Come up with a discussion question about the movie and answer it in a CCEJ paragraph. Obviously you will not quote directly from the film, but you should paraphrase evidence to back up your claim.
REMEMBER -- CLAIMS SHOULD BE FOCUSED AND SPECIFIC.
THEY ARE THE FOUNDATION OF YOUR ARGUMENT.
REMEMBER -- CLAIMS SHOULD BE FOCUSED AND SPECIFIC.
THEY ARE THE FOUNDATION OF YOUR ARGUMENT.
If John Anderton is able to prove the system wrong should the Minority Report department let everyone free?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion if John is able to be free or proves the system wrong then so should all the other criminals held captive. Most of the criminals captured haven't actually committed a crime. For instance when the detective came to visit John he made a point to question the moral of their security system due to the fact that many of the criminals had not actually been a criminal . Also the guy who was about to kill his wife had not actually killed her but it is believed he would've not stopped trying to kill her had the detectives not walked in on him and saved his wife's life. However, John is a supposed criminal yet he is on the run and is taking liberties to prove the system wrong. Therefore, it would only be fair to give the other "criminals" freedom as well.Also, the criminals brains have been controlled so they probably won't remember anything which might help them start over and be free.
I strongly agree with Briona if the system is proven to be flawed then that means that none of the people he actually arrested could be guility. When John went to go see the lady who made pre-crime she proved this point by saying if American people found out that there was even an ounce of reasonable doubt the whole system would be flawed. This is what made john wonder and want to invesigate the system because if it is flawed then all the cases of murder would be in valid and they would have no evidence
DeleteI also agree with Briona because when John found out about the Minority Report he thought about how many innocent people he put away. If the the lady who made the pre-crime had told them about the Minority Report I think the system would of went a different way. Some of those innocent people wouldn't be put to sleep
DeleteI disagree, John Anderton was framed for knowing too much. John was set up only after he observed the tape of the reoccurring vision that kept getting erased. After the pre-cog grabbed John and asked him "do you see" he realized that the images meant something more. The creator of the Pre-crime unit knew that John knew too much and therefore framed him. Although other prisoners may not have a minority report, it may quite well be a coincidence. John was framed because of who he was and what he knew.
DeleteIf John Anderton were able to prove the pre-crime system to be corrupted, it's hard to decide if people should be let free. If John Anderton were able to prove the system to be corrupted, would that mean the the entire system would be shut down? No more seeing the future? No more arrest for "future murder"? If that is the case, then I partially agree everyone should be let free-- only due to free will that had not been fulfilled yet. But, then again, if the pre-crime officers hadn't been around to stop the crime, it would in fact have happened and those people would have been arrested anyway. That's what makes this a difficult decision-- deciding at what point in the justice system can free will be justified? Before or after the crime?
DeleteBriona -- good question and response. 15/15
DeleteKristina -- add more evidence to Briona's response. More details from the film that explain why they should be released. 12/15
Alicia -- add more evidence as well (but you did post twice to the last post, so you have extra points) 10/5
Ariana -- good points on why you disagree with these comments. 14/15
Micha'elle -- good nuanced response that is not black and white. Proofread next time, though. 13/15
Is it possible that the pre-crime system detained innocent people?
ReplyDeleteYes, being that John Anderton was falsely accussed of a future murder there is a huge chance that the pre-crime system imprisoned innocent people. The three people who were given off the visions to the police could have been setting certain people up or just imagining things that aren't going to actually happen. Those three people aren't what everyone thinks they are and are capable of more than people give them credit for. For instance, in the film the woman who was soaking in the water, grabbed John and spoke to him saying "Can you see it?". The police said that they weren't able to speak nor move as she did. She also had more power than they thought because her actions were recorded for some odd reason. All of this goes to say, that those three people have more power than people thought and may have purposedly placed or had police place innocent people in jail.
I disagree with Samiyah's response to her question of whether it is possible the system detained innocent people. I believe that John Anderton was rightfully acquitted by the end of the movie due to his resourcefulness and that the system worked as it was designed. The Precogs had a vision of a murder being committed by John which was no different from the other visions they've had. John was strongly against the idea that he would kill someone, but he disregarded the thought of possibly killing someone accidentally. In the film, John was face to face with the man he thought killed his son and although he restrained himself from purposefully killing the man, the man physically forced John to shoot him. John still ended up killing the man as was seen in the vision that the Precog, Agatha, had earlier in the movie. Despite John's intentions, he still ended up killing the man, fulfilling the vision. The fact that John still resulted in killing someone means that people have a written out fate which dictates our actions. John was meant to kill the man and so he did, therefore the people arrested may object to ever committing the crime, but it doesn't mean that they wouldn't commit the crime in the end at the last second of time in which it's meant to occur.
