With the shadowy figure of Max von Sydow looming behind him, Spielberg felt compelled to make the movie a little more Swedish.

I seem to be out of step with most critics when it comes to Steven Spielberg and Tom Cruise. Last year, I was an enthusiastic supporter of both Spielberg's AI and Cruise's Vanilla Sky, films that received lukewarm receptions from many reviewers. This year the two have teamed up for Minority Report and most critics are heaping on unconditional praise. My praise, on the other hand, is tinged with mild disappointment.

Minority Report is set about fifty years in the future where, in Washington DC, the Pre-Crime Unit has eliminated murder. A trio of "pre-cogs" living in a milky pool predicts homicides and the police stop them before they occur. It seems to be a foolproof system, as we see in an exciting sequence near the beginning of the movie. Then John Anderton (Cruise), head of the Pre-Crime Unit, is named as the perpetrator in the murder of a man he’s never met. Convinced that he wouldn’t really commit such a crime, Anderton goes on the run to try to prove his innocence.

The good news here is we have a great story, built upon an intriguing premise. The idea that we could see and prevent a crime before it occurs is fascinating, and particularly apropos in these anxious times. The movie raises questions that have been on our minds lately: how much freedom would we give up to be safe? Can we trust the systems put in place to protect us? What happens when they make a mistake? The script by Scott Frank and Jon Cohen starts with a short story by Phillip K. Dick and spins off in dizzying, thought-provoking directions. The issues inherent in the premise are compellingly addressed without beating the audience over the head with them.

The mystery of Anderton's future crime is well thought out, with a clever twist at the end. His efforts to clear his name allow Spielberg to mix a pulse-pounding action movie in with his idea-driven think piece. The screenwriters have come up with an inventive variety of ways the cops can find Anderton, and an equal number of tricks he can use to evade them. This makes for a fun and suspenseful second act.

Tom had no idea botox injections would be so painful.

And if you don't like anything else about the movie, Spielberg's depiction of America 50 years down the road is undeniably watchable. What does this future hold? Robotic spiders that search for fugitives by going through a building, scanning the retinas of all they meet. Freaky little cars. A computer interface that Cruise manipulates not with a mouse or a touch-screen, but simply by gesturing at it. All things that are imaginative but not beyond the realm of possibility for the middle of this century.

So we have all the makings of exactly the kind of smart sci-fi thriller I love. What could go wrong?

Well, a few things. For one, the story of Anderton's future crime, while essentially sound, rests on one of those time-travel-ly (not really, but seeing into the future is kind of similar) paradoxes that give me a headache. I can't tell you more without ruining the plot, but if you've seen the movie and want to know what I mean email me; we'll talk. I think it's one of those either you buy it or you don't kind of things, and I'm not ready to sign the purchase agreement. (I will, however, consider leasing with the option to buy.)

In an effort to snag some of that Harry Potter magic, the filmmakers tried to fit a Quidditch match into the movie.

More importantly, Spielberg and the screenwriters alternately explain too much and too little. I was left with too many questions about the pre-cogs, how it all worked, how they could justify keeping three people enslaved in holding tanks. Are there trials for the people that Anderton arrests? We're never told. On the other hand, when the mystery is ultimately solved it's not nearly as complicated as the filmmakers seem to think. The audience has things figured out long before Spielberg stops explaining them, which was an unfortunate way to end such a compelling film.

I also have to object to a couple of gratuitous gross-out scenes. I'm not squeamish, but if you're going to show me something disgusting, I'd like to feel that there's a reason for it, that it's not just filler. We'd already gotten the idea that Anderton's day wasn't going well; we didn't need the shot of him biting into the maggot sandwich to prove it. But this was just part of the larger problem of pacing. Not all the scenes needed to be in the movie, and even more of them didn't need to take as much time as they did. Spielberg rarely makes this kind of misstep so it's possible I was just not getting something important -- oh, but that seems unlikely; I stand by my complaint.

Did you ever notice how almost every Tom Cruise movie has a scene of him running at full speed? I don't have a joke for it, I just think it's interesting.

Cruise does a creditable job as Anderton, a man pushed almost to his limits even before he was accused of murder. Of the supporting players, I liked Max Von Sydow as Anderton's boss, and Lois Smith as the woman who invented pre-crime. These old pros give subtle performances in small roles. Tim Blake Nelson (O Brother, Where Art Thou), on the other hand, overplays his part as a creepy warden, watching over the cryogenically frozen pre-criminals. And Colin Farrell, playing a Justice Department minion, continues to not impress me. He seems to be a hot commodity in Hollywood these days but I just don't get it, as you can see from my reviews of American Outlaws and -- well, okay, I didn’t write a review of Hart's War, but if I had I surely would have mentioned Mr. Farrell's lackluster performance. The man redefines shallow for me.

But since overall I liked more about the movie than I disliked I'll end on a positive note. Spielberg, like George Lucas, is one of those directors who have always been accused of caring more about special effects than story. In the case of Spielberg, I couldn't disagree more. There's something I want to say about that, but Roger Ebert said it better, and so I'll quote him and hope to not get sued: "Some directors place their trust in technology. Spielberg, who is a master of technology, trusts only story and character, and then uses everything else as a workman uses his tools. He makes "Minority Report" with the new technology; other directors seem to be trying to make their movies from it."

Sing it, Rog.

Gorilla Pants rating: 3 out of 4 bananas