Worthy - Minority Report - How close was Dick's vision to reality?

In Minority Report, director Stephen Spielberg uses cinema to bring the visions of short story author Phillip K. Dick to life. First published in 1956, Dick’s intense and what are considered by many to be somewhat paranoid scenes – which in my personal opinion, were heavily influenced by the era they were written in (ie: Cold War, Russian enemies, American hysteria) – question whether or not human beings are predisposed to commit crimes or if they have the free will to change their outcomes.

Spielberg expands on Dick’s writings to create a world where human beings are predisposed to fearing their government. Their arrests are caused by actions that have been foreseen by government “forces” – most of the population remaining in the dark about the existence of Pre-Cogs – and, as such, create the ideology that the government knows all. I first saw this film at its original release (December 2002) and understood the basic concepts, but did not harbor the knowledge I do now to contrast the differences between the imaginary world of Phillip K. Dick and the world we live in. Today, I have to ask myself whether or not he was on to something.

To be honest, I think Spielberg created a world that is not too far off from reality – both his and Dick’s. In Lester D. Friedman’s article Minority Report: A Dystopic Vision, he explains the accidental yet perfect timing of the film’s release. While written before the September 11th terrorist attacks, Minority Report was released at a time where Americans constantly questioned the extent of their safety, security and their personal information. He also explores the importance of maintaining essential human freedoms so they are not exchanged for so-called “governmental assurances.”

In his article Friedman says, “…Can we trust the FBI and the CIA to exercise appropriate restraints, to monitor only those who endanger our safety and not those who hold unpopular opinions, if given greater power to patrol our lives? Will President Bush's and Tom Ridge's Department of Homeland Security prevent violent activities or routinely engage in unjustified surveillance of our personal lives? Does the former justify the latter? It is also a time when, while ethicists debate the ramifications of the latest scientific findings about genetic predispositions, prisons throughout the United States contain people arrested because the government suspects they would have committed future crimes.”

In short, we currently live in a world where the slightest suspicions that would, under normal circumstances, would remain just so, contain enough “evidence” to lead to conviction and life-altering damages. We have also lived through a state of panic similar to the environment Americans were subdued to during the Cold War (unless you find S.W.A.T. teams searching mailboxes for anthrax any different than the duck-and-cover drills elementary schools students memorized, the idea being ensuring safety and knowing what you can do to deter oneself from danger) . The combination of Dick’s fears and Spielberg’s vision provides illusions to the fact that the media and the government are long time acquaintances. I find it ironic and chilling that the media follows a timeline where current events can coincide with our entertainment with such ease.

Armato, Morality and Minority Report

Minority Report offers several topics for moral debate in the realm of crime and justice. Primarily, of course, is the question of the legitimacy of a precog's prediction of a crime as compared to the predicted criminal's realized line of action.

These predictions alienate the supposed perpetrators as murderous monsters. The "justice" perpetrators receive actually removes their ability to provide legal defenses for themselves. What the precogs offer the police can be thought of as conditional surveillance—looking into their visions is similar to watching footage from a security camera, but it's a security camera in the future that might be at a different angle than you think, or that won't capture the whole story, or that is capturing something that ends up not occurring.

The precogs' predictions (accusations) are like a futuristic version of red-light and speed cameras that record when we break automobile laws. In both scenarios, the accused is found guilty only through surveillance, which is not sufficient enough evidence to convict someone of wrong-doing. There is an added level of injustice in the Minority Report scenario, though: the surveilled event may be a complete fabrication that is not the least bit actualized.

This brings me to Terri Murray's "Our Post-Moral Future?" which describes new technology capable of "reading" brains to determine if a person is likely to commit a crime. Hello, science fiction in the real world. She also brings up how our society likes to think of criminals as "ill" people who can be cured of an inherent inclination to commit crime. Absolute tomfoolery, if you ask me. Most people have felt hatred for another person before, and some of us have thought about how nice it would be to kill a person we hate; but hardly anybody decides to go the immoral route. Most of us take the time to think rationally and make the decision that we are not going to murder our high school disciplinarians, our exes, our in-laws, or our roommates.