DeleteI would like to agree with Samiyah and respectfully disagree with Naheem because In the film "Minority Report" John wasn't only falsely accused , but he was set up so that his career could be taken away and he could be put away like the others. His kid was kidnapped and murdered and the man that made all of this possible was the same man that took Agatha as a child and killed her mother. The "gifted" one were supposed to see future murders, but the older lady did say that often times they do disagree. Agatha was the most powerful of the 3 pre-cogs , but she also couldn't always determine the fate of someone or their existence meaning that all her visions couldn't have been right and John was falsely accused , he also had options which others didn't.
DeleteI want to agree with Akilah and Samiyah because I do believe that system accused innocent people of murder. John is a example of somebody falsely accused. The pre-cogs aren't always right. John had to prove that on his own because he knew he wasn't a murder, he was set up. I'm sure that if some of the people knew that they were being accused of murder just like John was that they were going to do everything to change that from happening. Or even if they didn't know and there wasn't a system some of the criminals probably wouldn't even had murder anybody. The pre-cogs weren't always right. The strongest one out of the 3 was Agatha,some of the vision that she saw, the twins couldn't see. All her visions weren't right and people have the power to change their future too. So I do believe that the system did detained some innocent people.
DeleteI like that all three of you are having an engaged discussion here! 15/15 for everyone
DeleteIf John Anderson have no minority report, how would he prove that there is one of the others he have arrested? if he dose find one what will happen to the state?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion with him knowing that he has not minority report, hopefully it will be in the back of his mind when he dose get to the moment of the crime, that he will choose to create one for himself. If he find the minority report of the for the other woman's case that would shut down the system and the people of the state wouldn't be able to trust the police department. riots would break out and the perfect reputation of having a murder free state will be tarnished.
I agree with Tania because if a person has a minority report the people that's head of the system should discuss if the person who commit the crime should deserve another chance at life. If an innocent person is placed in jail, then that shows the system is wrong, because if your innocent and have a minority report that goes to show you did the right thing in life.
DeleteI'm not sure I understand the questions you both are answering. The wording is unclear and the context/evidence need to be developed more to make your explanations more understandable. 10/15
DeleteDo you think John would have killed Leo Crow if the precog was not there with him?
ReplyDeleteWhen John found out Leo Crow took his son, his intention was to kill him but the precog was there and kept telling him "You have a choice." This affected John because it got him thinking he can control his own actions and he didn't need any precog telling him his future because he controls what he does. With the precog being there to tell John he had a choice it prevented him from killing Leo Crow which was really hard for him to do but knew it was the right decision. He knew this was right because he knew he could prove to society that the precog could be wrong about murder and innocent people were being put in jail.
I agree with Namir if the precog wasn't there with him, he would of killed Leo Crow. The precog being there made him rethink his actions.In the scene with them standing in the room, John watched his watch waiting on his alarm to ring to change the future of what the precog saw. He knew this was right because he knew he could prove to society that the precogs could be wrong, making it a minority report. By taking this step he prevented his own crime without the pre-crime system locking innocent people up.
DeleteIf Agatha wasn't with John, he wouldn't have even known who Leo Crow was because Agatha was there to protect John from the pre-crime officers seeing him. If it wasn't for Agatha being with John he would've already been imprisoned. In the film when Agatha tells John to wait when the little girl ask her mother for a balloon, to block him off from the officers seeing him, or when she told him to get give the homeless man some change, which was a distraction for the officers when going through the door and helped him escape because so that's why i believe that if Agatha wasn't with John he would've already been arrested and not even given the chance to kill Leo Crow.
DeleteI agree with everyone who agreed with Namir's statment about how if the pre-cog wasn' with john that he would killed Leo Crow with no second thoughts or feel any remorse for him at all. John had not seen his son after that time with his son in the pool. Finally seeing the killer of your only child right there in your eyes, you would only think about the revenge and life ending moment you want for that killer.However since the pre-cog was by his side he realize what she meant by. "You know your future, so the chioce is yours"As Agatha said that to John he realize his faith and he cannot kill this man.John choice made his innocence stay alive, if he had killed Leo Crow, his innocence would disapear once he had pulled that trigger. The pre-cog was his protector with his future and show him that wasn't like the soicety he lived in. That he would send a message to the morally corrupted world that what the law is doing is wrong and needs a stop. If john had killed Leo Crow he would be apart of the problem. Since he didn't, he has become the solution to the problem.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteNamir -- Good question, done in office hours. 15/15
DeleteRoderick -- Good job starting a discussion. 14/15
Jerelle -- Good job incorporating additional evidence 15/15
Alvin -- you don't add too much to this discussion. You mostly agree with what others have said previously. 12/15
If Agatha would of have died instead of her mother, would there even be a system of pre-time ?
ReplyDeleteAgatha is the head of the system for pre-time, therefore there wouldn't be no system without her if she had died instead of her mother. Lamar consider her as the strongest one of all the precog, she has the strength and ability that the other precogs don't. In the film , when John takes Agatha the system of pre-time shuts down. Lamar is able to kill Danny Witwer without no one knowing because of the simple fact that the pre-time is not working due to Agatha not being there with the other precogs. Therefore, Agatha is their greatest possession for pre-time and the system wouldn't be nothing without her.
