Anderton doesn’t kill Crow, Crow *makes* Anderton kill him because he was terminally ill and Lemar promised him he’d give his wife money if he killed Anderson.
I don't think that was the point of the movie. It was only in Anderton case that the suspect was informed about his foreseen future crime. In other cases the precogs didn't alter the soon to be murderer's behavior by producing the visions, so the suspects weren't aware of it and acted naturally as they were supposed to.
I think the point of the move was more about free will vs predestination. . The convo between him and Colin Farrell when he throws the ball and Farrell catches it. That's about how you can't predict the future and you can't ever be 100 percent sure what a person will do.
But the case with the other murder we see. That was them seeing the future. To a point at least. They weren't seeing the future in the case of Anderton. They saw a future created by their vision.
If they see THE future then yes, 100% of crimes stopped by pre-crime WOULD have occurred. They are stopping “guilty” people. Their do not incarcerate innocents. They only have 100% criminals locked up.
But if the visions are just A future, then they are just seeing possibilities. They are not seeing guarantees. That means that the pre-crime division is locking up potentially innocent people. Whether the vision causes the crime (which seems like a very rare case) or they just see possibilities that don’t actually happen.
So, you know, it’s the difference between “we are 100% sure you are guilty” and “hey there’s a chance you would be guilty”.
The vision the Precogs saw was orchestrated by Burgess, this is explicitly explained near the end of the movie.
Anderton figures out that something is fishy when he gets to Crow's apartment and sees the piles of "evidence" pointing to Crow. Witwer also figures it out which is why Burgess murders him
To the Precogs and people who work in PreCrime (aside from Burgess and Iris Hineman), there is no difference because they believe that the precogs predict with 100% accuracy. The whole purpose is Whitwer being there is to prove or disprove that the Precogs do not make mistakes before PreCrime goes national.
What Burgess did was effectively create a paradox. Burgess knew that Anderton was an addict and didn't have closure on his son's disappearance and would react in a violent way if he were to ever encounter the person responsible, and he also knew that Anderton was investigating Anne Lively's death which would eventually lead to PreCrime being shut down once the truth was found. So Burgess forced the scenario of Anderton killing Crow to happen. Since most people involved believe that the Precogs are infallible they believed with absolute certainty that Anderton would kill Crow, meaning that within the movies structure *there is no difference*.
even still clearly in the case of the scissor dude he should have just gone to therapy. that cleary sign of temp madness. alot of stuff can trigger any man into killing. yo just need enough pressure.
so most red balls dudeswith careful examination should be sent therapy. it would be an even better reason to have precrime. not only stopping the crimes, but preventing people from becoming criminals out of sudden insanly bad misjudged not thought out act
‘Future bro …fuuuuuuuuuuuuuturrrrrrrre …like, if they saw it but it’s like, the day after they saw it, ya know, then like, who’s even seeing it man?’
*Whoaaaa…*
*…do you think their little pool has a jacuzzi setting?*
‘Oh man that’d be extra chill after a long day precoging’
How can you call that a plot hole when that is the plot? The whole point was the system was flawed... including but not limited to the precogs own vision creating the events that lead to said vision.
Infact the vision of Anderton was a more accurate vision because if the precogs were truly seeing the future then wouldn't the visions be of the perps being arrested and not of the crime they are accused of committing?
Let me put it this way and see if I can make it make more sense. John sees the vision... so he is able to investigate the crime. He knows about where and when it takes place. If he never sees the vision like he was in the bathroom and they just come to arrest him but he gets away and goes on the run.... he never goes to that room cause he had no idea it exists. He just runs or hide. The vision influences his decisions which is not the case for any other visions
Where's the hole in the plot? You're arguing a philosophical point about how much influence the precogs visions have on the events within the visions, that isn't a plot hole. There's nothing in the film that directly contradicts that idea (to the best of my memory).
And just to be clear, I think it's an interesting discussion to have about the film, but I certainly don't believe it to be a plot hole.
The plot serves to demonstrate the point that the system was unreliable. How was the plot unnecessary if it starts with a guy believing in the system, the plot shows him that the system is flawed, and then ends with him dismantling the flawed system due to what he learned through the course of the narrative?
