Wine and Movies - Minority Report (2002)

Wine Trivia Question of the Week:

Cabernet Franc is one of the parent grapes of Cabernet Sauvignon, but it is also the parent of two additional Bordeaux varieties, one equally well-known, the other less so.

Are these "other" two child grapes:

• A) Sauvignon Blanc and Petite Verdot
• B) Merlot and Petite Sirah
• C) Malbec and Petite Verdot
• D) Merlot and Carmenere

To answer this question and find out the answer head over to our Substack - VintertainmentStudios.com, find this post on MINORITY REPORT and cast your vote in the poll, then scroll to the bottom of the post to see if you got it right! 

THE WINES Featured in this episode:

2022 Quinta das Queimas Encruzado, Dao, Portugal

2021 Conceito Brut Nature, Gruner Veltliner, Duoro, Portugal

Chapters

• 1:46 Wine Trivia Question of the Week
• 4:47 A Sequel to 1990's Total Recall?
• 17:57 The Idea Summit (Worldbuilding Superteam)
• 21:22 Predictive Policing
• 24:33 Precrime and Minority Reports
• 38:38 What We Thought Back in 2002
• 45:19 The Original Short Story Ending
• 50:26 2022 Quinta das Queimas Encruzado, Dao, Portugal
• 53:47 2021 Conceito Brut Nature, Gruner Veltliner, Duoro, Portugal
• 1:02:05 Wrap-Up!