Watch for typos -- it's "precrime" not "pretime!" 13/15
DeleteSHAKIIM HL:
ReplyDeleteA question that I have is john more worried about proving himself innocent or the flaw in the pre crime system?
I think john is more worried about finding the flaw in the pre crime system. I say this becuase when his name came up he did not first think about how he is going to get out of the trouble he is in he thinks about the possible flaw that was in the system. This is evident when john visits the pre crime creator and finds out about the minority report. His first thought is not that he needs to get the minority report to get prove his innocence he thinks about the people that he put away and that flaw in the system that proves that the people that he out away could not have commited the crime that was said they were going to commit. If he was only worrying about his innocence he is worrying about the people that he put away due to the flawed system.
Thoughtful question and good explanation. 15/15
DeleteALDAIR:
ReplyDeleteDoes precrime take away free will ?
My answer is yes it does. In Minority Report, the DCPD uses the precogs to see future murders. They then go and arrest the "murderers". This is where the individual's free will is taken. The officers don't know if the individual is really going to go through with the murder. They could of had a change of heart and decided not to murder anyone but precrime takes away there ability to do that. Since the murder hasn't actually been committed, there hasn't been a crime and the individual shouldn't be arrested.
Needs a bit more development for full credit. 13/15
DeleteWould you agree if the government came up with a Pre-Crime system like the one in Minority Report?
ReplyDeleteI would not agree with our government if it created a system similar to that of the one in Minority Report. People don't get the benefit of the doubt and it has no remorse for people. What if the crime had reasonable cause? There won't be an excuse for self defense, because even when you are defending yourself the government won't have empathy to the situation. Also it is not always guaranteed the crime will occur. The government does not give people a chance to defend themselves in the court of law or change their future. This system would be extremely unfair and unreasonable. If the US government adopted a system like the one in Minority Report, I would not agree.
I would agree if the government came up with a pre-crime system similar to the one in Minority Report because it would help decrease the murder rate in this country. It would be satisfying if the police could stop a crime before it happens because then people wouldn't have to worry about loosing a loved one. However, if a person is stopped before committing a crime, they should be allowed to go to trial to be proven innocent or guilty. The reasoning for that would be because the police wouldn't know for sure if the "murderer" was for sure going to commit the crime. Therefore, I would agree if the government came up with a pre-crime system, but there would have to be a few changes.
DeleteI would disagree with the government having a pre crime like the one in Minority Report because as we seen n the movie someone of high power would be able to get away with murder because they are able to get their hands on film that others can't. This isn't a fair deal because innocent people would get arrested for something that could have went either way. Pre crime may work for some crimes but not all would be seen if the government were able to have deleted film because of their power in the government.
DeleteAll interesting, clear, well explained responses. 14/15
DeleteThe question is not whether or not the pre-crime system works, but does it work the way it was supposed to?
ReplyDeleteWhen the ball had Anderton's name on it, it was shown that Anderton was going to kill the Crowe. Anderton said that the precog's "don't see what you intend to do, only what you will do". Although this statement is true, it is also false to a degree. I believe that precognition works, but not the way the society thinks it does. In the vision of the Precogs Anderton shoots Crowe, and Crowe dies. Anderton is now trying to prevent this murder. Anderton discovers who Crowe is and his connection to his missing son, then understands why he intended on killing him. Anderton, at the end of the movie, makes the point that we are capable of making our own decisions ot shape our own destinies, but I dont think it was his destiny the vision was showing. I think the visions are meant to show the fate of the victims so they themselves could be saved, but the pre-crime police focus their time on apprehending the "offenders". Even after Anderton chose not to kill Crowe, Crowe was still shot and fell out of the window, resulting in his death. This has led me to believe that regardless of the apprehension of the possible offenders, the victims in the visions are meant to die, and will die unless someone intervines. This, I believe, is the reason the precognition system ultimately failed in the end, everyone failed to see the real issue in the visions.
Very thoughtful analysis. 15/15
DeleteI want to disagree with the comment made by Kewan Eley above me. I would agree with the system if our government ran by it. It would prevent crimes and put killers away. It would bring relief to families and curtail the rising death rate in the U.S., especially in Essex County. This system would be very helpful to the police department and make the city safer. Now a days, the streets are filled with violence and homicides. This precrime system would give people back the feeling of having security. Therefore, I would definitely agree if the government came up with a precrime system like the one in the Minority Report.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to your last response. 12/15
DeleteDo you think John Anderston made the right decision to break laws after becoming wanted for a precrime?