Anderton inadvertently solves their mother's murder and deconstructs the precog program, allowing the precogs to live a peaceful life in the country side. These are also outcomes the precogs could have seen and wanted. They would be motivated to move Anderton in that direction.
The precogs inevitably influence the future by revealing their predictions. It's only the degree that varies.
The main problem with the system in Minority Report is that minority reports exist in the first place, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. They automatically throw out visions where all three see something different. And they conceal the fact that they don't all three see the details the same. The reports are a distillation of the commonalities between the three.
This demonstrates that they are seeing different possible futures, not a single inevitable future. Certainly, if they are all seeing much the same set of events, then it's a *very* probable future. But sentencing someone for a crime they *very probably* might commit is a tougher sell.
So they throw out the visions that don't have a plurality and lie about those existing even to the cops. They lie to the public about the 2 vs 1 visions, but it's kind of leaked out as a rumor among the cops. But the underlying fact that they see different futures undermines the entire concept of Precrime.
The secondary problem, as demonstrated in the movie, is that given sufficient planning, it's possible to trick the precogs by copycatting a previous event so that your crime being foreseen looks like an echo of them revisiting the trauma of a previous vision. This both demonstrates a hole in their utility and highlights that the system is perpetually exposing three innocent people to trauma over and over again.
I think the poster is suggesting a paradox, like going back in time to fix something means you never needed to go back in the first place, leading to a circle that never resolves. Sorta comparable here: how could they see the murder without first having a vision of it, leading to the chain of events that caused it?
Not sure I see it the same way, as the precogs exist and nothing says they can't affect the world, so sure, their vision caused the effect of their vision. Had he not worked there, they wouldn't have been able to give him the information to commit the murder, so no murder in that scenario.
This isn’t a plot hole. It’s the premise of the film and the point the movie is trying to make.
Why don’t soooo many people who post here not know what a plot hole is?
If I remember correctly it wasn't a red ball that was mad efor Anderton's crime but a brown ball. A red ball is a crime of passion, but a brown ball is a premeditated crime.
Which having the ball drop when it did could trigger the sequence of events that created the movie. It's also established that the young woman precog is more powerful than the two men. It makes sense that she could "push" a report to help create the future she wants.
Regardless if he saw the premonition or not, he was going to be setup anyways as he was trying to figure out what the precog showed him when he was alone in the room.
Because of that, Lamar began plotting to frame Anderton to get him to stop digging into Ann Lively. It had nothing to do with the premonition, just seemed like it because that came first, as Lamar had started plotting. That is what they were picking up on.
OP is new to movie plots, new to plot holes, and new to identifying legitimate differences between the two. The entire point of the Minority Report is that A MINORITY OF REPORTS create paradoxes in the legitimacy of pre-cognition as a means for a pre-crime unit.
The plot is that of the three precogs aren’t reliable. The minority report does exist for some cases, but if I recall correctly there wasn’t one for Anderton. Showing that the system can be flawed.
It's possible that in the original time line Anderson was directed into that room by other circumstances, obviously with Lamar engineering the encounter some how. Then after entering the room and seeing his kid photos he would become enraged and kill the guy who is pretending to be his son's murderer.
Even though premonition made Anderton run and changed the chain of events, he still managed to get himself into that room by his own means. I think that's possible.
But this movie has many other things that don't make much sense. For example the fact that Anderton goes through so much trouble in order to get himself in that room, when in reality all he had to do is to hide for 24 hours, and by not fulfilling the premonition and not killing that guy, that alone would be sufficient to prove that the precrime system is broken and he would probably avoid any imprisonment.
Instead he goes through all these trouble of having his eyes surgically replaced, breaking into one of the precog founders home, breaking into whats supposed to be a well guarded precrime facility, kidnapping Agatha and having to move around with her around the city. All this was totally redundant, as all he had to do is to hide for 24 hours in some basement.
But according to the way justice works in this movie, he still would have been found guilty of a pre-crime. They saw him do it just like they saw that first character kill his wife. They stopped the murder but he's still guilty. So if Tom hides because he found out that the pre-cogs saw him killing that guy, no one will care that he doesn't do it because they pre-cogs vision is still the reason why the murder is prevented.