Transcript

0:00

Believe it or not, producer Gary Goldman of the original Total Recall wanted to bring back Arnold Schwarzenegger's Total Recall character for an entirely new unrelated adventure based on a completely different unrelated dick story. An idea I kind of actually really dig. Absolutely. This one guy, this one character hopping from dick to dick. No, no, no, no, no. I need to rephrase that. Sorry. No, you don't. Are you not Ventertained? Yes sir! We'll have a real good time! He's Dave and I'm Dallas and this is Ventertainment. uh We have opinions on just about everything. Sometimes those opinions are spot on. Sometimes they go down easier with a glass of wine. This is entertainment, the wine and entertainment pairing podcast. uh Welcome back to another wine and entertainment pairing for your Vintertainment. This is of course the podcast where we pair wine with entertainment. It is as simple as that. You know, we always know what we like or dislike, but we rarely know why. So what better way to learn about that than by comparing different wines to different types of entertainment and comparing how they hit us and affect us the way that they do. I'm Dave, your WCET level three certified wine professional. And I'm Dallas, a professional writer and world builder. And we took a week off last week because we hate y'all. We don't like talking to you. We needed a week off. OK. I mean, no, that's not true. We actually we we actually love you all and we appreciate you so much. So we had to come running back. Anyways, one of those two statements is true. And now for the wine trivia question of the week, Cabernet Franc is one of the parent grapes of Cabernet Sauvignon, but it is also the parent of two. uh additional Bordeaux varieties, one equally well known, the other less so. Are these quote unquote other two child grapes, A, Sauvignon Blanc and Petite Bordeaux? B, Merlot and Petite Syrah? C, Malbec and Petite Bordeaux? Or D, Merlot and Carminiere? To answer this question and find out the answer, head over to our sub stack. entertainment studios dot com. Find this post on minority report on our entertainment studios dot com sub stack and cast your vote in the poll on that post. Then after you cast your vote honor system people cast your vote first. See if you get it right. See you don't Google it motherfuckers. You know, I actually go in there and like see if you know this off the top of your head or can glean the information from whatever you currently know about wine. And then you can scroll to the bottom. where not only the answer will be there, but we'll also explain the answer in a little more detail so you can learn something. Because we try to sprinkle in a little wine edumacation in these things. So head on over to our sub stack of entertainmentstudios.com and vote in the poll on this post on minority report, minority. Report, repost, minority repost, minority report. Now onto today's movie, which I just revealed multiple times. You you did. We did. Now this was suggested to us by fellow substacker, Corinne Kowalski on Substack. She has a Substack dearly decanted at dearly decanted.substack.com. ah She suggested this to be an on theme companion piece to our month long Substack Wine Conversation for July, which was on the topic, can AI replace sommeliers? Where we explored the current cutting edge of technology, how it was going to impact the wine industry. We had seven different wine writers all way in on this topic. Plus we got three unofficial entries. Because people just kept joining in and we were like, everyone was interested in the topic. It was a bit testy. It was a bit controversial. We did not all agree on this topic. Some of us were like myself, were much more cynical and much more worried about what was going to happen. Others were much more romantic about it and that we can never replace humanity or humans and blah, blah. And it was not a drama free conversation. But never was around here on the note. Yes. On the note of what technology is going to do or not going to do Dallas. As though we have not already revealed it multiple times. What is today's movie that we are here to discuss? That's right. The film is of course Minority Report, for which for we world builders is kind of a big fucking deal. With a budget of 102 million dollars, the film was released on June 19th, 2002 and will go on to take 35.6 domestically in its opening weekend and is now nearing 400 million in lifetime receipts. But first, let's jump back in time a bit. The 1950s, in fact. In 1956, Philip K. Dicht released a short story entitled Minority Report in which he warned of an inevitable battle between determinism and free will. The story also dug into his own fears of techno paranoia while expanding the ideas of precognition and time travel. Then in 1992, many decades later, the rights were optioned as a sequel to another dick adaptation. Big reveal for you guys who don't know total recall. That is right. Believe it or not. Believe it or not. I could not. I honestly could not believe it. Although, well, I'll get to that. Yeah, I'll get to this in a minute. I actually think anyway. Believe it or not, producer Gary Goldman of the original Total Recall wanted to bring back Arnold Schwarzenegger's Total Recall character for an entirely new unrelated adventure based on a completely different unrelated Dick story and idea. I kind of actually really. dig. Absolutely. This one guy, this one character hopping from Dick to Dick. No, no, no, no, no. I need to rephrase that. Sorry. No, don't. No, you This one guy hopping from PKD to PKD story. Um, and to Gary Goldman, he explains this and this, I kind of agreed even before I read this quote from Gary Goldman, but he explains in the book Tales from Development Hell by David Hughes, quote, when we finished Total Recall, none of the major players wanted to make a sequel. They all felt that the franchise wasn't well suited. to a sequel, kind of true. uh They also held the previously accepted idea that sequels were commercial debasements that serious artists did not divulge in, also true. Although the success of James Cameron's Aliens had been an exception and the Cameron's Terminator 2. Judgment Day would further change this way of thinking that sequels were always going to be like the lesser of the movies and the OG would always be like the OG and everything else was just a carbon copy to diminishing returns kind of a thing. Like maybe not in the box office, you would make more money because it's a sequel, but the movie itself would never be as good as the original. And then this started to not prove the case for certain things. uh At the time, however, Goldman's interest in a sequel to Total Recall fell on deaf ears. Then in the early 1990s, Goldman optioned Minority Report with the view of directing it himself as a low budget feature. He approached Verhoeven, Paul Verhoeven, the director of the original Total Recall, to ask if he would attach himself as executive producer, thus throwing the weight of Verhoeven's name behind the project, even if Verhoeven was not directly involved. So according to Goldman, quote, Verhoeven read the short story, liked it and agreed to help me out. Then he asked me if I thought about how well the story worked as a total recall sequel. Although it had nothing to do with the themes of the movie, there was something about the tone and driving narrative that made it seem perfect for a sequel, unquote. And you know, better still, it did not repeat anything from the original film, the original total recall, allowing Goldman to take the franchise in a totally new direction, one that would be thematically consistent with the original. Quote, this is what appealed to Paul, the possibility of doing a sequel that seemed original. not repetitive or derivative unquote. And this is also something for me personally that when I thought at first I was shocked this was considered for a total recall SQL. I'm like WTF. And then I thought about it. And I was like, you know, yeah, because it's in this futuristic world where all this technology and these things can possibly happen. I believe