Back in the 1950's, many science fiction writers were apparently fascinated with the idea that paranormal studies could someday lead to the discovery of provable, replicable, and even manageable extra sensory perception (ESP) in humans. Most of what these writers wrote was rubbish. Some of it was brilliant. The writing of Philip K. Dick generally belongs in the latter category.
The new movie ''Minority Report'', based on a P. K. Dick short story of the same title, concerns the harnessing of human precognition as a tool to prevent murders. As a film, it's only fair - a disappointment, considering that Steven Spielberg directed. I went to the theater hoping that Mr. Spielberg would show due respect for the Science in SF. The basic story, naturally, has considerable interest, and when written it featured state of the art scientific extrapolation; the execution of the movie, sad to say, suffers considerably from obvious appeals to the lowest common denominator. ''Minority Report'' is Dick dumbed down.
In terms of pure film criticism, it's easy to lament a complete lack of character development, a ridiculously stereotyped and predictable villain and gratuitously flashy action pieces, not to mention clunky fist fights and stupid cops that seem to come from a different movie altogether. But as a lifelong devotee of great science fiction, my major objection to ''Minority Report'' is its wildly uneven depiction of the future. Granted, many film-goers might not notice or care, but for me, the little details really stick out: things like cell phones and hypodermic needles that will clearly be out of date in five years, let alone fifty.
Of course, given today's extremely rapid - and rapidly accelerating - pace of scientific discovery and technological development, it may not be possible to present a depiction of our world fifty years hence with any credibility. Indeed, it leads one to wonder: If the 1950's SF fascination with ESP seems quaint to us today, which science fiction fads of our time will be looked upon as anachronistic by our grandchildren?
For my money, the closest any filmmaker has come to capturing the flavor - if not the exact look - of the potential human future was way back in 1968. Stanley Kubrick's ''2001: A Space Odyssey'', made with considerable input from Arthur C. Clarke, is still the best of them all. My advice to Mr. Spielberg, if he's listening, is to pay more attention to period detail and less to fight sequences; you may not please the trailer park crowd, but your film could have far greater impact and more lasting appeal.
The new movie ''Minority Report'', based on a P. K. Dick short story of the same title, concerns the harnessing of human precognition as a tool to prevent murders. As a film, it's only fair - a disappointment, considering that Steven Spielberg directed. I went to the theater hoping that Mr. Spielberg would show due respect for the Science in SF. The basic story, naturally, has considerable interest, and when written it featured state of the art scientific extrapolation; the execution of the movie, sad to say, suffers considerably from obvious appeals to the lowest common denominator. ''Minority Report'' is Dick dumbed down.
In terms of pure film criticism, it's easy to lament a complete lack of character development, a ridiculously stereotyped and predictable villain and gratuitously flashy action pieces, not to mention clunky fist fights and stupid cops that seem to come from a different movie altogether. But as a lifelong devotee of great science fiction, my major objection to ''Minority Report'' is its wildly uneven depiction of the future. Granted, many film-goers might not notice or care, but for me, the little details really stick out: things like cell phones and hypodermic needles that will clearly be out of date in five years, let alone fifty.
Of course, given today's extremely rapid - and rapidly accelerating - pace of scientific discovery and technological development, it may not be possible to present a depiction of our world fifty years hence with any credibility. Indeed, it leads one to wonder: If the 1950's SF fascination with ESP seems quaint to us today, which science fiction fads of our time will be looked upon as anachronistic by our grandchildren?
For my money, the closest any filmmaker has come to capturing the flavor - if not the exact look - of the potential human future was way back in 1968. Stanley Kubrick's ''2001: A Space Odyssey'', made with considerable input from Arthur C. Clarke, is still the best of them all. My advice to Mr. Spielberg, if he's listening, is to pay more attention to period detail and less to fight sequences; you may not please the trailer park crowd, but your film could have far greater impact and more lasting appeal.
