In 2002, Spielberg directed the second installment of his "Fugitive Trilogy," The Minority Report.
In this science fiction film starring Tom Cruise, Spielberg combines his wild ideas with the concept of the original novel, based on modern industrial technology, to create a highly technological and untrue future society.
Looking at the cool and real transportation and various intelligent case-handling equipment in the movie, people have to be amazed by Spielberg's imagination and creativity.
However, as a member of the "Fugitive Trilogy", the reputation of "Minority Report" is not good. The film currently has a total of 110,000 reviews on Douban, scoring 7.8 points. A total of 480,000 reviews on IMDB were given a score of 7.6.
Although the rating is not low, this "strong combination" of Spielberg and Tom Cruise is definitely a "bad film" in the hearts of many audiences. At that time, some people put the responsibility on Spielberg's head, believing that his over-commercial operation led to the depth of the subject that should have been able to dig well into a popcorn movie with "heavy special effects and light plot".
<h1 class= "pgc-h-arrow-right" > Spielberg cold, not necessarily because of "over-commercialization" but deep</h1>
Weaker plots are indeed a fatal flaw of Minority Reports, but it would be inappropriate to blame the flaws on over-commercialization.
Commercial operation generally refers to the use of a large number of special effects and action scenes in the film, and attracts more audiences through these stimulating elements.
For a science fiction film, special effects and action scenes are essential components in themselves, and if their excessive proportions cause the plot to be compressed, thus affecting the depth of the film, it seems a bit of a strong word.
Maybe the fierce fights and dazzling special effects can't show the depth of the content, but these elements are to science fiction films like the costumes to the actors, and we think that it will affect the connotation of the character because a prop, a costume or a makeup has been with the actor for too long?
No, we will only give the character a first impression based on the costume, and then speculate on his connotations according to his lines and actions.
The character's lines and actions can correspond to the plot setting of the movie. Therefore, for the science fiction film "Minority Report", the special effects and action shots are not the "culprits" that make people feel that there is no depth, and it is true that the plot is too weak to make the audience think deeply.
It is hard to imagine that a big director like Spielberg would direct a science fiction film with no depth in the plot.
After all, there was the glory of "Artificial Intelligence" and "E.T Alien" before, and then there was the success of "Ready Player One". This means that when he directed Minority Report, he did not understand how to intersperse deep content in science fiction films, nor did he have a decline in "skill" because of his age.
So, it has to be wondered whether this adaptation of the short story of the same name, "Minority Report", really has no deep content worth thinking about, or whether it has been seen as a popcorn movie because of the influence of Tom Cruise's personal charm.
When revisiting this 2002 sci-fi film with the above questions, you will find that behind the special effects and the aura of Atango, there are actually three propositions worth thinking about in the plot of the movie.
Although Spielberg sets clues in the dialogue of the characters to guide the audience to think about the corresponding propositions, it is believed that many people have not been able to think too carefully when they follow the perspective of Atango and feel the sensory stimulation brought by various special effects and action scenes.
Which three propositions did Spielberg put in the movie? This needs to start from the beginning of the movie.
<h1 class= "pgc-h-arrow-right" > proposition 1: If it can be prevented before it happens, then how to define crime? </h1>
At the beginning of the film, Spielberg uses a montage shot to show us a flashback clip of a crime scene. And through a series of cool gestures by Atango, we are revealed how the prophecy system for crime prevention works.
Because of the prophecy system, many murders can be stopped before they occur, which seems to have a very positive effect on crime prevention. But the system also has a paradoxical flaw: if the criminal has not committed a crime, is it "overcorrected" to arrest the suspect based on prophecy? After all, the crime has not yet begun, and it seems unfair to convict it according to the subjective consciousness of the prophet.
To this end, the investigator played by Kling Farrell was entrusted by the Ministry of Justice to investigate the crime prevention system, and once it was found that the system was unreliable, it would grasp the evidence and make the operation of crime prevention a thing of the past.
Through the Investigation of the Ministry of Justice, the film pushes the seemingly perfect crime prevention system to the forefront, in order to make the audience think about whether this kind of "precautionary" behavior is reasonable.
Even in the words of Klin Farrell, he bluntly said that this crime prevention system is "legally flawed".
