> Thoughts?

I also think the movie should have handled the "conclusions" about pre-crime with a little more thought. The closing shots seem to act on an ethical conclusion that it has not earned by establishing a proper argument. A more open-ended ending would have been fine, as would this same ending with more exploration of the pertinent moral questions.

All the same, I think my problem with the ending is more centered on the plot itself than on the moral questions. I am not one of those that writes off absolutely everything that follows Anderton's imprisonment as an artificially contrived "happy ending" -- people who scoff at Spielberg because his movies tend to be upbeat annoy me -- but I don't think the identity of the villain or the final confrontation with him were interesting at all. In stark contrast to the originality and creativity of the rest of the movie, these elements come straight out of standard formulas. With a story line that held up better at the end, I don't think the slight mishandling of the moral issues would have been as conspicuous.