SPOILER WARNING: If you haven't seen "Minority Report" and intend to,
do NOT read beyond this point.  My intent in asking this question is
to have a plot point clarified, not to give the story line away to
someone who hasn't seen the film.

Blank line

Blank line

Blank line

Blank line

Another blank line

And another

And another

And another

This should be enough.

Question: Did Anderton kill Crow?  (That's what it looked like to me.)
Or did something else happen in that room that I missed, such as the
gun accidentally going off or Crow pulling the trigger or some third
party killing him?  Under the circumstances, the killing didn't seem
in character, and I feel like I missed something in the story.

Bonus (worth an extra star): The obvious plot hole in the movie was
that the security system should have been set up to keep Anderton out
of sensitive places once he was on the lam. Why would the film
director leave such a gaping hole in the plot when it would have been
simple to give an explanation (such as Anderson finding a hacker to
take care of such things)?

Thanks.

Hi, wantstoknow. Thanks for your question.

Anderton did not intentionally kill Crow. It looked like that in the
precog vision because he said "Goodbye, Crow," and then Crow was shot
immediately after. However, he said goodbye really meaning to leave,
and turned to do so; he had no motive to kill Crow, knowing Crow was a
fraud. Crow's family, however, would not get the money promised unless
Crow was killed and Anderton framed for the murder, so Crow threw
himself at the gun, forcing the trigger closed and actually commiting
suicide using Anderton's gun.

There were SEVERAL glaring plot holes in the movie, and they all
bothered me to no end. The short story by Philip K. Dick (out of print
seperately, I believe, but available in "The Philip K. Dick Reader")
was done much better, with absolutely no consistency flaws. It might
have something to do with the fact that the screenwriter, Scott Frank
(Get Shorty, Out of Sight, Little Man Tate) does not generally write
sci-fi scripts and so concepts such as "a hacker could solve that" do
not leap readily to mind. On the other hand, because some of the
execution of the story was changed, it made more sense in the short
story version for Anderton to be able to get back in (although it put
him in a very comprimising position), and so part of the difficulty
was staying true to the short story in one place while not doing so
elsewhere. Really, all of the consistency flaws seemed to arise from
this form of discrepency.


Some detailed information on the script (spoiler-free, for those who
care), can be found at:
Screenwriter's Utopia Script Review for: MINORITY REPORT
http://www.screenwritersutopia.com/script_reviews/minority_report.html

Search Strategy:
://www.google.com/search?q=screenplay+minority+report

Thank you for choosing Google! Answers.

That makes sense.  Thank you!  (Great comments too.)

Hello Wantstoknow,

I wish I had the answer for you but - I have no clue!  Your questions
are exactly what I was thinking... my unofficial opinion (lol) is yes,
Anderton did kill Crow.

Second part of your question is harder to figure out.  I agree 100%
with you - this was a giant gap in the storyline.  I'll continue to
watch this question hoping another researcher can give the answer to
these 2 questions...

But it was a great movie, wasn't it?  I'm planning on seeing it again
ASAP!  :)

Regards,

tlspiegel-ga

There are several threads about these very points going on on Usenet.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22minority+report%22+security+plot

I agree with Bookface on both points. 

1. I am convinced that when Crow pulled the gun toward himself, he
also pulled the trigger. I never saw it any other way. He was very
intent on dying to "take care of his family."

2. I wonder if Anderton was meant to be trapped and killed quickly in
the precog tank. Since he was anonymous now that his eyes were out,
how else could they track him? If an alarm went off and he ran, he's
gone. But if they get him into the building, they know where he's
headed by tracking his login points.

Or, as some on usenet "see" it, eyeballs in a ziploc baggie seemed
more important than some boring hacker. Same with eyeballs rolling
down the hill into a drain. Plot hole, schmot hole.

The ending is, literally, a whole other story. (remember A.I.?) 

Cheers!
-- mother

Bookface is correct. Crow basically committed suicide using Anderton's
gun.

As for Anderton getting into the Pre-Crime department, and not being
blocked out, it seems reasonable that they would let him back in, as
it would be easier to trap him in the building than running around New
York City trying to find him. Call it bait.

Now now, Mother, what exactly do you mean about the ending of A.I.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE? In my humble opinion, the ending truly made
the film what it is, without compromising the film's integrity and
meaning. Trust me, the ending is a lot more than it seems. For more
information, feel free to visit the Mysteries of A.I. [
http://www.mysteriesofai.com ]

Thanks for the discussion! :)