Murderers have that option to, the option to not commit murder. Even if a man has his hand on a trigger and is ready to fire at his boss, he can still decide to not shoot. Hell, even if he does shoot and immediately comes to his senses, he can call for help or try to give first aid assistance. That would save his boss's life and get him stuck with a charge of simply attempted murder. The point is that he has options.

In Minority Report the supposed criminals have no options. The whole concept of freedom is neglected, and the society fully embraces a type of mechanistic world view, that everything that will happen directly results from everything that is happening, and the future cannot be changed. Free will then doesn't exist, and morality becomes an illusion.

Shelby Gevry- Minority Report

As human beings we have ingrained in use the unfortunate necessity to put ourselves into groups. From socioeconomic classes to racial separations to grouping based on interests, sex, beliefs, nationality the list is infinite- we tend to place upon ourselves, whether willingly or not, certain distinctions as to separate ourselves from others, but why? Why is it that man is so driven to have an "us" and a "them"? Why is it that human nature drives us to make these distinctions, as if compelled to do so in the belief that somehow this separation must be made and in doing so we are somehow making ourselves better. As Antonio Sanchez-Escalonilla points out we place people into groups as a sort of defense mechanism. By labeling we make them less threatening because we know what they are, what to call them; to "root out those individuals who are a danger to our way of life," (pg 12). The idea being that with these distinctions we have the ability to label ourselves better than those outside of certain groups. This idea of the others or the outsiders is prevalent in the film Minority Report.
It is interesting to note just how quickly one can become another. In then out, with no warning or explanation. For Tom Cruise it was a simple thought, an innermost private thought that purged him from the "us" and sent him to the "them." Within Minority Report there are strict constraints placed society, certain groups that are adhered to. There are the cops, the precogs, the criminals, and the innocent everyday citizens- to name a few. But even within the police force there are separations. For example John Anderton, the main character played by Cruise, is acting chief of the Precrime unit a force the using precognitive people who can look into the future to see crimes before they are committed. The Precogs, they are referred as, create the most distinctive group, they are the farthest from "us." They are shunned from the outside world, trapped in a room treated as if they aren't even people. It is not only their abilities that distinguish them from others but the way in which they are used, tools not people. It is easier for humans to distance themselves, to make distinctions rather than to open there eyes and see that we are all others, that there is a "them" and an "us" only because we have made it so.

Tucker, Minority Report

In the movie Minority Report the story takes place in a world where the whole justice system literally depends on two precogs. These precogs are humans whose thought can be taken from their heads and put on a screen to be analyzed. Their thoughts are analyzed because their thoughts show the future, future crimes. Precogs show crimes before they are committed so that the head of the police force Tom Anderton, who is played by Tom Cruise, can catch them before the crime is committed. Although this eliminates crime all together and supposedly saves many lives Terri Murray, the author of Our Post Moral Future, and I disagree with this idea. I believe that unless the crime is committed it cannot count as a crime or as Terri puts it " ‘crime’ is meaningless unless it is done, and is a crime precisely because it is done". Punishing someone for just their intent is taking away the freedom of choice and decision. I believe if this new type of justice system were to ever actually become a reality that the public would riot against it taking away their constitutional rights. Also if there were no crimes committed, no one as examples to show what would really happen if a horrible crime was committed then their would be no virtuous people because "what allows us to feel virtuous, as opposed to the vicious people who commit crimes, is that we choose not to act upon these thoughts". Terri also makes a good point by saying, "if we are prepared to punish people for what they merely intend to do, are we also prepared to reward people for good intentions before a virtuous deed is done?". In conclusion I think the whole idea of arresting people for a crime that has not been officially committed is violating rights and wrong.