ReplyDeleteI think John made the right decision to breaking laws after being wanted for a precrime because he was not only trying to figure out why he was suppose to kill a man but he was trying to figure out the bigger picture for why he was set up in the first place. In the movie, Lamar was an old man who basically created precrime and he killed a women for her daughter which was Agatha, a precot. Once Lamar thought John was getting close, he set him up to be targeted for a precrime. Lamar knew that if he use the disappearance of his son against him he will be driven to kill. Throughout the whole movie John got closer and closer to why he was in the vision killing that man. All of the file stealing and stealing Agatha was worth it in the long run because it was the right thing to do. John wanted to prove that Lamar was doing something that was antithetic to what the precrime agency was about. Therefore, his actions were justified and he made the right decision because he found out why he was setup and he proved that a person can commit a crime, because of echos, which will be deleted because if they are seen twice it will be like deja-vu.
I agree with Tyron's statement above. I believe John Anderton's actions were justified because all his wrongful doings turned out to be a good deed to society. He wanted to prove his innocence so, he did anything it took to not be accused of a crime he was set up for. Finally his actions payed off and saved the system of pre-crime.
DeleteTo a certain extent, I'd like to agree with Tyron as far as him being able to figure out why he was supposed to kill Lee Crow as well as figuring out the bigger picture of precrime as a whole. With all of the steps that he took, he would've never got to the final solution without his wife and the conversation she had with Lamar while he was in jail. She mentioned how Agatha's mother was killed in the vision that she had. After stating her name, his wife knew that Lamar was the one behind all of this. This goes to show that although Anderton went about his way to find out the truth, none of this would've never happened without his wife.
DeleteTyron -- thoughtful question and response. 15/15
DeleteTamra -- you need to introduce more evidence or add on to her analysis to receive a higher score. 10/15
Nia -- good nuanced explanation of the two sides of the debate. 13/15
Question: Why Did Lamar set up John Anderton ?
ReplyDeleteAnswer: I think Lamar set up John Anderton because I honestly think he was jealous of John. John Anderton had a successful career, a beautiful wife, and an adoring son. Lamar had no of those. For example, Lamar asked Crow to pretend that he killed John's son, and the pre-cogs saw John killing Crow. Lamar was jealous of John because why else would you pay someone off to put John in jail.
He didn't have those things when he set him up, he had lost both his son and his wife. 10/15
DeleteDo you agree with Anderton's actions to prove himself innocent from a crime?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anderton's actions in proving to the pre-crime cops that he is innocent because I would have did the same thing if I was in his position. If I was accused of a crime and had to spend years in jail I would have did everything I could have in order to prove my innocence. As Anderton said in the movie "Minority Report" he did not know the person that he was supposedly entitled to kill. He felt as though that was weird because he has never met the man in his life. He wanted to prove to the cops that he is innocent and that they might have gotten him mixed up with someone. Besides, Anderton became a pre-crime cop so that no violence would occur and to make sure his community was safe. He wouldn't turn on his people and commit to a crime If he wanted to prevent crime from happening.
Baleegh McCrimmon
DeleteI agree with Ziana's answer above. When John went to confront with the lady that created the system she told him it was a way to prove his innocence by finding the minority report. As she said above being in a position of life and going away, you would do anything you could to make sure that you don't go away. John felt that impossible to kill somebody he didn't know, but once he found out who and what that person did he was furious. But he wasn't the type to kill. John was only there to stop the killing from happening. Ziana made a good point of what his job was and at the end he proved that Lamar was behind it all.
Some errors in spelling/grammar for both. 13/15
DeleteIn the act of killing Agatha's mother do you think the end justified the mean?
ReplyDeleteThis would be a difficult situation because its asking is one life worth saving millions, if per-crime was not invited then murder would not have stopped the way it did. Pre-Crime seemed like the solution to the murder epidemic and saved a lot of lives so i can see why the man wanted to kill Agatha's mother if he truly felt like he was doing the right thing. Although he might have been some what justified in what he did the very act was a contradiction to what his cause was supposed to be. Also in killing Agatha's mother he proved that the human side of Pre-crime, the fact that they thought the second murder was an echo, was not exact enough to rely on. In away the thing he did no save his company was the same thing that caused it to fail in the end.
Very thoughtful question and response. 15/15
DeleteWhat has Andertons reveal about the system of pre-crime?
ReplyDeleteAnderton has showed that pre-crime is not always accurate. Pre-crime predicts what happens in the future, however Anderton has showed that the future can always change with one action. At the end of the movie when Lamar was about to kill Anderton, Anderton Kept telling him " you control your future" then Lamar killed himself instead of Anderton. With this Anderton showed that simple actions that people take can change the predicted future. Lamar was predicted to kill Anderton and was not expected to take his own life. From this, Anderton showed that pre-crime is not always accurate and that the predicted future can be changed.
This point has been made in various ways already on this blog. 12/15
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletedo you think that john stealing agatha helped him ina good or bad way ?