But because the efficacy of the crime prevention system is evident in the film, and Atango's indignant arguments, it is easy for the audience to think that the Justice Department represented by Kling Farrell is deliberately trying to suppress this nascent power institution.
Kling: Isn't it a contradiction that if we stop it, the future will change?
Atango: The fact that you prevent something from happening doesn't change the fact that it happens.
The tit-for-tat remarks of the two men directly put the proposition of how to define crime with prophecy in front of the audience. However, this philosophical debate did not bear fruit, and the rich dialogue between the two protagonists was also stolen by the thrilling escape of Atango.
Although the film actually advances the plot with the question of how to define the crime throughout the film, the ending of the film does not give a good answer. Brother Atang used escape to prove that the crime prevention system can also go wrong, but it cannot prove that the crime prevention system has no practical value. Because foresaw that Brother Tang's murder was a mistake, he could completely deny the previous criminal verdict, and brother Tang's weight was heavy enough to affect the judicial system?
If a secondary judgment is added after subduing the suspect, will it be more reasonable to analyze the suspect's behavior pattern in recent times and then define the crime than to "one-size-fits-all" identification with the system or deny the system?
Because Atangge's ending is too deliberate, "Proposition One" cannot complete logical autonomy and is difficult to guide the audience to think deeply. But "Proposition One" itself is a very interesting issue of the rule of law, and it can also be said that Spielberg did not set a deep meaning for the film.
<h1 class= "pgc-h-arrow-right" > proposition two: Can a perfect system be enforced by imperfect people? </h1>
In the debate between Kling and Atango, in addition to the proposition of how to define crime, it also involves a discussion of the perfect system.
Crime prevention systems are perfect in theory, but they cannot be operated by people. The prophet is a person, the operator is a person, and even the whole organization is made up of different people. There are all kinds of unstable factors in people, and if imperfect people implement a perfect system, will the result be 100% flawless?
The film gives the answer through the "blackening" of Rama, the supreme leader of the crime prevention system. In order to prevent the prophet's mother from taking back her daughter, Rama hired a killer to murder the mother. Because of the existence of a crime prevention system, this killer was subdued before committing the crime. But Rama, dressed in the same costume as the killer, killed the mother after the police left.
Since the Prophet had a criminal flashback memory, Jean Rama's actions were considered at the time to be the Prophet's criminal flashback memory of the previous killer. Rama, familiar with the crime prevention system, accomplished a perfect crime.
This proves that a perfect system, under the control of imperfect people, can produce perfect good and perfect evil.
Compared with "Proposition One", "Proposition TWO" has a higher degree of completion in the movie, and even supplements "Proposition I" to a certain extent. However, due to the "blackening" of Rama, it belongs to the suspense of the movie, which makes "proposition two" have to be revealed at the end of the movie.
After following Atango for 100 minutes of "The Great Escape", the audience can no longer wait to witness the end of his hand-bladed enemy, and this slightly serious discussion about the perfect system and the imperfect executor appears at this time, which is difficult to arouse the audience's interest.
Therefore, when Rama chooses to swallow a gun and commit suicide to defend his last dignity, everyone will only feel that he deserves it, rather than thinking about why Atang Ge set up such a bureau to make Rama realize his mistake and commit suicide.
Because of the anticipation of Atangge's revenge, the influence of "Proposition TWO" is greatly reduced, and it is difficult for the audience to have the impulse to think. However, the philosophical ideas contained in "Proposition II" are actually quite worthy of in-depth study, and the thinking derived from them is also deep enough.
<h1 class = "pgc-h-arrow-right" > proposition three: Can you resist stress when you enter adversity? </h1>
The title " Minority Report " refers to a special case of the prophesied criminal system. When three prophets do not agree on the prophesied results of the same crime, the minority situation is called the minority report. Because the appearance of minority reports is a threat to the prophesitic criminal system, as soon as a minority report survives, the system immediately deletes them, and there will be no record except for the prophet himself who generated the report.
In order to prove his innocence, Atangge decided to resist adversity, kidnapped the Prophet and obtained his own minority report.
In order not to be arrested, he fought with his former teammates who were fully armed with his bare hands.
In order not to be caught by the system, he risked blindness to change his eyes, eat moldy food during the period, and suffer various abuses from electric shocks.
However, after rescuing the Prophet, he found that he had no minority report at all, and that he was destined to "kill" a stranger. But he was not discouraged, but followed the clues to follow the vine and finally found the truth behind the scenes.