Mathey, Minority Report

In Minority Report, "criminals" are treated really badly. Even though they did not commit the crime, they are considered criminals because the Pre Cogs have seen their intentions and are always right. However, there is a glitch in the system of pre-crime. When the three pre cogs do not agree on a crime, it creates a minority report which is never going to be revealed otherwise, it would mean that pre-crime cannot be trusted and therefore would have to be shut down. This glitch is used by the bad guy in the movie by trying to make the pre cogs see one crime instead of two. However, Agatha, the more gifted of the pre cogs do not fall for it and warns John Anderton (Tom Cruise) of what is going on. In Terri Murray's essay, "Our Post Moral Future", she argues with the fact that if someone has not committed a crime, he/she cannot be convicted before it happens. She gives an example by citing the opposite. Should we reward people for good intentions before a virtuous deed is done? No we shouldn't so why should we arrest people and treat them as outcast based on their intentions and not their actual actions. So if I went to my friend and said joking " I'm going to kill you" will I be considered a criminal? This would be absurd. I understand that safety should be a priority in this world but at what price. The sacrifice to lose all privacy and control over our life. Becoming puppets of our own world and being scared just to think. The way the criminals are treated in the movie is just horrible. A halo is placed on their head where they would watch their crime over and over again for the rest of their life while being in tube like cells underground. This is even worst than what we do to prisoners in society, at least they have rights and have the chance to prove themselves innocent. In the movie, they just get arrested and are put straight into hibernation state. When were their rights cited? " You have the right to remain silent until you speak to a lawyer, if you do not have one, one will be assigned to you..." Where would the world be without rights ? Indepence is based on them. I do not think that potential criminals like the ones in the movie should be tortured that much. Of course we would live in a crime free place, but I would be scared of the government more than criminals in this case. The power that they acquired based on three genetically modified humans (pre cogs) is just scary.

Malveaux - Minority Report

Minority Report is a film by Philip K. Dick that explores the concept of distributing consequences to someone before their crime ever takes place based on foreknowledge provided by what the film refers to as “precogs”.  The film, set in 2054 Washington, D.C., presumes that any intended act in the future that does harm to society in any capacity is a crime. 

The “precogs, three physics, uses their gift of foretelling the future to determine who, where, when, and at what time someone will commit the crime. The police unit, led by Tom Cruise, then seeks out the pre-determined perpetrator and prosecutes them for the crime they haven’t committed “yet”. According to Terri Murray, in the article Our Post-Moral Future?, a crime is meaningless until it is done, and is a crime precisely because it is done therefore redefining the meaning. Murray also argues that the definition of a criminal is retrospective because the freedom that allows a criminal to choose whether or not to commit the crime is the reason he or she is defined a criminal should they choose to proceed with the act. This is an important concept that isn’t explored in Minority Report. 

The precogs foresee the crime and the police unit acts upon it. Their intentions are to prevent murders, however, they are stripping away someone’s inalienable right, which is free will. What viewer’s should ask themselves after watching this film is at what does a police unit’s obligation to capture criminals infringe upon a person’s right to have private thoughts. 

Penland: Minority Report

In the 2002 film, Minority Report, an experimental police force in Washington, D.C. arrests future murderers based on the visions of three precogs; Agatha, Dashiell, and Arthur. The police force is lead by Captain Joe Anderton (Tom Cruise), who studies the precogs’ visions, gathering clues and information to find the potential murderer. Once he figures out where the murderer is, he and the police force race to arrest him, before the crime is committed, essentially eliminating crime for six years in the D.C. area.

The criminals in this movie are treated as outcasts. Their basic rights are stripped from them; the crime they were arrested for never even happened. Although the precogs are supposed to always be right about a murder, the murderers were only arrested because of something that was going to happen. Terri Murray’s essay, “Our Post-Mortal Future?” addresses this issue, saying “a ‘crime’ is meaningless unless it is done, and is a crime precisely because it is done” (137). This essay shows that the future criminals of this movie were treated unfairly because they never actually committed the crime.

One glitch with this system lies with the precogs. The precogs are human, and could have missed a murder, which does happen in the movie. The murder of Agatha’s birth mother is predicted by the precogs, and prevented from happening. However, the true murderer knows the glitch of the precogs, and commits the murder the same exact way as before. The precogs see this murder, however, the files are erased because it appears to be an echo, which is what happens when a particularly horrific murder is committed, and the precogs see the murder twice. This glitch in the system questions the reliability of the precogs, making the audience wonder if the other murders would have actually happened.

After the criminals were arrested, a police officer placed a futuristic headband on them, forcing them into a sleep-like state, where they could only see their murder over and over again for the rest of their lives. The criminals were then placed in a tube and put underground with the rest of the future criminals, basically tortured with the same image for the rest of their lives. This part of the movie was horrifying to me, because the criminals were completely de-humanized. They became merely bodies without souls after they were placed in these tubes. They were treated worse than the criminals we have today; they literally had no freedom, no movement, and no sunlight.

