MovieChat Forums > Minority Report (2002) Discussion > Idiot plot

Idiot plot

posted 8 years ago by successor13326
14 replies | jump to latest

All Anderton has to do is hide out until time runs out, then he can go investigate who set him up. But instead he keeps putting himself in harm's way solely to further the idiot plot.

Also, why doesn't Pre-Crime have a system in place to allow future criminals to voluntarily turn themselves in? If you know you're going to commit a murder, why not put yourself under voluntary detention until the murder time is up. The plot could've been solved in under five minutes if Anderton simply told his associates, hey, the preCogs saw me commit a murder. Please lock me in a cell until the murder time is up. Problem solved. If criminals like Anderton refuse to be detained, then you can hunt them down. The only exception would be crimes of passion.

Also, why didn't they remove Anderton's retinal access to the facility? You'd think they would do that immediately after he's become a wanted criminal.

Another problem with the system. Pre-crime only detects murders. Okay. So what if the killers deliberately beat or poison their victims into permanent comas while keeping their bodies alive? Technically, they aren't dead, so it isn't murder. Great, so criminals would just become smarter and nearly kill people. Also, what about war or terrorist acts like 9/11? Wouldn't mass murder drive the Precogs insane?

Why not just order everybody out of the building and confirm their identities directly instead of using the spiders? Doesn't Precrime know about the swapping eyes trick? Also, don't they have security cameras on the streets and in the buildings of the future. That way, they can see who is coming in and out of buildings.

Nobody protests the illegal detention of the three Precogs or the fact that the people who were arrested committed no crimes?

Minority Report is the perfect example of an idiot plot.

[–] yurenchu 8 years ago

All Anderton has to do is hide out until time runs out, then he can go investigate who set him up. But instead he keeps putting himself in harm's way solely to further the idiot plot.

Remember Iris Hineman's words when Anderton raises the idea of just hiding/staying away from this unknown Leo Crow? She says "can you avoid a man you've never met?"

If the pre-cogs predict that you will murder a certain person at this-and-that-time, then that murder will indeed happen (because it's been written in your future), regardless of what you do in the meanwhile; unless the "heroic" Pre-Crime cops catch you red-handed and prevent the crime at the last moment. That's what Anderton and his smug colleagues firmly believed, because they thought that the Pre-Crime system is perfect and that the pre-cogs are never wrong.

Also, why doesn't Pre-Crime have a system in place to allow future criminals to voluntarily turn themselves in? If you know you're going to commit a murder, why not put yourself under voluntary detention until the murder time is up. The plot could've been solved in under five minutes if Anderton simply told his associates, hey, the preCogs saw me commit a murder. Please lock me in a cell until the murder time is up. Problem solved. If criminals like Anderton refuse to be detained, then you can hunt them down. The only exception would be crimes of passion.

The Pre-Crime system was born in a time of growing social unrest: poverty, drugs, unemployment, bad working conditions, bad housing, crime rates through the roof. There was a outcry for drastic measures. So rather than tackling the issues that are the root causes of the problems in society, the government came up with a pilot/test project for a drastical solution that merely fights the symptoms of the societal problems and that scores easy popularity points: fight crime, catch all criminals before they actually commit a crime, and punish them - severely but "humanely" (= life detention in Containment). (Note that the Precrime ad campaigns promised to fight all crimes, not just murders - which was a lie.)

Of course the government was not going to count on that future criminals would voluntarily turn themselves in. What's the point of voluntary temporary detention? If these criminals didn't want to commit the crimes, they wouldn't be planning and doing these crimes in the first place. Also, the government would be giving the wrong signal to the criminals: "Hey, this week we're on to you. So, be a good boy, come in for detention, and better luck with your crime next time." It would be like opting for an endless (tax-money-costing) cat-and-mouse game with the criminals, all the while the criminals are mostly free to roam the streets. You can't sell that concept to the discontented public. So your proposed solution doesn't make much sense.

Sure, the Pre-Crime system wasn't perfect and could have been implemented more wisely. But in real life, things aren't perfect and flawless either. And if everything in the depicted society was implemented in a fair/good/harmonic/perfect way, there would have been no story and no movie. And so we the audience would learn nothing from it.

