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.

Hales- Blade Runner

The “other” in Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner is the Nexus 6. These ‘replicants’ were built by the head of the Tyrell Corporation for several different reasons, but primarily to work on ‘off world’ planets and essentially be slaves. Each model has a different specialty: Roy has optimum self-sufficiency and incredible strength, Pris was noted as a basic pleasure model and had great acrobatic skills, and Zhora was termed the Beauty and the Beast. Because it was believed that after a certain amount of time that the replicants might acquire human emotions (and therefore pose a threat to their usefulness and willingness to comply to their said actions) the Nexus 6 were given a bult in 4 year life span.They came back to Earth to get the brains behind the Tyrell Corporation to lengthen their life spans. When Roy has Sebastian take him to meet Tyrell he is treated with a minimum amount of respect, almost child-like. I find it interesting that Roy simply took what Tyrell said for the end al be all so quickly, it seems like a normal person might continue trying to find a way to stay alive. Tyrell does seem to treat him like a child though and that could be seen as Tyrell looking down on him and disrespecting his emotions as invalid, or it could be seen as a father figure reaction because Tyrell was his maker.

            I cannot help but wonder what point the police force saw in having Deckard hunt and kill the replicants if they knew that their expiration dates were so close on the horizon. Roy died of “natural” causes while he and Deckard were fighting it out. I believe it is important to note that at the end of the film the viewer discovers that Deckard is a replicant as well. Because of this, I find it incredibly cruel that he was asked to kill other replicants, Or, was he built specifically for that very reason? Deckard’s internal journey throughout the course of the film makes the viewer quiestion what being human really is. In the final scene when we find that he is a replicant all the lines between human and non-human are blurred. The love that he and Rachael felt towards each other shows us how strong the replicant’s feelings can be. We had been following his emotions the whole time thinking that he was a human. In Senior’s article, Blade Runner and Cyberpunk Visions of Humanity, he notes, “… all the boundaries are blurred between master and slave, hunter and the hunted, hero and villain, the animate and the inanimate, the human and the nonhuman…” This ambiguity becomes a major problem for the maker, who would have wanted a very clear line between replicant and human. But in the end, if you allow something the ability to have emotions, it becomes human as well. 

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.

Cardon - Casablanca

The producers of major motion pictures work diligently to make sure that their film doesn’t alienate certain groups of people, because it could greatly effect the turn out in audience size. Finding common ground for everyone in the audience to agree on is important in regards to the overall success of the film. In the early stages of the film, Isla and Laszlo enter Rick’s café. Laszlo is unaware of the relationship his wife, Isla, and Rick had during the time of his absence. In the scene pictured, four of the main characters are present: Rick, Isla, Laszlo, and Captain Renault. A viewer could take this particular scene and use it’s elements as foreshadowing of what is to come. Isla is sitting down at the table looking at Rick with a certain smirk on her face. Captain Renault clearly realizes that there is something between the two, without having any prior knowledge to their previous relationship. Laszlo is placed further back to the right. He has a look of concern on his face as he looks at Rick. Both Rick and Isla are staring at one another as if no one else were around. The lighting is very low key with dramatic shadows. This use of light not only sets the mood of the nightclub, but it also adds to the mystery of the situation at hand. The frame is most definitely social. All four characters are in the frame, which captures their meeting.

Villavicencio-Casablanca

Set in December 1941 in Casablanca of French-ruled Morocco, the film Casablanca depicts the romantic struggle between an ex-freedom fighting nightclub owner, Rick, and his rediscovered true love, IIsa, who had previously deserted him when the Nazis invaded Paris and later went on to marry someone else. The film also has an underlying reference to American involvement in World War II.

The character of Rick Blaine is complex in that although pessimistic and apathetic—refusing drinks from night club customers, disrespecting his lover Yvonne, and having no interest in politics—he also still reveals a glimmer of the old Rick, a man who was happily in love with IIsa in Paris before she broke his heart. As the film comes to an end, Rick surrenders his reignited love for IIsa, allowing her to escape out of Casablanca with her husband, Louis.

Ricks character can be interpreted as representing the difficulties that arise when one attempts to be neutral, whether it involves a forbidden love or a World War. This relates to the Political Expediency Theory, in which director Michael Curtiz attempts to remain neutral regarding World War II. He used an excess of actors from many different races and a protagonist set on impartiality and detachment (yet who is at times also generous and passionate). In the end however, the main character chooses a side unable retain a complete disregard from the world around him.

The political expediency theory deals with presenting a certain political opinion (or lack there of in this case) in order to please others, rather than staying true to one’s own beliefs and morals.Because this film was released in 1942, the theme of between impossible neutrality parallels to Americas struggle to remain uninvolved in the war.

One important scene where Rick’s neutrality finally falters is when IIsa admits she is still in love with him and they kiss.

Mise en Scene:

Dominant: IIsa would be the dominant in this scene because not only does she take up the majority of the frame, but she also has more lighting casted on her face. She is facing the camera slightly more than Rick is as well.

Subsidiary: Rick would obviously be the next thing a viewer’s eye moves to even thought the background is lighter.  

Lighting: The characters in the scene seem to be somewhat casted in a shadow. The background is more lit than the characters but still dim overall. This would probably be considering low lighting. 

Camera Proxemics: this is an extreme Close-up because only their faces are within the frame. 

Frame: This frame would tight, closing in on their faces with the background out of focus and mostly unidentifiable. 

Angle: The camera seems to be at the same level of their faces so would be considered a straight on shot or eye level. 

Character proxemics: The characters are in an intimate proxemics of each other. 


Casablanca--Internet Movie Database

Cole, Casablanca

In Casablanca, the ideology of the movie proves to be deeper than just a typical love story, as many would argue. Set during World War II, the political ideology could only do so much to hide under the overwhelming love story. Before we know about Ilsa, we are introduced to Rick and Renault. These opposing characters dress in contrasting colors, noting their opposing ‘sides’ in the war. Clothed in white at first, and later darker colors, we are led to believe that Rick’s stance in the war is undecided. His nonchalant demeanor and selfish attitude give the appearance of self-imposed power, which we can trace in his relationship with Renault. Rick, being originally from New York, represents what American audiences of that time, 1942, wanted to see. In the end, Rick and Renault trump the German forces invading Casablanca, and allow their friends to escape to America. These dramatic changes from each character appeal to the target audience because of their nationalistic behaviors, especially during that uncertain time in history. The picture above, in Rick’s bar, depicts Rick as a source of power, which will prove to be true at the end of the movie. The four characters are all wearing light colors, reinforcing the idea that they are the ‘good’ in this ideology of good vs. evil. In this scene we see Renault in white as well, as opposed to his usual dark attire, foreshadowing his ultimate rebellion toward the German forces. The proximity of the characters to one another also gives the audience the idea that neither Rick nor Renault know which side they are on. The introduction of Ilsa further confuses Rick as to how involved he would like to be in the chaos of the war, as we can see from the picture, he only has eyes for her. Overall, the picture exudes confusion for all parties, however the lighting suggests that in the end, each party’s confusion will be settled.

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.