This clip shows how people in this movie have very little privacy because their eyes are scanned everywhere.

Bienvenu, Minority Report and the Idea of the "Other"

Films that take place in the future are always intriguing to people (including myself). This is mostly because they give a visual representation of what our world and our lives might be like some 20, 40, even 60 years from now. In Steven Spielberg’s film Minority Report (2002), he addresses specifically the way crime, imprisonment and security could be like in the future. In this film, the invention of Pre-crime and the use of the precogs’ predictions allow this special department of security to stop criminals from committing murders before it even happens. Once caught, they are put into a vegetable state and forced to watch their predicted crime over and over again.

In our blog prompt, it is suggested that “the other” in this film are the convicted criminals caught by the Pre-crime department. After thinking this over, I found that this may not be entirely true. Everyone is this future world is being watched, not just the criminals. Everyone is being eye scanned in every step they take. This allows them to be tracked at any given moment. When John Anderton is trying to run from Pre-crime cops it is virtually impossible for him to get away because of these eye scans. In this film I think EVERYONE is the other, not just the criminals. Nobody has privacy and everyone is a suspect is a sense. In Antonio Sanchez-Escalonilla’s article, The Popular Genres of Action and Fantasy in the Wake of 9/11 Attacks, Steven Spielberg speaks out about the idea of giving up certain freedoms to insure that our country is safe. He explains that this is in fact what the film is about.

The article connects the plots and themes of certain movies to the aftermath and emotions following the 9/11 attacks. In years following the attacks, airport security amongst other things have been heightened to an extreme. This entailed privacy issues that effected everyone, not just suspected terrorists. Just as in Minority Report, everyone was being questioned, everyone was given less privacy and everyone became “the other.” After reading this article I realized more and more that this film wasn’t about the criminals being the other, it is about anyone and everyone being the other.

Knoepfler, Minority Report

In the article "Our Post-Mortal Future", the concept of reading someone's mind before an action is questioned. Many of the stated uses of this technology presume that an intended act is still a crime despite the absence of a victim and perpetrator (yet). The article states that this redefines the term "crime" itself. If we can punish people before they commit a crime, can we award people before they do a good deed? If these precogs can predict a crime, can they predict the Precrime unit from failing to prevent the crime, thus allowing the unit to prevent the crime they were predicted not to prevent? The idea of predicting the future is very paradoxical. The main point of this article is the idea of a criminal. The freedom for this criminal to have the intention of committing a crime is what makes him accountable for his actions. Essentially, if allowed to predict crimes before they happen, the Precrime unit is unjustly persecuting the accused. Minority Report effectively explores an individual accused of a future crime and the obstacles he or she faces to realize whether or not the action was truly intended. The film brings into question future prediction, and really any time manipulation at all. Humanity is in the now, and if allowed to predict the future and judge an individual on those future actions, we lose our humanity.

Harper, Minority Report

In Minority Report the other is considered the potentional criminal. The potentional criminal is treated wrost than if they actually comitted the crime. In Hollywood and the Rhetoric of Panic by Antonio Sanchez-Escalonilla says that, "The conflict between national security and civil liberties is one of the underlying themes in Minority Report." These potentional criminals aren't being given their rights. In the movie it seems that all forms of privacy is abused. The governement basically examines people's thoughts and deteremines whether they're a criminal or not. The problem with that is that people change their minds and some people do not fully act out their thoughts. In many ways, I believe, this movie shows how America treated Middle Eastern people after 9/11. In the film, the potentional criminals aren't asked any questions about what they were going to do and they are abusivly handled. While the authorities and other people observe and applaud because they believe that everyone should be safe, even if it means invading privacy. America, in other ways, did this to Middle Eastern Americans. On planes and in stores and almost anywhere (after 9/11) Middle Eastern people were outcast.

Villavicencio, Minority Report and Terry Murray's "Our Post-Moral Future?"

Minority report is a film based on the conflicting notions of free will and determinism. The movie tells the story of John Anderton, a Washington DC detective of the future, who works for Precrime, a company claiming the ability to predict crimes before they are acted out. This allows for the government to not only find and arrest the presumed “criminals,” but also prevent the crimes from ever occurring.  