Furthermore, Anderton is a pro-active and pragmatical cop. It's in his nature to investigate things and get hold of stuff himself, rather than just patiently wait, give away control and hope that everything will sort itself out for the better; especially when it's his own future on the line, and when he feels that he's being set up. (I mean, what would you do?)

Also, why didn't they remove Anderton's retinal access to the facility? You'd think they would do that immediately after he's become a wanted criminal.

This issue has been raised several times on this board (there's also a recent thread about it, look it up). So far, there has been no conclusive answer. We could blame it on the complacency of a bureaucratic system that seems to be prevalent in the depicted society. Or maybe Pre-Crime protocol demands not to change anything in a suspect's circumstances and environment (such as in Anderton's case: his retinal access), because then you'd be interfering too much with the future as depicted in the pre-vision, and hence you'd make it harder to catch him based on the previsioned "evidence". (But in the case of the latter, why did Anderton's eyes still have access after he was caught and put in Containment?)

Another problem with the system. Pre-crime only detects murders. Okay. So what if the killers deliberately beat or poison their victims into permanent comas while keeping their bodies alive? Technically, they aren't dead, so it isn't murder. Great, so criminals would just become smarter and nearly kill people. Also, what about war or terrorist acts like 9/11? Wouldn't mass murder drive the Precogs insane?

What if this, what if that. Of course we can always think of something that forms an exception to the rule, because no system or technique is perfect. Those exceptions didn't occur in the events of the movie and simply aren't addressed, so who knows what the rules are in that case. But the movie isn't about that. The point is that those exceptions aren't important, because they don't serve the main themes and the message that this movie wants to bring across. You can't blame the movie for leaving out issues and details that contribute nothing to its intended story.

Why not just order everybody out of the building and confirm their identities directly instead of using the spiders? Doesn't Precrime know about the swapping eyes trick? Also, don't they have security cameras on the streets and in the buildings of the future. That way, they can see who is coming in and out of buildings.

The policy makers who invented that "spyder protocol" probably thought they were doing society a service when they'd avoid face-to-face interaction between police (human cops) and innocent civilians as much as possible. The spyders only need a few seconds to scan your eyes, and when cleared then you can continue with whatever you were doing; so not much of a hassle for you. The cops don't have to physically interact with a mob of poor frustrated ghetto residents who have their own problems, and hence don't risk facing heated arguments which may easily lead to aggression etc. The spyders (aided by the outside thermal imaging tech at the maglev) can process a whole building in a matter of minutes, so the hungry cops can be casual about it and are sure to finish their job before dinner time. The cops may know about the eyes-swapping practices, but they just do as their protocols tell them to do; they don't have to do any thinking of their own.

Convenient and safe for the cops, minimal grounds for complaint from the civilians (= "happy consumers") ==> Government can assure itself that it's doing a good job (and justify its position of power to their backers/financers). Win-win-win!

Nobody protests the illegal detention of the three Precogs or the fact that the people who were arrested committed no crimes?

The public at large wasn't aware of "illegal detention of the three Precogs". Remember the scene with the group of school children? Their tour guide was telling them the lie that the precogs lived a life in luxury, with exercise rooms and whatnot to their service.

According to Burgess, Anderton and the rest of the Pre-Crime Department, "the Pre-Crime system is perfect!" This is also communicated towards/sold to the public by their ads: "Precrime. It works!" Witwer has some doubts about the system but Anderton explains to him that the fact that Pre-Crime prevents these crimes doesn't negate the fact that those arrested people would indeed have murdered someone if Pre-Crime hadn't interfered; hence these people do deserve their prison sentence (according to Anderton, who is a firm believer in the system).

Minority Report is the perfect example of an idiot plot.

No, Minority Report is a commentary on a dystopian society based on mass-consumerism, complacent authoritarian government, and blindness to the real problems in the world.