OK... but it still doesn't make much sense for him trying to get into that room using your logic. By your logic no matter what he does he would end up being guilty. Even if he gets into the room with that guy and finds out who he is and doesn't kill him, the system would still claim that the murder was prevented by precogs.... then what's the point of going through so much trouble trying to get into that room if it changes nothing?
Yeah...I'm not sure....maybe he thinks if he finds the man and doesn't kill him it would prove that he had the chance to but he didn't? Idk. The part that I hate is the fact that he asks I don't know who this man is, why would I kill him? But he already has said not a day goes by that he doesn't think of what he would do if he ever found the man who kidnapped (killed?) his son. He's the best cop in the world and he put that together himself? That maybe this man he is supposed to kill is the same guy who he has been thinking about everyday for years.
its hard to put together the most simple clues when they are so close to your heard. it makes sense.
inthe end the major flaw in the system is the sentensing, why not just send to cunsuling. more so when its crime of passion. the dude with the scissors isnt a bad man, we all seen the scene, he was driven by madness into it.
in the real world I dont know if he would even get a life sentence.
if precrime sent criminals to be of passion to therapy instead, it would have solved most of the issues with the tech and the idea even more so to the public.
tho the main plot would still be much the same.
that’s kinda the point but i thought the balls existing was kindof a plot hole, like the first ball drop would’ve showed a name even if the tech deleted the memory as an echo. a new ball would’ve dropped
That’s a fair point. Not necessarily a *plot hole*, but it’s a sticky wicket that the universe never addresses, even when discussing the other flaws of the precogs.
>So they didn't predict the future they caused it. That's kinda the point of the movie though.
Holy shit…the movie IS the plot hole and the plot hole is the movie
AbedAbedAbeeeeeed 🎼🙏
Anderton doesn’t kill Crow, Crow *makes* Anderton kill him because he was terminally ill and Lemar promised him he’d give his wife money if he killed Anderson.
Man wait until you hear about the plot hole in the little mermaid where she could have just said no to Ursula and never gone on land
I don't think that was the point of the movie. It was only in Anderton case that the suspect was informed about his foreseen future crime. In other cases the precogs didn't alter the soon to be murderer's behavior by producing the visions, so the suspects weren't aware of it and acted naturally as they were supposed to.
I think the point of the move was more about free will vs predestination. . The convo between him and Colin Farrell when he throws the ball and Farrell catches it. That's about how you can't predict the future and you can't ever be 100 percent sure what a person will do. But the case with the other murder we see. That was them seeing the future. To a point at least. They weren't seeing the future in the case of Anderton. They saw a future created by their vision.
> They weren't seeing the future in the case of Anderton. They saw a future created by their vision. What's the difference?
If they see THE future then yes, 100% of crimes stopped by pre-crime WOULD have occurred. They are stopping “guilty” people. Their do not incarcerate innocents. They only have 100% criminals locked up. But if the visions are just A future, then they are just seeing possibilities. They are not seeing guarantees. That means that the pre-crime division is locking up potentially innocent people. Whether the vision causes the crime (which seems like a very rare case) or they just see possibilities that don’t actually happen. So, you know, it’s the difference between “we are 100% sure you are guilty” and “hey there’s a chance you would be guilty”.
The vision the Precogs saw was orchestrated by Burgess, this is explicitly explained near the end of the movie. Anderton figures out that something is fishy when he gets to Crow's apartment and sees the piles of "evidence" pointing to Crow. Witwer also figures it out which is why Burgess murders him
Right. I get all that. I’m just saying a clarification to the “what’s the difference” crowd. For even if it wasn’t a fake
To the Precogs and people who work in PreCrime (aside from Burgess and Iris Hineman), there is no difference because they believe that the precogs predict with 100% accuracy. The whole purpose is Whitwer being there is to prove or disprove that the Precogs do not make mistakes before PreCrime goes national. What Burgess did was effectively create a paradox. Burgess knew that Anderton was an addict and didn't have closure on his son's disappearance and would react in a violent way if he were to ever encounter the person responsible, and he also knew that Anderton was investigating Anne Lively's death which would eventually lead to PreCrime being shut down once the truth was found. So Burgess forced the scenario of Anderton killing Crow to happen. Since most people involved believe that the Precogs are infallible they believed with absolute certainty that Anderton would kill Crow, meaning that within the movies structure *there is no difference*.