Anderton discovers flaw in the system when finds himself on the opposite spectrum predicted to commit a murder. He finds himself running just as all the other accused, whether guilty or not, find themselves. As a result, the murder he is suspected to commit is consequently caused by said accusation. Additionally, not only does the inaccurate prediction drive the criminal act he would’ve never committed to begin with, but the knowledge of his future allows him the choice to change his future, thus destroying any validity the Precrime approach stands on. In short, if any criminal is able to become aware of their supposed future crime, they will have the choice of not committing it and should then be given the choice before being punished.

The whole movie is based on whether it is possible/moral to connect malicious thoughts or intentions directly to malicious actions. The criminals are treated as if they do not have a free will, and that their crime-ridden future is inevitable. They are in a sense “determined” to act unlawfully, (which then blame should not be given if they have no control over what they will do, no real intentions or choice to choose between right and wrong)

As Terri Murray discusses in Our-Post Moral Future, “it follows from the fact that someone might commit a crime that they also might not.” The author discusses whether we are the way we are because of natural or innate characteristics, or if we have chosen to make ourselves this way. If we consciously choose to be the people we are then we would then be responsible for those facts as well as our actions. She refers to African Americans and women who were (and still are) discriminated against and are given the blame for either having that skin color or for being born that gender. Just as the criminals in Minority Report, this reveals the huge contradiction between lacking choices of what you “are”  (whether it is destined to break laws, or being a woman or person of a different race) yet also being responsible for those traits.

Overall, if we have free will then we should be punished for criminal acts (obviously considering the circumstance/intentions) and it is impossible to simply reads someone’s thoughts pre-crime and be totally sure the act will be carried out. If we do not have free will and our actions are pre-determined, then there lies the problem of whether we, as humans, should be blamed for these actions, or simply “treated” for these “pre-existing conditions” as Terry Murray describes them. 

Minority Report Clips (NYTimes)

Thomas-Minority Report

In Minority Report, the pre-cog crime division uses technology that claims to be able to see some commit a crime before it really happens. In Terri Murray’s article “Our Post-Moral Future” he states, “Crime and punishment depend upon free human agency, a cornerstone of liberal democracy. By re-defining criminal acts as involuntary and inevitable, proponents of the new technology merely fabricate a dubious demand for the product they hope to supply.”

As I watched Minority Report, I was disturbed that they were arresting people for crimes they hadn’t committed. Even though the crimes were horrific, they still hadn’t been committed. A moral boundary was being crossed. If someone intends to do something wrong, but hasn’t done anything wrong, should they still be held accountable? Is it still a crime. Murray later states in his article, “In its ordinary sense, a 'crime' is meaningless unless it is done, and is a crime precisely because it is done.” A Crime because a crime once something is done and once something is committed. So it’s wrong, according to Murray and I, to arrest someone because of what they were thinking. It’s different when we arrest people on intended murder charges because there’s a way to prove that they had intentions of killing someone. The whole idea of going into someone’s mind is what disturbed me the most. That would open the door to numerous problems. Where does it stop? There’s too much opportunity to take advantage of this type of technology. Going into the human mind is taking it a step too far.

Labbe-Minority Report

Minority Report (2002), directed by Steven Spielberg, is set in Washington D.C in 2054. Scott Frank wrote the screenplay based on Philip K. Dick's novella. Dick questions humanity and reality throughout his works. Minority Report investigates these themes by the unfair treatment of precogs, who are beings with the ability to foresee crimes.


In the film, three precogs, Agatha (Samantha Morton), Arthur (Michael Dickman) and Dashiel (Matthew Dickman), reside together under the PreCrime unit's constant watch. The officers learn the names of future victim's and criminals as well as the time and date of future crimes. Precrime arrives at the scene before violence ensues, haloing the perpetrators, leaving them incapacitated. Then, the criminals are taken into custody and locked up.



Dr. Iris Hineman (Lois Smith), whose research laid the groundwork for the program says Agatha is the strongest precog. Chief John Anderton (Tom Cruise) finds out PreCrime director Lamar Burgess (Max von Sydow) killed Agatha's mother, Anne Lively. "You created a world without crime. All you had to do was kill someone," Anderton says to Burgess.