ReplyDeleteJoh knew what he was doig with agahta because she was known as the head pre-cog so he needed her help. I believe that it helped him in both way because he still windup getting arrested. But before his arrested she helped him see everythiung that he has suppose to have commited.In he scence john will ask " iwas suppose to kill you ''? John just wanted the truth agatha was the only person that can help himprove his inoccent. If i was him i wouldve done whatever it tookbecause i knew i never commited that crime. But him taking her helped him she help him figure out what happen to his son etc . She helped him out alot even if she was tired of seeing the future. Now he's back into his normal life and agathas back into telling futures.
PROOFREAD PLEASE! 11/15
DeleteWhy did john anderton decide not to kill Crow?
ReplyDeleteHe didn't kill Crow in the hotel room because I think that he understood that if he was to kill him then all of the hard work and things he did would have been for nothing. Then the pre cogs would have been correct and he would have been in jail. Lamar knew that the only thing that would make John Anderton go crazy/ or make him kill someone is the truth as to who took his child and what happened to his child. John Anderton did a good job as to keeping his composure. In the movie he says " I'm not going to kill you". This shows that he had a great amount of focus and composure not to kill him.
Masai Lewis
Good question and decent analysis. You could develop your reasoning and explain the context a bit more for full credit. 13/15
DeleteDoes society have free will or is everything Destiny ?
ReplyDeleteSociety does not have free will. Fate has already determined your choices every time you think that a decision is your own to make. In the movie Minority Report it was determined by the precogs that John Anderton would kill a man named Crow. Although Agatha kept telling John that he still "had a choice", that he still had a chance to change his future, this was not true. If John Anderton truly had a choice Crow would still be alive. Even if Anderton had not wanted or intended for Crow to die, it was what fate had intended. So we don't have free will, everything that happens is for a reason, and only fate knows that reason why.
Very deep question and good response and connection to the film. 14/15
DeleteDo you think pre-crime is helpful and do it need any changes ?
ReplyDeleteI think that pre-crime is very helpful to society and the citizens because it stop the violence before it happens. The pre-crime system just end some changes so innocent people wont be placed in prison. The pre-crime system will help people from dying when its not their time to go yet, and the crime rate wont be a issue. Some changes that need to be made it that people should go to court before they are place in jail to go over the reason why they committed the crime and to discuss if they should receive another chance in society.
Proofread. This question has been debated already on this blog. Not very original. 11/15
DeleteWhat theme does John Anderton convey to us through his character, and how?
ReplyDeleteJohn Anderton shows as film watchers that one must be courages and persevering because if you really want something so badly like fighting for your innocence it takes courage and hope. Since the moment John Anderton's name came up on one of the wooden balls he was determined to break the fate, and proof to everyone that this was just a set up, and he was completely innocent. This shows that after John's hard work Justice was served and he got a second chance with his wife again.
Good job trying to analyze theme and ask high level questions. 13/15
DeleteQuestion: Do you think that the precrime was still justified in continuing to arrest people they believed to commit a crime based on their past cases?
ReplyDeleteAnswer: I think that the pre-crime should not be justified/ allowed to continue to arrest people for the future crime that the precogs sees them committing because of the fact that the three precogs do not always agree on a crime that is about to happen. Which is called a minority report.An example of a minority report occurring is when precogs had a vision of one of the precogs' mother getting murdered by someone.This was a minority report because while two of the precogs was having the same vision of how the murder was going to happen, the third was having a different vision of how her mother was getting killed. But as a way to cover up the doubt of if the crime was being committed by the same person/or actually happening, the outcome decided not to take the doubt into consideration, the precrime still arrested the man they thought was to commit the crime and ended up staying the wrong person who actually committed the crime.This shows how the outcome should not continued to be allowed to arrest people because since there was a single doubt in the crime that was to happen, and that continued to arrest an innocent man, then that makes the precrime system inaccurat and flawed.
This question has been debated already on this blog. Not very original. 12/15
DeleteShould pre-crime have continued?
ReplyDeletePre-crime Shouldn't be continued because, it had many flaws in the system. In the movie, "Minority Report", pre-crime are are arresting innocent people for crimes they didn't commit. For the arrest to be made they are first seen by the pre-clause who can seen into the future and see the crime actually happening but, the pre-clause are not always correct because ones self has a choice to chamge the outcome of a situation and change their faith. Which results in pre-crime locking up innocent people.
I would like to disagree with Mahee. I believe that the pre crime should have continued because the people wasn't innocent if they thought of committing a crime and also in the movie when they was advertising the pre crime system it showed how the crime rate dropped a lot from the pre crime system which showing this system does work . I just believe that in the pre crime system the people should be able to testify guilty or not guilty.
DeleteThis question has been debated already on this blog. Not very original. 11/15
DeleteDo you think the world today should have a pre-crime system to prevent people from committing crimes that way the world could be a better place?
ReplyDeleteNo, I don't think that the world should have a pre-crime system today, because it messes up people's freewill or destiny. The pre-crime system prevents people from living the life that they were meant to live. In the film "Minority Report " when they stopped the man from stabbing his wife with scissors for having an affair in their home, they changed both his destiny and his wife's destiny. The pre-crime system controls mostly eveything. This makes for a world without lessons. Without lessons one can never learn. Without learning one can not grow or become a better individual as that is the reason for free will. The pre-crime system makes for a boring world that leaves everyone unhappy and no room to grow. So this is why there shouldn't be a pre-crime system today.