The adversity that Brother Atang faces in the movie is actually unbearable for ordinary people. The film hopes that through the encounter of Atang Ge, the audience should think about what mentality should be used to overcome difficulties in the face of difficulties, and thus constitute proposition three.
However, because the protagonist of AtangGe's victory aura is too heavy, the dilemma of "Proposition Three" has been hit by "dimensionality reduction". After all, compared to the various "impossible tasks" that Brother Tang has set in "Mission Impossible", the dilemma in "Minority Report" is simply "child's play".
From the discussion of the three propositions, it is not difficult to see that the performance of Brother Tang as the protagonist directly affects the possibility of the audience to think about the proposition.
If Atango did not have ethan Hunt's aura, would everyone feel the hardships of fighting against adversity in his masochistic process? If it is not to see the victorious posture of Atang Ge's justice, will everyone think more about the relationship between the system and the executor? If it weren't for Atango's hasty ending, would there be a more perfect conclusion about how to define crime?
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" > "aura" is too strong</h1>
So, the plot of Minority Report is too weak, and I think it has to do with tom Cruise's "protagonist aura" being too dazzling.
Because of the existence of "Brother Atang", many people regard "Minority Report" as a sci-fi action film with a big male protagonist, ignoring the ethical discussion issues set by Spielberg in the film, resulting in the lack of depth of the film after watching the film.
Mention Tom Cruise, and everyone will inevitably think of the charming agent Ethan Hunt who went on an adventure while soaking up beautiful women in "Mission Impossible".
Tom Cruise's handsome image and superb acting skills not only "brought Ethan Hunt to life", but also made the "Mission Impossible" series a world-renowned movie ID.
However, because Ethan Hunt's image is too deeply rooted in people's hearts, the audience locked the impression of Atang Ge in "Mission Impossible", making Tom Cruise feel like Ethan Hunt no matter what he plays.
In fact, before starring in "Mission Impossible", Tom Cruise also had many classic masterpieces, such as "Top Gun", "Rain Man" and "Night Interview with vampires", etc., the image is varied and wide-ranging, and will not be stuck in a role.
But since starring in "Mission Impossible", action movies seem to have become his fixed label, and most of the film and television works he has participated in are mainly action movies. Although he also starred in "Magnolia" and "Mr. Sweetheart" after "Mission Impossible 1", two of the best works that made him nominated for the Oscar. And with the increase of age, Brother Tang not only did not make achievements in "literary drama", but more and more limited himself to the genre of action movies.
Is it because Tom Cruise's acting skills began to "degenerate" after Mission Impossible? Obviously not, take the Minority Report as an example.
After Atangge found the suspect suspected of kidnapping his son and learned that the suspect had "committed the crime", as a policeman, he faced the choice of shooting revenge or arresting the prisoner according to the judicial process. Brother Tang uses subtle eyes and expression changes to express this process of inner torment to the extreme, and the superb acting skills visible to the naked eye are beyond doubt.
However, since becoming a producer in the "Mission Impossible" series, Brother Tang is no longer satisfied with contributing different acting skills as an actor, but chooses to continuously strengthen his personal style in the direction of action movies. The advantage of this is naturally to form a distinct personal character, so that the audience can think of him for the first time when they come into contact with similar action movies.
But everything has advantages and disadvantages, and this practice will also limit Brother Tang's play path, and it is easy for him to play all the roles as one. At the same time, in order to accommodate the actors with distinctive characteristics, the director will also make certain adaptations in the plot, so that the actors can better play their own advantages.
So, even if the Minority Report has 3 propositions worth digging into, the combination of Spielberg and Atango may not be able to produce a chemical reaction. Although Spielberg did not have "Jiang Lang's talent exhausted", in the face of Atang Ge's powerful aura, his talent still seemed to be "not enough to see".
What's more interesting is that in 2005, the two of them worked together again on the movie "World War", and the result was even worse, which seems to confirm the above view. Since then, the two have not cooperated and have been fine with each other.
Still, I think Minority Report is a sci-fi film that still has the potential to tap into, so you might as well take a look.
I'm a wooden branch of the dangerous building, what do you think of Spielberg's "Minority Report" cooperated with Atango? Do you think that Brother Tang's personal style is too strong to affect his play path? Feel free to leave your opinion below.