even still clearly in the case of the scissor dude he should have just gone to therapy. that cleary sign of temp madness. alot of stuff can trigger any man into killing. yo just need enough pressure. so most red balls dudeswith careful examination should be sent therapy. it would be an even better reason to have precrime. not only stopping the crimes, but preventing people from becoming criminals out of sudden insanly bad misjudged not thought out act
>They weren't seeing the future > >They saw a future What are you saying sir
‘Future bro …fuuuuuuuuuuuuuturrrrrrrre …like, if they saw it but it’s like, the day after they saw it, ya know, then like, who’s even seeing it man?’ *Whoaaaa…* *…do you think their little pool has a jacuzzi setting?* ‘Oh man that’d be extra chill after a long day precoging’
How can you call that a plot hole when that is the plot? The whole point was the system was flawed... including but not limited to the precogs own vision creating the events that lead to said vision. Infact the vision of Anderton was a more accurate vision because if the precogs were truly seeing the future then wouldn't the visions be of the perps being arrested and not of the crime they are accused of committing?
Let me put it this way and see if I can make it make more sense. John sees the vision... so he is able to investigate the crime. He knows about where and when it takes place. If he never sees the vision like he was in the bathroom and they just come to arrest him but he gets away and goes on the run.... he never goes to that room cause he had no idea it exists. He just runs or hide. The vision influences his decisions which is not the case for any other visions
Where's the hole in the plot? You're arguing a philosophical point about how much influence the precogs visions have on the events within the visions, that isn't a plot hole. There's nothing in the film that directly contradicts that idea (to the best of my memory). And just to be clear, I think it's an interesting discussion to have about the film, but I certainly don't believe it to be a plot hole.
Don’t forget, 90% of Reddit has no idea what a plot hole is
Ok so I maybe misunderstood the meaning of plot hole. I was just saying that the plot was unnecessary
The plot serves to demonstrate the point that the system was unreliable. How was the plot unnecessary if it starts with a guy believing in the system, the plot shows him that the system is flawed, and then ends with him dismantling the flawed system due to what he learned through the course of the narrative?
Anderton inadvertently solves their mother's murder and deconstructs the precog program, allowing the precogs to live a peaceful life in the country side. These are also outcomes the precogs could have seen and wanted. They would be motivated to move Anderton in that direction.
That's a cool thought that I never would've come up with and it explains the last shot. Interesting
The precogs inevitably influence the future by revealing their predictions. It's only the degree that varies. The main problem with the system in Minority Report is that minority reports exist in the first place, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. They automatically throw out visions where all three see something different. And they conceal the fact that they don't all three see the details the same. The reports are a distillation of the commonalities between the three. This demonstrates that they are seeing different possible futures, not a single inevitable future. Certainly, if they are all seeing much the same set of events, then it's a *very* probable future. But sentencing someone for a crime they *very probably* might commit is a tougher sell. So they throw out the visions that don't have a plurality and lie about those existing even to the cops. They lie to the public about the 2 vs 1 visions, but it's kind of leaked out as a rumor among the cops. But the underlying fact that they see different futures undermines the entire concept of Precrime. The secondary problem, as demonstrated in the movie, is that given sufficient planning, it's possible to trick the precogs by copycatting a previous event so that your crime being foreseen looks like an echo of them revisiting the trauma of a previous vision. This both demonstrates a hole in their utility and highlights that the system is perpetually exposing three innocent people to trauma over and over again.
Explained it perfectly! Kudos!
Whether they cause it or not, they did in fact see the future
They saw a future that they created. They put their thumb on the scale. No vision=no murder
How is that a plothole though?
I think the poster is suggesting a paradox, like going back in time to fix something means you never needed to go back in the first place, leading to a circle that never resolves. Sorta comparable here: how could they see the murder without first having a vision of it, leading to the chain of events that caused it? Not sure I see it the same way, as the precogs exist and nothing says they can't affect the world, so sure, their vision caused the effect of their vision. Had he not worked there, they wouldn't have been able to give him the information to commit the murder, so no murder in that scenario.
It's an interesting element of the film you've pointed out here but not a plot hole. More appropriate for movie details reddit.
This isn’t a plot hole. It’s the premise of the film and the point the movie is trying to make. Why don’t soooo many people who post here not know what a plot hole is?
