The Apocalypse is Here: Philip K. Dick, Part Two

This week’s assemblage of films includes:

• Total Recall

• Minority Report

• A Scanner Darkly

• Screamers

• The Adjustment Bureau

The focal feature will be Minority Report.

We’ve visited one of the worlds of Philip K. Dick before, but it was not a world like this. Where the Blade Runner franchise questions the role of the “andy” in society, stories like “The Minority Report” question whether or not free will even exists. I will admit as I admitted before that the only works of Dick’s I’ve read are Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? and Ubik. Not having read “The Minority Report” – although I’ve brushed up on the Wikipedia synopsis – or any of the other stories these films are derived from, I will be (in theory) refraining from comment on the accuracy of the adaptation.

Since this isn’t our first rodeo I’ll cut to the chase. Minority Report was, to put it lightly, simultaneously engaging and awful. I don’t regret watching it, but it also took me nearly a whole day to finish the film because it didn’t take much to call me away from it.

The PreCrime police department, headed by John Anderton (Tom Cruise), is responsible for stopping murders before they happen. They are able to do this through a system that harnesses the powers of three people known as the Precogs, who see future murders. When precogs see a murder, a complex system of brown and red balls alerts the department of the identity of the victim(s) and the murderer, while simultaneously relaying footage of their vision. Through the success of this program, the murder rate is almost zero in the nation’s capital, and people feel safe. The system seems perfect until the next murderer is declared to be John Anderton. Anderton, a man with a drug habit and his own experiences with grief, must prove his innocence or discover how he can commit a premeditated murder when he has never met the victim.

First and foremost, I applaud the actors. I’ve heard in my theatre experience that a director will usually only comment on what they don’t like and not what they do like. With that in mind, I have to say that I didn’t notice anything in regards to the acting. Nothing in particular stood out, which is frankly impressive considering the two-plus hour runtime of the film. If anything did seem off, it made more sense to blame it on the writing of the individual characters, rather than an actor’s ability to realistically portray a character.

The story was somewhat flawed. Then again, all stories are flawed to a certain extent. Some of these things I’ll point out later when I inevitably compare the source material to the adaptation, but there was an extreme lack of significance throughout most of the film. Key moments were well-executed, which makes the whole situation worse. It wasn’t a lack of capability. The writing and story suffered from a lack of diligence or perhaps was torn to shreds in the editing process. Regardless, as I mentioned, no weight was given to many major moments in the film. A decision that should have had life-altering consequences was made around halfway through the film, and the build up to John’s choice is intense. After it happens, it is never referenced again, let alone actually be life-altering as it should have been. It’s simply difficult to root for a character who seems to have things magically handed to him. On top of this, the writing contradicts itself several times. The Precogs can only see murders, except when they can see everyday events and use them to their advantage. In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king, except he isn’t one-eyed, which relates to my above gripe about consequence. If events aren’t contradictory, sometimes they just erase the complications which they set up in ways that serve to frustrate more than satisfy.

This next bit is complicated: it feels like an early 2000s film in every regard. This ranges from the somehow simultaneously muted and saturated color palate the film employs, to the design of the Spyders and awareness of trends in technology. Depending on your age, this is either something to be reviled or something that is comfortably nostalgic. For me, Minority Report invokes a fond nostalgia. Brands that are not at the forefront of technology but still demonstrating what we might come to expect from the future meet the round, almost retro-future designs embraced in the aughts’s to create an engaging visual spectacle.

I already admitted that I haven’t read “The Minority Report;” however, I have read its Wikipedia synopsis and, frankly, am frustrated. Much of my criticism arises in the ways in which things changed from the original short story were changed when adapted to the film. I don’t mean to start the “book is better” argument because the screen and the page present very different and important storytelling opportunities. Still, many of the changes from the story to the film added to its runtime without necessarily advancing the story or changing it for the better. The story behind “The Minority Report” is more complex in its handling of the predetermination elements and simpler in its treatment of Anderton chasing fate. The Precogs are not limited to seeing solely murder as they are in the film, except they really aren’t in the film as Agatha uses her precognitive abilities to warn Anderton several times.

While I didn’t hate watching Minority Report, a part of me wishes I went with the 2012 remake of Total Recall, or literally anything else. Apparently, it was initially supposed to be a sequel to the 1990 Total Recall, which begs the question as to if it was intended to create a new sci-fi franchise like what eventually transformed into the Blade Runner franchise. If not, what was the point? I hesitate to admit it, but I want a glimpse into the reality where that happened. With my feet firmly planted in this reality, it seems safe to say that Minority Report was a neat and informative deep-dive into the less popular (but still acclaimed!) works of Philip K. Dick.

“Send me forget-me-nots to help me to remember” – or something like that. Next week we’ll find that “the stars look very different…” Not at all like “diamonds in the sky.” Is this ham-fisted enough? Let me be perfectly transparent. Music legends transform before our eyes in Seeking Different Stardom.

Indira Ramgolam is a Culture writer and sophomore in Columbia College.