Who are you? This question has been debated already on this blog. Not very original. 12/15
DeleteIn the movie, " Minority Report" clearly Lamar's plan to set up John was preplaned before even the precogs seen it. So why didn't the precogs predict Lamar's setup since its not a crime a passion and could have been clearly stopped sooner?
ReplyDeleteSince the precogs can only see murder, I guess they could only see the action of Leo Crow being killed but not the planning of how he should be killed, which is ineffective system then. To clarify, apparently Lamar made an offer with Leo that if he pretend to be John's son killer and get killed by John then his family will get paid. However, since this offer had to be made way before the murder, how come the precogs didn't see. Shouldn't they be able to see premeditated plans faster than crimes of passion. Showing how this part of the movie really doesn't make sense because the precogs should have seen this, and predicted it.
Very thoughtful question! 14/15
DeleteIf the pre-crime system was invented in Newark would the crime rate ?
ReplyDeleteI believe that if the pre-crime system was created in the "dsystopia" Newark people would have a second thought about doing the crime. Even if a person has not yet took the action to do the crime the prey crime system takes it as that person is still guilty because they had the intentions of killing someone and if they would not stopped they would have still did the crime. Having this law created in Newark would put a lot of people in jail and help better this society. Newark is a area where people feel as though violence is a good way to express their opinion or to get back revenge and having this pre-crime will stop innocent people from getting their lives taken away and put people who are guilty into prison for a long time.
Proofread. Your question doesn't make sense because words are missing. 11/15
DeleteWill the world in the future be that of Minority Report?
ReplyDeleteI agree that the world be like Minority Report in the future. I believe so because if crimes continue to increase, then the authorities and the government would possibly resort to creating a Pre-Crime system to drastically decrease crime, keep people safe, and put the people who committed the crimes in jail. From my perspective and possibly other People’s, crimes are being committed every day and rarely anything is done about it. Crimes go unsolved. The people who commit the crimes aren’t put to justice. So that the crimes will seize, authorities and the government might resort to the Pre-Crime System. The positive things about the Pre-Crime System are that people won’t be harmed or killed, the people who commit the crimes will be sent to jail, and the crimes actually be commits. The negative things about thru Pre-Crime System are that there is a possibility that people who are arrested for commuting future crimes might not have committed them and it takes away People’s free well and freedom. Despite the negative things about the Pre-Crime System, this system might be effectively used in future to keep people safe and stop crime.
Thoughtful response based on text and world connections. 14/15
DeleteShould pre-crime be considered if a person thinks about murdering a person who harmed one of their family members ?
ReplyDeletePre-crime should not be considered if a person thinks about committing a murder against a person who has harmed a family member of theirs. In the movie John wasn't able to find his minority report because he actually ended up killing Leo Crow who was the kidnapper of John's son. I don't think john should have been convicted of pre-crime because he was trying to basically protect the legacy of his son by killing the man who abducted him.
If there was a pre-crime system like the one in the movie, I do think it would decrease the crime rate and have more people second guess about doing crime. In Newark and everywhere in the world, people are so quick to do a crime and sometimes are able to get away with it. With this pre-crime, it would be able to arrest the killers and put them in jail before the crime is done. This is shown in the movie when the man was about to kill his wife. In the movie "the man was ten seconds away from killing his wife before the police came in to arrest him". With that, it proves that pre-crime is something that can work in a dystopia world like Newark and help decrease crime rates. If their are less crime, then it less of a dystopia world. If there is less of a dystopia world, then that means that more lives can be saved. Therefore if a pre-crime system was created in Newark, it would decrease the crime rate and save more lives.
ReplyDeleteWhat was the significance of the ending of the movie?
ReplyDeleteThe ending of the movie was significant because it highlighted the flaw of the pre-crime system. From the ending, we realized that the mindset of greed in the human race is the flaw that destroys the purpose of pre-crime. In the film, John Anderton reveals the murder that Lamar Burgess, the director of the pre-crime unit, committed. Burgess was able to hide the murder by hiring someone else to act out a seperate scene that the precogs would witness so they wouldn't get the real murder that he was carrying out. The fact that Burgess was able to hide this murder from the unit, and the precogs, shows how humans are unable to create a system without trying to cheat it. They will take advantage of their knowledge of something and use it to their benefit, which, in the movie, led to the death of a woman, and could lead to harm to other people in the society.
Good analysis of the human flaw of greed. 15/15
DeleteBased on the movie do you think that a dystopian society harms or helps its's citizens ?