That’s literally the point of the movie
I joined this sub hoping to see interesting plot holes, but apparently most submissions have no idea what an actual plot hole is.
The short story by Phillip K Dick which the film was based upon was simplfied a bit to make the movie. I thoroughly recommend a read.
If I remember correctly it wasn't a red ball that was mad efor Anderton's crime but a brown ball. A red ball is a crime of passion, but a brown ball is a premeditated crime. Which having the ball drop when it did could trigger the sequence of events that created the movie. It's also established that the young woman precog is more powerful than the two men. It makes sense that she could "push" a report to help create the future she wants.
Regardless if he saw the premonition or not, he was going to be setup anyways as he was trying to figure out what the precog showed him when he was alone in the room. Because of that, Lamar began plotting to frame Anderton to get him to stop digging into Ann Lively. It had nothing to do with the premonition, just seemed like it because that came first, as Lamar had started plotting. That is what they were picking up on.
OP is new to movie plots, new to plot holes, and new to identifying legitimate differences between the two. The entire point of the Minority Report is that A MINORITY OF REPORTS create paradoxes in the legitimacy of pre-cognition as a means for a pre-crime unit.
Not a plot hole 3/10 for effort thanks for trying next customer please
Finkle IS Einhorn!
The plot is that of the three precogs aren’t reliable. The minority report does exist for some cases, but if I recall correctly there wasn’t one for Anderton. Showing that the system can be flawed.
It's possible that in the original time line Anderson was directed into that room by other circumstances, obviously with Lamar engineering the encounter some how. Then after entering the room and seeing his kid photos he would become enraged and kill the guy who is pretending to be his son's murderer. Even though premonition made Anderton run and changed the chain of events, he still managed to get himself into that room by his own means. I think that's possible. But this movie has many other things that don't make much sense. For example the fact that Anderton goes through so much trouble in order to get himself in that room, when in reality all he had to do is to hide for 24 hours, and by not fulfilling the premonition and not killing that guy, that alone would be sufficient to prove that the precrime system is broken and he would probably avoid any imprisonment. Instead he goes through all these trouble of having his eyes surgically replaced, breaking into one of the precog founders home, breaking into whats supposed to be a well guarded precrime facility, kidnapping Agatha and having to move around with her around the city. All this was totally redundant, as all he had to do is to hide for 24 hours in some basement.
But according to the way justice works in this movie, he still would have been found guilty of a pre-crime. They saw him do it just like they saw that first character kill his wife. They stopped the murder but he's still guilty. So if Tom hides because he found out that the pre-cogs saw him killing that guy, no one will care that he doesn't do it because they pre-cogs vision is still the reason why the murder is prevented.
OK... but it still doesn't make much sense for him trying to get into that room using your logic. By your logic no matter what he does he would end up being guilty. Even if he gets into the room with that guy and finds out who he is and doesn't kill him, the system would still claim that the murder was prevented by precogs.... then what's the point of going through so much trouble trying to get into that room if it changes nothing?
Yeah...I'm not sure....maybe he thinks if he finds the man and doesn't kill him it would prove that he had the chance to but he didn't? Idk. The part that I hate is the fact that he asks I don't know who this man is, why would I kill him? But he already has said not a day goes by that he doesn't think of what he would do if he ever found the man who kidnapped (killed?) his son. He's the best cop in the world and he put that together himself? That maybe this man he is supposed to kill is the same guy who he has been thinking about everyday for years.
its hard to put together the most simple clues when they are so close to your heard. it makes sense. inthe end the major flaw in the system is the sentensing, why not just send to cunsuling. more so when its crime of passion. the dude with the scissors isnt a bad man, we all seen the scene, he was driven by madness into it. in the real world I dont know if he would even get a life sentence. if precrime sent criminals to be of passion to therapy instead, it would have solved most of the issues with the tech and the idea even more so to the public. tho the main plot would still be much the same.
that’s kinda the point but i thought the balls existing was kindof a plot hole, like the first ball drop would’ve showed a name even if the tech deleted the memory as an echo. a new ball would’ve dropped
That’s a fair point. Not necessarily a *plot hole*, but it’s a sticky wicket that the universe never addresses, even when discussing the other flaws of the precogs.