Steven Spielberg, in my opinion, a very big flaw that I can not help but notice every time I see his Film: I always felt that behind the amazing formal and stylistic perfection, there is more reason that sentiment. I think that Spielberg loves making movies, I think you love every movie he has done, although maybe each in a different way. But I am convinced that his way of loving both light years away from mine where I instinctively he is thoughtful, where I am passionate he is methodical. And that makes me appreciate his films without that these can never rob me of everything, to be loved by me. Judge them great films, I recognize the merits and value, but they still feel cold. And
'my problem, probably. Apparently Spielberg and I are not exactly on the same wavelength. I do not think that we would worry that much, to be honest. I shot my first shot at "Minority Report". I have more to shoot.
Philip K. Dick, for example. One writer has surely one can write novels and stories interesting and fascinating. Pure him with a pair of defects not bad, though. First was obsessed by lack of money, and wrote under the influence of substances that favor, so to speak, the creative inspiration. For this often, very often, his novels have plots practically impossible to follow, with continuous reversal of reality that eventually just leave without any recognizable landmarks, and also deprives the reader to judge what he just read. He was a master in bringing certainty to be without players after only a few pages of his novels. A great trick, so great to have them done in time become, a cult writer. Dick has become something to show off how can a hunter with a newly captured prey. I read it, and even more, show your appreciation for him is a fashion now established. I challenge anyone of you to read "Ubik" and give me some interpretation, based on facts derived from the novel, accurately discriminating between reality and fiction.
This is the second shot. I have not fired directly at Spielberg is true, but he is on that side of the fence. I have not finished yet.
The short story from which it was the screenplay for the film is very different from what we see on the big screen. After all I'm talking about a film that comes to almost two and a half hours, while the account was short, really short. Therefore it was necessary to expand, define, add, invent characters, places, events, in order to put together enough material for a film. The work has not been hurt, for heaven's sake. But there are a couple of points which remain vague and undefined, is implied but not because they become obvious in the light of other facts. They implied that explain it would be impossible, or nearly so. The fact that the Precrimine going to go after six months of experiments in Washington, to operate throughout the national territory of the United States in the film do not talk about other Precog addition to the three who work in Washington, and at some point explicitly defines a space limit in their precognitive ability. Beyond a certain number of miles from where they are physically impossible for them to provide for a murder. It 'clear that to expand to the entire territory of the United States are not sufficient to cover three precognitive Precog. But when the doctor who "discovered" Precog about their origins and its nature, does not mention the existence Precog other than the three in Washington. Moreover the same plot against Anderton (Tom Cruise) is not understood well by what is born: in fact no one had a reason for putting him and catch him, or at least no consistent pattern is explained in context. There is a hint to inconsistencies in the mechanism of precognition that Anderton is about to discover, but the danger that these findings could derail the experiment Precrimine is extremely remote, and still does not justify the triggering of the conspiracy that, indeed, becomes the cause of the outbreak of the events leading to the closure of the same experiment
... And I'm three. Perhaps even this is capable of eliminating "Minority Report ". See you next.
happens that one day, the Precog "see" that the poor within thirty-six hours Anderton become a murderess. Kill, in a place that does not know, a guy who does not know. At the time of the murder, in the apartment where this will be done, there will be other people. The Precog, or rather the interface that transforms their "dreams" in anticipation of murder, has taken to carve two wooden balls as the murderer and the victim. However, at least in the case of Anderton, they are wrong, and big: Leo predict that Anderton will kill the Crow, but in reality, that we will see several minutes after the forecast, it is Crow who kill by pressing the trigger of the gun that Anderton is aiming at him, while he has no intention of killing him. Well, actually it is a suicide, not murder. But Precog have foreseen and decreed that the murderer was Anderton. No minority report. It seems to me not just an inconsistency, a clear and dangerous flaw in the system. On several occasions, then, the female Precog is anxious to tell Anderton who can choose what to do, that can change his future by deciding whether or not to kill Crow. This is another contradiction. If Precog "see" the future, how can Anderton change something that already knows how to be? E 'nonsense that the same Precog tells him that it is possible. It 's a paradox, but one of those able to stay on your stomach, undigested, for a long time.
Four. Fired at point blank range and close range. Still not enough, though. Here's the next.
Spielberg is a meticulous director. Attentive to every detail. Visionary enough, the right creative, unpredictable when needed. There are shots out of the ordinary, there is the temptation to dazzle the viewer focusing more on how the scenes were shot rather than on what they stage scenes. Sorry for the cacophony. I mean that Spielberg almost never to distract us with special effects while is telling something essential. E 'loyal viewers, and that I have always appreciated. In "Minority Report" But there is a scene that jars so annoying with all the rest. E 'drop style difficult to interpret. Anderton is trying to re-enter the premises of Precrimine using, for the reading of the retina, an eye surgeon who was explanted before replacing them with a pair belonged to a criminal record when they fall from his hands. It does not take long to realize that a human eye fell on the ground can not do anything but lie there where it fell, or far, because of its very nature. In the film, however, the two eyes seem with a life of its own: bouncing across the floor like ping pong balls, matching the physics of these rather than to a pair of eyes. It 's aftermath absurd, totally detached from the rest of the film, set in a time when the suspense should be maximum. Something obscene.