______
Joe Satriani - "Always With Me, Always With You"
http://youtu.be/VI57QHL6ge0

[–] successor13326 8 years ago

Actually Anderton could have avoided meeting Leo Crow because unlike the other suspects, he had access to the Precogs visions and knew the time and basic location of the murder. So Hineman's line doesn't wash. When he saw the billboard and the hotel, he should have known something was wrong and left. Or he should've just hid out or had himself imprisoned until the murder time was up like I said. He knew the murder was in a hotel room on a high floor, so as long as he stayed far away from the city and hotel, he would've been safe. The fact that he went into the room is simply the manipulation of an idiot plot forcing the character through a contrived setup to further the story.

Also, a supposedly expert cop like Anderton doesn't recognize an obvious set up with all those pictures on the bed? Even Inspector Clouseau would suspect something was fishy. It is so painfully contrived and unbelievable.

Another thing. Wouldn't the Pre-Crime cops chasing Anderton know that he knew the ins and outs of their system, including spyders and eye checks? Thus, it would be necessary to visually confirm each person. In fact, why not have the Spyders do visual confirmations of each person via video camera instead of eye scans. Robot cameras can visually scan buildings now, so there's no excuse.

A fully built car can start right out of the factory without keys or a code of some kind. How is it powered? Does it have gas? And nobody puts an APB out for this stolen vehicle?

The more you analyze Minority Report's plot, the more ridiculous it becomes.

[–] yurenchu 8 years ago

Actually Anderton could have avoided meeting Leo Crow because unlike the other suspects, he had access to the Precogs visions and knew the time and basic location of the murder. So Hineman's line doesn't wash. When he saw the billboard and the hotel, he should have known something was wrong and left. Or he should've just hid out or had himself imprisoned until the murder time was up like I said. He knew the murder was in a hotel room on a high floor, so as long as he stayed far away from the city and hotel, he would've been safe.

Anderton doesn't know how he's being set up, nor by whom. Maybe the "bad guys" had created a doppelganger with his name and his looks, and that doppelganger manages to kill Leo Crow anyway; if Leo Crow isn't saved and ends up dead anyhow, then John Anderton still gets the blame anyway, even if he claims that he has an alibi because he has been hiding at the other side of town during the time of the murder (because that's what you can expect to happen when you're being set up).

Anderton wants to regain control of the situation, he wants to save Leo Crow and he wants to stop and arrest whoever is going to kill Crow. He doesn't achieve any of that by simply waiting it out in some hidden basement.

Furthermore, Hineman's line still applies. Anderton doesn't know the whole future. Suppose he hides in an unused room in the basement of the PreCrime building. Suddenly and purely coincidentally, a big fire breaks out in that building. Anderton is forced to leave the basement, he saves some woman on the way out but is struck unconscious by a falling beam or something. When he regains consciousness, he finds himself in the apartment of the woman who saved him from the fire; and that apartment turns out to be the apartment in the prevision! How could Anderton be certain that a similar scenario based on pure coincidence was not going to happen?

Anderton can't let himself get (temporarily) imprisoned by Pre-Crime. If he did, then Pre-Crime would argue that the reason that Anderton doesn't kill Crow (as per the prevision) is because Pre-Crime successfully intervened, just like it did with Howard Marks and all those other jailed criminals. But (according to their laws) Howard Marks and those other criminals still deserved their life-long prison sentence (even though they hadn't actually killed any person), and therefore so would Anderton. The fact that he is a cop doesn't (and shouldn't) grant him a free pass.

The only way that Anderton might clear his name by letting himself (temporarily) imprisoned, is if Leo Crow gets murdered at the previsioned time and place while Anderton was being locked up; but then Anderton and Pre-Crime wouldn't be doing their job right, would they?
(And note that I wrote "might clear his name", because it's not guaranteed; it could be argued that someone else merely finished the job that Anderton was really planning to do.)

And the fact that Anderton strongly believed that "whatever the precogs predict to happen, will indeed happen (unless prevented by Pre-Crime intervention)", still remains as an undeniable factor in Anderton's behaviour.

The fact that he went into the room is simply the manipulation of an idiot plot forcing the character through a contrived setup to further the story.