Lively wanted her daughter back. Burgess wanted the distraction out of the way. He knew there would be no PreCrime without Agatha, and his program would be a failure. He had no problem locking Agatha (and the other precogs) up and using her as a tool. He had no problem killing Agatha's mother because he didn't see Agatha as human.



In the article, "Minority Report: Narrative, Images, and Dead Women," Joanne Clarke Dillman says, "Agatha's trauma is the loss of her mother, Anne Lively;Anderton's is the loss of his son, Sean."



Anderton is decidedly human. His loss parallels with Agath's loss, putting them on the same human level. "Agatha reaches out to Anderton," Dillman says. The audience is led to side with Agatha's human qualities, showing Burgess' crime to be unjust.



"The movement of the film takes Agatha and Anderton from the position of melancholy to that of mourning, to a sense of wholeness where both move on." Their stories continue to move on the same level to the film's end. Anderton reunites with his ex-wife, Lara, and the precogs are allowed to live in an undisclosed location in peace.





This clip shows Anderton and Agatha's close relationship.

Villacreces, The Outcast in Minority Report

The movie Minority Report by the director Steven Spielberg the outcast is the future criminal. John Anderson is the Chief of the Department of Pre-Crime in Washington DC and a troubled human being because of the loss of his son and the divorce with his wife. Just before the department was going to the launched nation wide, the “precogs” foresee that Anderson was going to kill a man with the name of Leo Crow. This makes Anderson run away, and become an outcast from society.

At the end of the movie, we see the flaw of the pre-crime program. If a human being foresees that he will commit a crime in the near future, you could be able to change the future. This is what Anderson tries to through out the movie, because he did not want to be “haloed”. According to Terry Murray in his article “Our Post-Moral Future”, he explains how science has been able to read the brain in order to know what the intentions of people are, to know if they are going to commit a crime. He argues that using this, as a pre-crime tool is unmoral for people because humans may think awful things in their brains, but might never be able to commit such things. This relates to the movie. Because you think about It, it does not mean you will go through with it.

If you would be able to know that you would commit a crime, would you do what ever it takes to change the future? This thought and phrase is what makes Anderson an outcast in the movie. He does everything possible to change his future. He outsmarts technology by having eye replacement, so he is not found around the city. He kidnaps one of the precogs, Agatha, to prove that the precog’s visions were flawed. He does what ever it took for him to be saved, and also showed this question to his boss, when he was about to kill Anderson. If you would be able to change your future, save a life, save your own life you would be able to do so.

Movie Videos & Movie Scenes at MOVIECLIPS.com

Iqbal, Minority Report

In the article, Hollywood and Rhetoric of Panic, by Antonio Sanchez-Escalonilla, he states that, “In Minority Report, there is a use of the eyes and vision as thematic symbols that emphasize the ideas of seeing, oberserving, watching and forseeing”. Minority Report is set in 2054, where an experimental police force called Precrime has diminished the crime in the city of Washington D.C. The Precrime employs three "precogs". Precogs are mutated humans with the ability to view murders that occur in the future. The Precrime officers then analyze and interpret the precogs visions to track down and prevent the murder before it happens. John Anderton, played by Tom Cruse, is chief of the force. He gets tied up in the “precognition”, when the precogs see Anderton kill a man named Leo Crow. Anderton goes on a hunt to find Dr. Iris Hineman, the lead researcher for Precrime. Dr. Iris Hineman reveals that the precogs do not always agree about the future. The differing vision, a "minority report," could show his innocence. Anderton undergoes eye replacement surgery to avoid the iris identification systems throughout the city. He then uses his old eyes to enter Precrime headquarters and abduct Agatha, the precog that Hineman noted always had the minority report. Sanchez says that, “Anderton has an eye transplant to change his identity and eludes its control.” Towards the end of the movie, Precrime receives reports that Burgess will kill Anderton. Anderton tries to convince Burgess that either he can kill Anderton, showing Precrime works but becoming a murderer himself, or he can spare him, showing Precrime as a failure. Anderton reveals the fundamental flaw of the system: if one knows his or her own future, he or she can change it. In the movie, people who are seen to commit these murders are continuously shown their “attempted” murder. I say attempted because no one knows if they actually do commit the murders or not. This in a way is outcasting criminals. Every person has a choice. They can either choose to murder the person or not to. This choice is taken away in Minority Report by arresting people on judgment of what they might do.