Five. And yet the magazine is not empty.
I do not, however, that a director friend tries to make the viewer using tricks more or less honest. "Minority Report" is not a new "Blade Runner", despite the fact that they have been taken (always faithful very little), a novel or a short story by Philip K. Dick. E 'then useless that they try to persuade the viewer that there are points in common is that we see from the rain pimp windows of Anderton, as is pimping the fact that he represented Washington in a similar way to the Los Angeles of "Blade Runner ". Also because the dirt and unhealthy that they breathed in the Los Angeles are far more accurate and realistic than that of Washington. The comparison is unequal, the charm of one is only a fraction of that of the other.
was the sixth. There are more.
Why American films have (almost) always end in a positive way? Why do I need a happy ending? And why the happy ending, even when necessary, must always be so desperately ordinary? "Minority Report" is no exception. Was over twenty minutes before the end would be a real film much more courageous. Cruder, harder. Had ended with a murder rather than suicide would have been much more ruthless, more bad. Had ended with the death of Anderton and doubt about the future of Lamar Burgess (Max Von Sydow) was much more fascinating. So, instead, becomes trivial. The hero wrongly accused can prove his innocence while bad, ruthless and bloody up to that point, he decided to take his own life as a supreme act of atonement. Seen a thousand times. One thing unbearable. One of those things that makes you cringe. Until just a moment before I thought that maybe while not a masterpiece that you were seeing was a great movie, a moment later, you would like to have in my hands the director to give him his stuff.
The seventh is gone. The eighth is almost blank, but I got loaded. Fire. In the final
corny happy ending, I would gladly avoided, we find that former Precog were sent away from civilization, to protect them (and to protect civilization itself, I would add ...) and give them a way to make a living "normal". Since they are able to capture images from the future of the crimes that will occur only if they are in the vicinity of murders and victims are sent in the middle of nowhere, a verdant archipelago where there is only their hut, or whatever. Well, this house is clearly reconstructed logs to the computer, is a vulgar play of pixels superimposed on a real landscape. And what you see, and how if you see. Very bad.
Are they just eight shots at point blank range? We think that now the film is good as dead and buried ... yet it is not. Despite all these flaws, "Minority Report" I liked it. I left the room convinced that he saw an excellent movie. A small pearl in a sea of \u200b\u200bmediocrity. It is a film from Oscar. It is a touching film, unforgettable exceptional. But film is a fascinating visual inventions, there are dozens, to find even more intelligent. It is scenically perfect, so perfect as are some sequences that should be reviewed and sent to memory to anyone thinking of wanting to be great, the director.
The ophthalmologist surgeon and his assistant are a speck great: a bit 'mad scientist, seasoned with assorted junk and smelly. A dip in the films of series B, a bit 'Cronenberg, a little' Carpenter ...
The sequence of the meeting with the doctor who discovered the powers of the Precog in the greenhouse of her: between plants and animated dreamlike delusions, revelations and new secrets.
Escape and crossing the atrium in the mall, with the Precog Agatha continues to have visions, and suggests the next move to Anderton (although in the film, at some point, it was said that the Precog could provide only bloody events, how can it be murder ...).
The symphony accompanying the images read the Precog, or the investigation process itself, in which Anderton tries to figure out where the murder is committed ...
short, well worth seeing "Minority Report"? Definitely yes. It's worth it because it is in any case, a film made
with care and skill. My observations are those of a passionate sci-fi look with a magnifying glass, the classic nit. This film should be approached as if it were a thriller or noir like many others. Then give her best, even without resorting to science fiction, cyberpunk, and so on.
14.10.2002 - a few thoughts
more I read other reviews about the movie, I spoke with other people ... I found a couple of my shots had gunpowder wet: more than anything else was I misunderstand, or rather not pay attention to differences between forecast and premonition of the future. It was not the only one to do it, but I do not justify this at all. So it is not true that the Precog see the future, indeed. I'm only able to perceive a crime, be it murder or suicide. It has nothing to do with the vision of the future seems more the ability to "hear" the evil and throw him into a kind of nightmare. So it is true that Anderton can change his destiny. Potentially is a murderer, but no one can stop him not to be, without it being a paradox. Indeed. A premonition is not a prediction of the future. For this reason, Precog not give certainties to the problem moves from the practical to the ethical. Since the Precog not foresee the future, it is necessary that the arrest occurs when the murder is being committed, not a moment before. That's why the only stop in which witness is in extremis. From what takes place seems to be an exception, reasoning above should be the norm. The "minority report" should serve only to control an event, however, probably bloody. The arrest would take place anyway fragrance of crime. It 's so? We do not know. If we admit that the film should be seen from a position slightly different, but that's a patina of plausibility greater. Spielberg is not a fool any.
0 comments:
Post a Comment