Eh, no. You're complaining that all decisions and leaps that Anderton makes after he saw his prevision, are contrived plot elements that merely serve to setup an outcome in which Anderton finally ends up in the same room with Leo Crow. But in case you hadn't noticed, the whole "Anderton kills Crow" prevision is in itself already a forced, contrived plot element in order to further, nay, kickstart the story. Because if there had been no prevision, Anderton wouldn't have gone on the run, he wouldn't have investigated, and he wouldn't have ended up in Crow's apartment. So what caused the prevision to occur in the first place? We're stuck with an unsolvable paradox there. And that's because the Crow prevision is a so-called "causal loop", which is an age-old narrative device (look it up).

The filmmakers utilized this narrative device merely as a vehicle for their story about free will vs. determinism, which is what the whole movie is really about. The fact that Anderton chose "this" over "that" is actually the main story. And Anderton's decisions and actions, after he saw himself in the prevision, do make sense from his character and his perspective. So it's not a so-called idiot plot; instead, it's a sensible plot about a naturally-responding protagonist, but kickstarted by some outrageous/extraordinary premises.

Also, a supposedly expert cop like Anderton doesn't recognize an obvious set up with all those pictures on the bed? Even Inspector Clouseau would suspect something was fishy. It is so painfully contrived and unbelievable.

Anderton had been walking around with feelings of vengeance for more than six years, his judgment was clouded by his personal stake in the matter. He wants it to be true. He wants so badly to make someone pay for his loss. That was part of the lesson: he wants "justice", but he can't see clearly. This theme of "not seeing clearly" was lampshaded by many symbols and elements in the movie (such as "seeing upside-down" when he crashes into the yoga-class, or grabbing the rotten food in the surgeon's fridge; or Lycon's quote "In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king").

Another thing. Wouldn't the Pre-Crime cops chasing Anderton know that he knew the ins and outs of their system, including spyders and eye checks? Thus, it would be necessary to visually confirm each person. In fact, why not have the Spyders do visual confirmations of each person via video camera instead of eye scans. Robot cameras can visually scan buildings now, so there's no excuse.

As the movie showed, changing your facial appearance was easier and much less troublesome or permanent than eye surgery: you don't really need a Swedish surgeon for that.

Moreover, if the spyders were built to do visual confirmations rather than eye checks, wouldn't Anderton know about that too, as per your logic? Wouldn't you then have complained "the Pre-Crime cops should have known that Anderton knows how to circumvent visual confirmation by spyders; the spyders should have done retinal/fingerprint/voice recognition/body odour/blablabla scans instead"?

Seems to me that you're merely complaining for the sake of complaining, rather than observing legitimate flaws in the plot.

A fully built car can start right out of the factory without keys or a code of some kind. How is it powered? Does it have gas? And nobody puts an APB out for this stolen vehicle?

Agreed, that was quite far-fetched. It's even more far-fetched how he arrived on that spot after running through the ghetto, and how he was able to access it without encountering any security measures in the first place. The sequence only served to further the plot, to explain how Anderton acquired a personal mode of transportation that enabled him to travel anonymously from the city centre to Hineman's house. They could have achieved the same by showing a quick and boring scene of him stealing a car on the street. But instead they decided to give us this action-packed sequence with stunts, gadgets, cool robotics and a dose of humour, in order to entertain/satisfy (part of) the audience who came to see a Tom Cruise action movie. Is that really wrong?

The more you analyze Minority Report's plot, the more ridiculous it becomes.

I too thought after first viewing that many of the plot elements in the movie were too ridiculous. Until I watched the movie again, analyzed the story and scenes, and realized what the movie's really about and where its inspiration(s) came from.

______
Joe Satriani - "Always With Me, Always With You"
http://youtu.be/VI57QHL6ge0

[–] successor13326 8 years ago

I think you're missing my point by a mile. My point is that Anderton could've easily avoided all the trouble by just hiding out. Think about it. Once the time is up, Anderton can't be charged with murder because he was never there to commit the murder in the first place and the victim is still alive. What are they going to charge him with? Having the potential to murder someone in an alternate timeline?

As for your fire scenario, that still doesn't make sense because even if he woke up in the hotel room he can still leave at any time. In fact, he already knows that if he stays, he will definitely kill Crow. So staying in that apartment when he knows the potential danger and sees a blatantly obvious set up makes him an idiot. Ergo, an idiot plot. If Anderton had done the smart thing and walked out, there'd be no murder plot and the story would collapse.

