Von Sydow). Along the way, he must loose his eyes. Technically, they are the means by which state surveillance is accomplished. Symbolically, the exchange of eyes means deeper insight in to his own motives and those of the pre-crime division itself. The question thus presented by Agatha becomes the great quest of the movie... to make sense of the past, to reveal the future, to understand the hidden foibles that underlie pre-crime investigations. What is more, this movie helped me to see. As a victim of violent crime, it is all too easy to become angry with how our criminal law situates itself so thoroughly on the side of the defendant. The accused is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In such a system, many guilty go free. Please don't believe the Hollywood fantasy that crime doesn't pay. The man who shot me and permanently blinded my co-worker walks the street to this day. He does so despite the fact that the police know precisely who he is and where he is. There simply isn't enough evidence to go to trial. All the same, after watching this movie, I found that I would not want to trade away our American freedoms for safety. At some point, it just isn't worth it. And that is a vision I can carry with me. So in answer to Agatha's question "Can you SEE?" I think so, yes.
Rating:
Summary: Minority Report
Review: Tom Cruises futuristic thriller "Minority Report" is absolutely fantastic. I myself am not a huge Tom Cruise fan but found this movie very entangling. From the beginning to the end, you wanted to find out what was going to happend and i don't think i blinked a single time. I would give this 5 stars except that some viewers may find the movie a bit confusing.
Rating:
Summary: A Complicated Futuristic Film
Review: Though it was complicated, this movie was not that hard to follow as long as you were paying attention. This futuristic film was definitely exciting and entertaining, but it had a good moral and story-line to it as well. Granted, the story-line (and the rest of the movie) is farfetched, but it was interesting. This story appears to be fatalistic, but by the end of the movie it is obvious that it is otherwise. Its message is clear in that we have the choice to make our own decisions and choose our own destinies. Minority Report is a very deep, compelling movie and I recommend it completely to anyone!
Rating:
Summary: Thank you,Mr.Spielberg!!
Review: After A.I,I feared that Mr.Spielberg had lost his touch,but now I can rest easy again.Minority Report is am absolutely brilliant film,filled with complex characters and an intruiging storyline.
It may not be as lavish or colorful as his previous movies,but the style suits the story perfectly.And the story is actually the best part of the movie,so much so that you can watch the film over and over again and find something new every time.I would recommend this to anyone who appreciates good quality films,as well as science-fiction buffs.
Rating: 
Summary: So-So
Review: It almost seemed as though Spielberg tried to mesmerize the audience with special effects instead of concentrating on a decent enough story. The whole story is built around a futuristic police force that prevents crimes from happening by using clairvoyants, combined with technology, to see into the future and stop them. I did have an issue with the small balls that spin from the computer with the victims names on them. All of that technology, and we have to watch balls roll down through a spiraled mousetrap game board? The plot is kind of weak, but the acting is solid. Max von Sydow and Colin Farrell made up for the somewhat "over-acting" of Cruise.
Rating:
Summary: Not a Sci Fi Fan but loved this movie!
Review: My sweet brother Mike got me this DVD for my birthday. I have seen the movie three times and appreciate its brilliance more after each viewing, Steven Spielberg challenges his audience to think while he tells this story as only he can. The premise a very scary one seems that one day it will be real. Samantha Morton whose beauty was so evident in Sweet and Lowdown is incredible as Agatha. I must admit the reason I went to see it the first time was for Colin Farrell..just so incredible an actor and so handsome on film that I forgot Tom Cruise was in the picture at all for awhile, but Tom is terrific and of course that scene stealer Max Von Sydow does a great job as well. Get the Popcorn and the Milk Duds and hang on for a great ride!!! Candace Serviss
Rating:
Summary: Was this Mr. Nice Guy Spielberg...?
Review: I have to admit, I checked the DVD cover more than once to make sure that this wasn't a film by David Fincher. The nuance and presentation was quite fine, but not as "up" as one would expect from Spielberg (not counting "A.I.", which was an homage to Kubrick). Regardless, the film is wrought with intrigue not yet imagined, and some great sets. The photography was maybe too "artsy" but was certainly appropriate to the goings-on. The performances were great, with Cruise gaining confidence as the film went on. Colin Farrell and Max von Sydow were customarily fine, and there's a particularly touching performance from Samantha Morton that left me a bit haunted. This film gains momentum, due to excellent editing and very taut direction, as well as a literate script, and the result is an imaginative and exciting adventure, great ecapist fare.
|