ReplyDeleteI believe that a dystopian society harms its citizens by allowing the government to make decisions for their society rather then them making decisions for their selves. Every house in the movie was the exact same house. The government made it so that the regular class people can be seen as equal. It does not allow citizens to be unique from each other and provide for their own selves. Also through out the movie many people feared the government. The government wanted their people to fear them so that they wont act out against them like the main character did. It harms the people by allowing a group of people to think for them rather then them thinking for their self.
Good discussion of the details of the film, although you could have rephrased your question to make it a bit more high level. 13/15
DeleteQuestion: Do people make the right choice only because people are watching?
ReplyDeleteAnswer: I think that it is a huge factor of people doing the right thing only because people are watching and not just because they would do what is right on their own. People like to be honored for doing the right thing, so most times people will do it for show or just to prove something. For example in the movie John is suppose to kill a man because it is predicted; but a precog is in the room and continuously advises hi not to kill the man, for him to walk away. So john chooses to not to take the mans life. the real question is whether or not John Anderon would have made the same decision if he was alone. my guess is no, people like John do things for show and recognition.
I do agree with Saieder that majority of the time humans only do the right thing when others are watching them. In most cases people want to be looked upon as good individuals, and they want to be seen as people who show humanity. In the movie John is about to kill the man who kidnapped his son and murdered him but he doesnt because the precog Agatha is watching him. She is scared and screaming for him not to shoot and because of her he doesn't. If AGatha was not in the room, John Anderson would have killed the man he just didnt want to commit a crime and look like a bad person in front of Agatha
DeleteVery interesting question! 14/15
DeleteDiscussion Question: Do you think John Anderton would have the free will to prove his innocence if he wasn't a cop? and what does that mean for the people who were wrongly accused, do they have a say in this system?
ReplyDeleteI think the only reason why John Anderton was able to prove his innocence is because, he was a cop who knew the system that ran the utopia/dystopia that he lived in. Because he was a cop, he was able to break and create rules for himself that might not be presume for others. For example when John arrested the guy who was about to kill his unfaithful wife, the man admitted that he wasn't going to do it. So can we assume that that guy was as innocent as John. But in the movie they arrested this man without him proving his innocence. So I think that according to the movie "Minority Report" people don't have a free will unless they have some power.
Interesting question. 14/15
Deleteis pre-crime affecting the future?
ReplyDeletei feel that pre-crime is not affecting the future because pre-crime is actually the future in a positive way. Pre-crime is helping our future because we are saving many people's lives because lately people been dying in our society everyday we don't know what is going to happen next. With pre-crime we can actually help the future children growing up and helping the population increase instead of decrease. Pre-crime have a positive impact on us and pre-crime is helping the people who is in the crime that may either be killed, sexually abused, robbed or in an altercation (fighting). I believe the drugs (neuron) is good because they are helping the cops catch the victims in the crime scene before it happens like John Anderton did when he caught the man who was going to kill his wife with scissors because she cheated on him in their house. The pre-crime is not affecting any of our future because it is helping us have a safer society and make sure we are safe before anything bad happens to us.
This question has been debated already on this blog. Not very original. 12/15
DeleteALYSHA W:
ReplyDeleteHow do you think John controlled hisself from killing the man who kidnapped his son?
I think that fact he knew he was getting accused for killing him in the first place made him not kill him. He knew that he was going to jail, because they accused him of killing him in the first place. But he held on tight in the situation and mentally stayed focus. Even though they was fighting and had a gun pointed at him. He had something in the back of his brain reminding him not to do it because he would only prove them right. He didnt want to prove to them that he was a killer. He wanted to beat the pre crime system, and he did because she didnt kill him like they thought he would. That just shows that future can change at any given moment because he proved his destined future wrong.
Good point. 14/15
DeleteABBY R:
ReplyDeleteIn the movie "Minority Report" , is there a theme conveyed?
In the movie "Minority Report", the author conveys the theme a perfect society cannot exist without flaws. In their world, there exists a society which closely monitors all citizens by eye scanners. As soon as one is born, their eyes are imported into the system. Therefore, the government is able to detect pre visions, or crimes they committed or have premeditated. The PreCrime system uses PreCogs, people who detect pre visions of crimes; by doing this, the government is able to stop murder before it happens. However, John Anderton( Tom Cruise) is set up by the CEO of PreCrime, framing him by revealing johns future to the PreCogs, where he killed the man who allegedly murdered John's son 10 year earlier. However, John is able to discover the systems's flaws through the revelation of a minority report, which reveals that 1% chance that the crime will not happen. By using this minority report, is able to prove his innocence via the minortity report. John tackles the PreCrime system by proving it is not 100% effective. The 1# chance of the event not happening is till possible. The PreCrime system is a prime example of how a world can not flourish without flaws. A world of perfection can not sustain. Therefore, the author conveys a theme that a perfect society will not exist without flaws.
Good high level analysis. 15/15
DeleteJAQUAYAH W:
ReplyDeleteDoes the gardener know about the flaws of the pre-crime? If so, why doesn't she tell?