I'm not complaining for the sake of complaining. I'm pointing out legitimate flaws in the plot. Other reviewers such as Confused Matthew have also pointed out the same plot flaws that I'm listing. I'm not saying you can't like the film if you want to, but you have to admit that the plot is extremely flawed and filled with enough holes to fly a fleet of 747s through.

[–] Mike716 8 years ago

That is the fundamental paradox regarding time travel or knowing the future, which has different rules for different stories, but usually requires the viewer to just accept the paradox. It's just the rules.

It was impossible for him to change the outcome because the events were predetermined. Movies like this, with only one timeline, challenge the idea of free will and freedom of choice. There was always only one sequence of events that Anderton could have done, and that is the one we saw in the movie, and it would have always led up to the event. Why did he choose to seek out the victim rather than hide and lock himself away? Because he just did. It's what he personally decided to do in an attempt to prove his innocence but it was futile because it would always result in the murder. Using the rules presented by the movie, him hiding away would result in the same thing, it would just be a much more boring movie.

It's hard to expain... Consider time travel in a one timeline universe. Say you want to travel back in time to this morning and leave an apple on the table. Chronologically, you wake up, there's an apple on the table, you go back in time, and leave the apple on the table. The apple was always there before you even traveled back in time, and you are always predetermined to go back in time and leave it. In a multiple timeline universe, the apple isn't there UNTIL you go back in time and leave it, creating an alternate timeline.

It's similar to this scenario. If Anderton were able to rewind the video feed of the murder the first time he watched it, it would show everything exactly as it happened in the movie, and then he would do all of that. If he were to lock himself away, he could rewind the feed and it would show himself hiding away but it'd end the same way. If he successfully prevented the murder by hiding away, then how or why would the precogs ever have shown him committing the murder in the first place if it was never going to happen? Seeing a future event of something that never really is a future event? Plus, there'd be no movie. There's an infinite number of possible future timelines, but there was only one for Anderton.

I know you're not asking about the rules, but asking why a character did one thing instead of the other is pointless. Anderton chose to seek out his victim because he's John Anderton, and that's his personality and he figured it was the best course of action.

[–] LiquidOcelot (2406) 5 years ago

I know this is an old post from an IMDB account, but goddamn you're a moron. Making pathetic convoluted excuses for the endless plot holes in the movie. I can't stand people like you.

[–] Painbow 8 years ago

"can you avoid a man you've never met?"

Yes. The film establishes that pre-cogs have a sensory radius of 200 miles.

So if Anderton travels 200 miles+... he is guaranteed not to meet Crow.

And even if by some miracle, he did meet Crow, it wouldn't matter because the pre-cogs would not have seen this.

[–] ramcha (62) 5 years ago

he hoped he would have an alternative future so he was looking for the Minority Report on the precog. when precog said there isn't any, he is devastated. also he did avoid killing him, it was just that nobody was there to witness it.

[–] Ace_Spade (9548) 5 years ago

Well said, yurenchu!

I will add to your piece about comas...

It's almost impossible to beat somebody into a coma without killing them. Picture somebody grabbing a bat or crowbar and trying to do that. Even with drugs or poisons, it would be extremely difficult. That's why "anesthesiologist" is a position in the hospital: you need a trained mind regulating things that knock people out or they don't stay down/die.

[–] Degree7 8 years ago

All Anderton has to do is hide out until time runs out, then he can go investigate who set him up.

Well it wouldn't really matter either way, as John has been framed. In this dystopian society, once you are seen in the precogs vision, you are guilty without having to be proven innocent, and you are "Halo-ed." However, this is something that isn't really explained in the movie. The man who tries to kill his wife in the beginning would logically only be charged with attempted murder, but we don't know if murderers or people guilty of attempted/conspiracy are given the same sentencing or not, and for how long. My guess is that John would be Halo-ed for only a period of a few years if he remained in hiding and didn't go looking for who set him up, as he would still be guilty due to the vision. It doesn't matter either way, his life as he knew it was over as soon as he was seen in the precogs vision. He knew he needed to find out who set him up. He had convinced himself that he wouldn't kill Leo Crowe, and he only had a limited amount of time before Precrime found him to find out why he was being framed. Even if he emerged from hiding long after the murder was to have taken place, he would still be a wanted man on the run. So going underground would be a waste of time.