Hutchinson- Minority Report

Minority Report’s whole plot is centered around one highly controversial issue: pre-crime. With the development of pre-crime, Washington D.C. has been able to boast that they have been crime free for six years. However, there’s one blatant problem with pre-crime: the criminals being arrested haven’t committed the crime for which they are being persecuted yet. These “criminals” can’t even be truly categorized as such, for the majority of them have never committed a crime. But as Anderton points out, the pre-cogs know what’s coming, and just because you stop something from happening doesn’t negate the fact that it would have happened without your interference. The pre-crime industry argues that not only have they stopped crime from taking place in these instances, but they have curtailed any future crime, because people are terrified of what would happen should they even try. These poor “criminals” get “haloed” as soon as they are arrested. They are sentenced, without a trial might I add, to a life of watching non-stop the crime they may have committed. They are kept alive with the biological necessities in a tubular cell, but are essentially in a reverse coma – their brains work fine, but their bodies are completely devoid of movement. It is almost as if they are “body-dead” instead of brain dead. Pre-crime has made an example of these so-called “criminals.” People are absolutely petrified of what might become of them, should they decide to delve into a life, or even a minute, of crime. The citizens of Washington, D.C. have given up many of their civil liberties to ensure pre-crimes success, but it all is for “the greater good.” In exchange for peace and safety, citizens’ privacy is almost non-existent: the spiders come into their homes to scan their retinal IDs; they are scanned whenever they enter a store, or board a train; even their minds have the potential of being invaded. Spielberg made a comment after his movie came out, not long after 9/11, “Right now, people are willing to give away a lot of their freedom in order to feel safe…Where do you draw the line? How much freedom are you willing to give up?” It seems as if the citizens in Minority Report have given up almost all of their freedom in order to be safe. They don’t even have the freedom to choose anymore. Agatha points out to Anderton that he has a choice, that there is always a choice. Apparently not, because pre-crime doesn’t give you that option. The potential criminals didn’t have a choice when they were aggressively detained and carted away. They are the outcasts, the scum of the earth, all for possibly committing a crime in the future. Maybe.

Himmelberg, Blade Runner Blog

Blade Runner is a very interesting sci-fi movie that dives into one possible future for planet earth and us. It is so weird to see how someone percieves what the future will be like and how we will percieve human life. In this movie they have two different types of beings, Humans and Replicants. Replicants are like humans except that they are only replications of humans or clones of humans, they have a set lifespan and are supposed to not have or show any emotions. They deal with the android by using it for their own purposes (to populate the new frontier, do the dirty work much like slaves) and then killing them (either physicially because they have gone arye or by giving them a set very short lifespan of 4 years). They seem to disregard that replicants are ,in almost every respect, the same or better than humans and therefore should be treated with similar standards. It goes back to the idea of slavery , why does one person or one group of people have the right to rule over others and make them do anything. The only real differenctiation is that replicants are "made" by humans so some may think that if you create something then you have some authority over them(when you have children you are responsible for them and have authority to tell them what to do), but on the other hand you do not have authority over them forever, if you treat them like a child, then you have to nuture the replicants and then let them live just like us, side by side with us. In Blade Runner, they simply believe that the replicants are lower and inferior to them, but the replicants don't like this and they want to control their own lives, much like any human does.

In the article "Blade Runner and Cyberpunk Visions of Humanity" by W.A. Senior, he talks about how the ideas of Humanity are blurred. In the article he says that the movie simply magnifies the extremes of humanity, from the dirty street rats found on earth in the dilapidated Los Angelos to the superhuman replicants, which are what humans strive to and have always wanted to be. It is funny that on both sides of the spectrum the middle "normal" people are controlling both sides both the lowly ones and the superhuman ones. It seems to say that it doesn't matter what you have we as humans will alwasy try to control others and rule over others. Especially the ones who are different from us.

McCay Blog Prompt for Blade Runner or Minority Report

Both Blade Runner and MInority Report isolate and either imprison or destroy the other, the android or the possible criminal. Using either film, discuss how each film deals with the outcast, the other--the android, the potential criminal. Please make sure you integrate at least one article that you have read from the articles posted on blackboard.