Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 411 (click to see context) from:
[[AC:FridgeLogic]]
to:
Added DiffLines:
[[/folder]]
[[folder:Changing the future]]
[[folder:Changing the future]]
Added DiffLines:
[[/folder]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Moved from fridge
Added DiffLines:
[[AC:FridgeLogic]]
* A precog sees a crime happening, the police are sent in, and the suspects are... kept in some sort of stasis despite having either not committed the crime or being caught in the act, in ''clear violation'' of their 5th and 6th Amendment Rights? How many alternative ways of preventing a crime are there?
** They've been repealed.
** In the case of premeditated murders, could there have been some sort of psychological intervention to prevent the killer from even attempting the murder in the first place?
** In the case of crimes of passion, such as the attempted murder of a cheating woman and her lover at the beginning of the film, would marriage counseling be provided if there was time?
** In the case of the charges against Anderton, why weren't Anderton and Crow formally interrogated for any possible motives the former would have for killing the latter?
* Precrime makes the arrest and sends the precriminal to jail under the pretense that the future couldn't change from the psychic visions, that the precriminal was ''certain to commit the crime''... yet the moment they are arrested, the future has changed and the crime ''cannot happen.'' Time isn't quite so resistant to change, is it?
** They probably mean it in the sense that it cannot be changed unless someone with foreknowledge of the visions prevents it. At the end, when a murder didn't happen without Precrime being the ones to prevent it, that brought the whole system down, as it proved that having knowledge before hand is not the only way to prevent it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[folder: Why does PreCrime arrest Anderton]]
* Crow and Witwer were ALREADY DEAD. Surely PRE-Crime has no jurisdiction?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 270 (click to see context) from:
** In the original novel they had cards, but laser-engraved wooden balls are about 20% cooler. It adds to drama and SYMBOLYSM!, when the "[[Literature/HarryPotter prophecy orb]]" is carved out before our very eyes and the words of Fate are literally burned into its surface. Also you cannot roll a card across the table for somebody to catch, when you want to illustrate how preventive actions are valid when you know the future.
to:
** In the original novel they had cards, but laser-engraved wooden balls are about 20% cooler. It adds to drama and SYMBOLYSM!, symbolysm, when the "[[Literature/HarryPotter prophecy orb]]" "prophecy orb" is carved out before our very eyes and the words of Fate are literally burned into its surface. Also you cannot roll a card across the table for somebody to catch, when you want to illustrate how preventive actions are valid when you know the future.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Because all it would take to unravel the thing would be to look a little closer at the images, which is a huge part of Anderton's job. He mentioned to Lamar that he found several other cases down in the stasis jail with missing or conflicting previsions. Even if Anderton is dedicated to the cause of Precrime, Witwer is doing an audit of the department on behalf of the Attorney General. At some point, this is going to come up. Setting up Anderton is literally the only way for Lamar to silence him.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** It not specifically stated, but it's heavily implied that the street drug drug Neuroin (the same drug that resulted in the precious via their addicted mothers) caused a murder/crime epidemic the same as crack in the 1980s.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* If the PreCogs react to the murderous intent, then it will probably be the decisive factor. Murder through inaction is a thing after all.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** But that's exactly why it should've been an RBS. "Putting Crow's face" on the faceless figure was the impetus for the spontaneous decision to murder Crow. Remember, PreCogs supposedly can differentiate between vain fantasies of murder and a pointed intent to commit it. Before seing the pictures Anderton could only fantasize about finding the criminal and killing him. Only in that exact moment could that thought have transformed into "I ''will'' kill ''this'' guy!"
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 392 (click to see context) from:
** "Every day for the last six years I've thought about only two things. The first was what my son would look like if he were alive today. If I would even recognize him if I saw him on the street. The second was what I would do to the man who took him." John had been thinking about how he would murder a man for the past six years. He just couldn't put a face on him, for obvious reasons. Apparently that was enough for the precogs to qualify as it a brown ball, since we can assume John got VERY specific and methodical about his dark thoughts regarding his son's abductor. When he had evidence that suggested that the man was Crow, those presenting thoughts were then directed to Crow.
to:
** "Every day for the last six years I've thought about only two things. The first was what my son would look like if he were alive today. If I would even recognize him if I saw him on the street. The second was what I would do to the man who took him." John had been thinking about how he would murder a man for the past six years. He just couldn't put a face on him, for obvious reasons. Apparently that was enough for the precogs to qualify as it a brown ball, since we can assume John got VERY specific and methodical about his dark thoughts regarding his son's abductor. When he had evidence that suggested that the man was Crow, those presenting already present thoughts were then directed to Crow.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 217 (click to see context) from:
** [[WhereAreTheyNowEpilogue At the end of the movie,]] Anderton and his wife have reconciled, [[BabiesEverAfter and she's pregnant again]]. It's been awhile since I've seen the movie, but I don't remember Agatha actually using Shawn's name in her monologue. Maybe she's talking about their second son. [[FridgeLogic Now that I've actually written that theory down]], [[TVTropesWillRuinYourLife I have a disturbing feeling that the kid's going to be treated as a]] ReplacementGoldfish.
to:
** [[WhereAreTheyNowEpilogue At the end of the movie,]] Anderton and his wife have reconciled, [[BabiesEverAfter and she's pregnant again]]. It's been awhile since I've seen the movie, but I don't remember Agatha actually using Shawn's name in her monologue. Maybe she's talking about their second son. [[FridgeLogic Now that I've actually written that theory down]], [[TVTropesWillRuinYourLife [[JustForFun/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife I have a disturbing feeling that the kid's going to be treated as a]] ReplacementGoldfish.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[folder: Why set up Anderton]]
*Why does Burgess bother to set Anderton up at all? I think in the movie he says it’s because Anderton was getting too close to the truth of Anne Lively’s death but…he wasn’t? The only thing close to that we see is when Agatha grabs him and asks “do you see?” and we don’t have any indication Anderton would know what the hell she was talking about. Burgess knew he was a strung out mess when he was off duty, making it even more unlikely he would have put two and two together of Burgess would have just left well enough alone. Congratulations boy, you played yourself.
[[/folder]]