Also, why doesn't Pre-Crime have a system in place to allow future criminals to voluntarily turn themselves in?

I believe in the film they mention that premeditated murders never really occur anymore. The only ones they usually get are crimes of passion, which occur within just a short few hour period. They are busy trying to find out where the perpetrator will be in that little an amount of time, so there is no opportunity to allow the murderer to turn themselves in. And even if they did, they would still be halo-ed.

Also, Yurenchu is right. If criminals would be willing to turn themselves in when they knew they were going to commit a crime, then they wouldn't bother committing the crime in the first place.

Also, why didn't they remove Anderton's retinal access to the facility? You'd think they would do that immediately after he's become a wanted criminal

A classic plot contrivance. I've seen this sort of thing done in films like the original Day the Earth Stood Still and even District 9. People easily gaining access to a secure area has occured in tons of films. Sure the writers could have taken more effort to have John gain access to Agatha in a more creative way, but it's small change to ask for really.

Another problem with the system. Pre-crime only detects murders. Okay. So what if the killers deliberately beat or poison their victims into permanent comas while keeping their bodies alive? Technically, they aren't dead, so it isn't murder. Great, so criminals would just become smarter and nearly kill people

Well the odds of something like this happening are less common than a homicide. And it sounds like what you're describing would eventually result in the death of the victim, so the precogs would pick it up eventually. Although the film isn't clear on whether the precogs see stuff like manslaughter or accidental homicides. Or a discreet murder, like poisoning someone's food. Anyway, I think it's clear that premeditated crimes like kidnapping are handled by a different department than the Precrime division. However, this shows the flaw in the system that guys like Burgess were able to exploit: that criminals can become smarter and fool the precogs.

Also, what about war or terrorist acts like 9/11? Wouldn't mass murder drive the Precogs insane?

The precogs only have an image of the DC area, they can't see beyond the borders of the district. Also, the precogs are shown to be traumatized by what they see, but they're kept doped up the whole time, so they really have no idea where they are.

~ I'm a 21st century man and I don't wanna be here.

[–] kellycallie (728) 5 years ago

You didn't see the secret twist in the film. He was actually caught and imprisoned - the second half of the movie is a dream he has while in a comatose state. Notice things get ''surreal'' post his first arrest.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

I disagree.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

agreed

[–] Ace_Spade (9548) 5 years ago

That's not an idiot plot.

An idiot plot is, if I recall my Siskel & Ebert correctly, a plot where one, simple phrase would solve everything. For instance, a farce hinging on the husband suspecting his wife of infidelity, but because nobody ever says, "Your wife wasn't here that weekend," the plot continues.

Anderton has all the information causing him woes. He isn't ignorant, he's just being driven to prove his innocence by his desperation. No, it's not a perfectly rational decision, but he's human. He's flawed. And he needs to find out more. He couldn't sit and wait. We see this in Oedipus Rex, as well (which shares MANY similarities with Minority Report). Oedipus' efforts damn him more, ensnare him further, and his actions are the actions of a driven man, compelled to move forward, condemned by his hubris (I couldn't possibly do that thing!), and by his nature (I must keep doing what I'm doing because I'm the hero/king, and it is my duty/desire!)

So, is there any logic to not sitting around? Yes.

1. He knows that trails go cold. He's first-hand familiar with this professionally (as a cop) and personally (his son was abducted).
2. He thinks he was set-up somehow. He wants to find who did this, and he cannot guarantee they will not say on his trail.
3. He knows how capable the cops are of tracking somebody down. Think of all the close-calls in the film, and how they keep finding him. So "just hiding out" wouldn't do it alone.
4. At first he does avoid Crow. He wants to find out if there's a flaw in precrime, so he talks to the mother of the system. She tells him about the minority report, which...is the title of the movie. From that point onwards, Oedipus- er...Anderton's nature/hubris compels him to think that he has a minority report. He then operates on this assumption: that he won't do it. Then, by the time he finds out he doesn't have one, he's already too curious; again: he's compelled by his nature to move forward.