The gardener is aware of the flaws of the pre-crime system which is apparent when she tells John Anderton that there is a minority report. However, the government does such a great job of making the citizens feel oppressed, which is traditional in a dystopia, that she is unable to speak up for her people. Even though she creates the pre-crime system too, she knows that the society is no good with the system. For this reason, she distances herself, not caring about the innocent lives she's put in jeopardy over a so called "future murder".
RASHAD L:
ReplyDeleteIf John Anderton is found innocent what should happen to the system?
If John Anderton is innocent then it proves that the system isn't successful because this will prove that the pre cogs aren't always accurate. The pre cogs are the three psychics that discover pre crime in the film, if they are wrong then pre crime is the wrong way to go. In the movie "Minority Report" John Anderton is a police who works for the people who discover pre crime in order to lower the homicide race in America. At first it was a good thing but suddenly everything just turned up side down for him, in the movie he recently lost his son & is divorced. Also he gets framed for killing a woman & the person who kills his son. In the movie he fights to prove his innocents but no one believes him dew to the fact that they are going off the pre crime. If John Anderton is guilty then it proves that the pre cogs aren't
useful.
13/15
DeleteSHAYDAIAH W:
ReplyDeleteWhy does the old-man (cop) set up the protagonist ?
The old man set up the protagonist because he didn't want to get in trouble for what he did . Which was he killed the pre-cog mother and he killed the protagonist so .The old man basically sent someone to kidnap the protagonist son, and rapped the little boy. Then the old man killed the little boy . This is al before pre crime happen so the pre-cogs wasn't able to see who committed that crime. So the protagonist was blamed for killing the man that kidnaped his son , but he didn't really kill him it was set up like that so that he would kill him and the protagonist can go to jail for life .
He didn't kill the son. He just took advantage of the fact that he'd gone missing. 12/15
DeleteSHAYDAIAH W:
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't the women that made pre crime admit that the predictions of the pre-cogs can be false sometimes and there for they are arresting the wrong people ?
The women that discovered pre-crime doesn't want admit that the pre-cogs predictions can sometimes be wrong because the way the society is set up the people would get very up set . The society have a lot of servailnc which means police are watching all the time , and have access to all of their personal life . The people would try to revolt and go against pre-crime , and would try to stop pre-crime from happening because they would like they have no privacy for no reason . They would try to stop it from happening because it a possibility that pre-crime it's putting away the wrong people because of the pre-cogs predictions .
13/15
DeleteASHLEI D:
ReplyDelete- To agree with the following bloggster " is the person still guilt of a crime they have yet to commit?" I agree that they can not be charged with a crime they didn't commit. if you think about it the person would be getting in trouble for something they didn't go . no one should be sentence to jail without hard core evidence. The crime happened in the future , this means that the future can change ever 3-5 seconds. This is why I say that someone should not be charge with a crime they didn't commit.
Needs development and proofreading to make point clearer/more convincing. 12/15
DeleteMILAN B:
ReplyDeleteQuestion: What could've happen to John if he were to turn himself in instead of running?
What could've happened to him is that he would've been tried. They could've looked at the precalcs' visions and looked at what the other two saw. If the the other two saw the same thing as the one who visioned him killing a man, they would've imprisoned him. In the movie, the woman who was taking care of the plants told him that there sometimes is one precalc that disagrees with the other visions seen by the other two precalcs. She was saying that it is a minority report. If a precalc's vision is different from the other two that raises a lot of questions. Therefore, they could've looked at the other two visions to see if they were the same.
Proofread -- precogs. Interesting question. 13/15
DeleteBelen Campos
ReplyDeleteThe people had limited amount of power in the society because they didn’t base things off their own ideas but instead held a dystopian world based on predictions made by pre-cogs. The pre-cogs determined whether or not a person had the opportunity to continue being free or would have to be arrested and put in prison for the rest of their lives. The people ran after suspects only after the pre-cogs advised them to. Sometimes the pre-cogs were wrong therefore the society was not the best. Also a flaw within the dystopian world where pre-cogs have the biggest say in everyone’s actions was that only murders were detected. In a world there exist a million other ways to harm the community such as robbing children away from their parents like they did with John’s son. Those negative actions were not detected. People didn’t think far enough to incorporate this in the pre-crime. If the people had based societies victory on their own ideas they would have been able to create a better society.
Good analysis. 14/15
DeleteTYIESHA:
ReplyDeleteDuring Minority Report, the Plant Lady stated how all organisms are the same because when it's in time of a problem or crisis, the only thing that they know is survival at the time. I agree with the Plant Lady. When John Anderton was with his wife and Agatha, Agatha yelled at him telling him to run, and that was the first instinct to do in his mind. He didn't think out how to handle the situation. He just wanted to escape from being caught by the police. Everybody will either panic or attempt to play cool when a problem occurs so they can help themselves "survive". All organisms honestly do think alike. We do what we have to do now to survive and worry about the consequences later. Our existence & life is more important to us.
14/15
Delete