It is worth five stars. Personal evaluation: This is the most abundant film and television work that I have seen in the past two decades, but at the same time, it is logically smooth and silky. In this movie, you will see a future with cyberpunk elements, exploration of future intervention, dystopian thoughts, investigation of motives for murder, sci-fi action movies, suspenseful crime thrillers, benign reasoning bridges, father-family relations, and self-selection. Various classic movie themes or elements, such as work and personal, morality and ethics of human nature and tools. At the same time, it comes with multiple reversals in reason. More than two hours of hearty and vivid impressions, it is actually a top seven movies at the beginning of the century. excellent work.
Many people have used "holes" in their film reviews, suggesting that there are many logical problems with this movie. But it really doesn't make any logical sense, because its main theme is to discuss a paradox: if the murder is prevented before the moment when the murder is about to be determined, then whether this attempted murder is convicted of homicide makes sense. This pseudo-paradox itself requires dialectical discussion. If according to the predictions of the predictor in the film, this person confirms the killing, and after we prevent the killing, he confirms that he did not kill, then this prediction is meaningless. It seems to be a reverse grandfather paradox.
But the reality is that Spielberg used a very clever way to guide the audience's inclination, so that the so-called loopholes collapsed on their own. It can also be seen from the film that these unmistakable predictions will indeed happen without intervention, even if this prediction is prevented. Therefore, the result obtained by the prophet is more like an act of predicting killing intent, and has nothing to do with the future. Based on this point, let’s discuss this crime prevention system again. After putting aside the problem of principle, we can use a series of events such as whether the system can be intervened by humans and whether the existence of the predictor violates morality, and finally the whole process of the ending of the system is obtained. There is good reason and evidence. The talent of the director is the impeccable integration of the overall structure of the film invisibly, and it is inclusive. (Actually, from the beginning, the number of people caught in bed has been roughly counted)
If there are any shortcomings in the movie, you will really be unable to think of any fatal or major shortcomings for a while. The only thing I feel regretful is that the film is a bit longer, which caused this title to appear very late, but it loses its effect after more than half of it. Long also has the advantage of being long. It could have been finished with a desperate ending like "Twelve Monkeys", or a semi-open style for the audience to play. But the movie literally lasted for more than forty minutes, a wave of reversal, and a happy ending. This process is not procrastinating, because the reasoning and the previous foreshadowing are all in the last forty minutes. The ending of the villain was not so cool. Instead, he returned to the carbine and came to a "thinking", and in the end everyone was happy ending.
The part where the organ stopped was so cool.
View more about Minority Report reviews