also we met the mutants in total recall, which are pre you know, and so they were they had these powers in the Precogs in Minority Report were gonna be the mutants in total recall that was the conception is that we would find the pre cogs via this mutant thing So it all kind of fits and then you're you are exploring dystopian slash utopian futures That is what kind of Philip K Dick did and so having this shared Philip K Dick universe with this one character Which is little James Bondian and a little nuts and so appropriate. I'm sorry It's so appropriate. It would have been great concept to see play out. I agree. agree. It's almost like Stephen King's Dark Tower universe as a Philip K Dick universe all surrounding this one guy. I really like the idea and the ultimate end. But alas, the script was completed just as production company Carol Coe went bankrupt. a financial crisis for the company so severe they even reneged on their contractual payments to Goldman, which is a rather stunning turn of events. Yes. Given especially the basic instinct right before this moment had also been a smash success for them. Plainly, the company was spending money like there was no tomorrow. A behavior that on theme with Minority Report became a self fulfilling prophecy. Anywho, as a result, ownership of the underlying rights to both the short story and the first draft. reverted to the writers, allowing them to move it to 20th Century Fox. That's right, it then came into the hands of Jan de Bond. At this stage, Verhoeven's fellow Dutchman was a celebrated cinematographer yet to direct the runaway hit Speed. Ultimately, they decided not to continue with it as a sequel. And so from that point on, Minority Report was developed as a freestanding movie based only on the Dick Short story. But even after it's a strange from Total Recall 2 and development as a separate entity, Minority Report suffered a further five years in development hell. And if anyone is in the industry, you know what development hell is. And for those who don't, trust me, you don't want to know, but go Google it. Get back to us. With Yandabot eventually jumping ship. He had been hot coming off of speed and uh following up with Twister, but then Speed 2 and the haunting bombed out. man did the haunting bomb out and gradually Fox lost faith in him. They could never find an actor that liked his draft that Fox was also in favor of, at least. It was only years later, 1998 or 1999, that Spielberg came in and read a draft he didn't like, of course. But when Goldman and Ron Shusett personally got their draft to him and persuaded him to read it, and he did like it. Shusett in one recording is quoted as saying Spielberg used an amalgamation of some of de Bont's draft and some of our draft and then his own ideas and because he's Steven fucking Spielberg I added the fucking his version was better in many ways and he made the best film of all. So Shusit, who like Goldman, earned an executive producer credit on Spielberg's ultimate film. Yandaban gets an associate producer credits. This is how this is how they folded in all these different drafts all these different ideas. Kind of the best of all worlds in certain ways that Spielberg was able to to cobble together here. And again, because he's Spielberg, he gets probably final say on that. Like the studio was like, yeah, yeah, yeah, it's you. Cool. Like, take the ideas you want. No notes. Right. And like, just make your film. So Shusit admits to being surprised that the director's take on the material was so dark. Quote, even darker than our last draft, was so dark that I think summer audiences weren't ready for it. We should have released it in the winter and then I think it might have, they might have expected it and been able to handle it. It was too dark a movie for people expecting summer fun with a total recall slash Phil Dick name on it. I'm gonna quibble with that in just a moment here, but, and our names connected to it as well, the two writers, Goldman and Shusett, They thought it would be like Total Recall. Audiences thought it would be like Total Recall and instead it was more like Blade Runner and they weren't ready for that, unquote. But I'm sorry, what? Total Recall isn't dark. Total Recall is just summer fun and then Philip K. Dick isn't dark. I mean, I kinda get it but I also, know Total Recall is pulpy. I know there's a lot of action. um But. Honestly, so is minority. Minority report is more thrilling than you remember, guaranteed. When you watch it, there are some set pieces that you're like, oh, yeah, this is a thrill ride. Like, what are you talking about? It's more austere. Yeah. Than Total Recall, I suppose. But again, it was 2002 versus 1990. 1990, you're still essentially in the 80s. I do think Total Recall suffers from its placement in time in that it did lead with the pulp. It also led with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Okay, let's start there. And there are very few things that end up being dark when Schwarzenegger's on screen because his action sort of persona just skews everything. It just looms so large. Are the sort of concepts in the film, are they sort of potentially dark? Yeah, but I don't... I necessarily, I see what they're saying when they're saying it wasn't necessarily dark. get it. I get it too. But I do think like the 80s, we were coming out of the it's all excess. Right. And so it's like pop violence and pop darkness. But I mean, it was the 80s was excessive. It was mean, it was cruel. It was bloody. It was violent. Like there was So many of the kids who grew up in the 80s, myself included, I'm sure you probably include yourself amongst us Dallas, too. We were fucked up by the 80s because it was scarring, traumatic. And then people, the writers coming out of the 80s is like, we were just doing fun stuff. It wasn't dark at all. I'm like, no, sir. No, sir. We were traumatized. This brings you are incorrect about how dark the 80s. brings up a very good point though because you and I saw this film when we were, I assume you as well, when we were young in our teens, I guess at best, right? And the filmmakers, of course, were largely in their 30s and 40s. And so what they saw as dark is not necessarily what we would assume is dark. I saw, again, I told you. report, right. And minority report is more, I would use the word somber. And it's not ridiculously somber about any stretch of the imagination, but it's more somber than total. Disturbing. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, and has a slightly stiller like when the action set pieces aren't happening. It's a much calmer, more austere, more somber in tone movie. The set pieces honestly almost feel a little out of place in the movie if there is one. But it flows smoothly. It works really well. We're to talk about the film improper here in a moment. But I'm not going to it's not a criticism to necessarily say the action set pieces almost feel out of place because I am going to emphasize the word almost. It does just work. But when they start, the film itself doesn't feel like an action film until it suddenly is. Spielberg makes it work. He always seems to be able to do this and make it work. But nevertheless, I agree that like there's an element of the film where you're like, oh, this is not a freewheeling, fun action movie. Then you get an action set piece and you're like, shit, yes, it is. OK, never mind. This is a total action movie. And then of course, goes right back to being this very still somber political thriller. And you're like, huh? ah And yet it works. You really don't go high. It's only in retrospect. When you think back on it, you're like, yeah, those were two totally different tones that somehow they blended absolutely and made it work. But anyway, Schubert wasn't wrong about audiences response to the film for all my crabbing, to be fair, upon release, although Minority Report grossed 350 million worldwide, fell far short of expectations generated by the first teaming of Steven Spielberg and Tom Cruise, especially on a sci fi project. The critical response was strong, but, quote, everybody thought it would do 500 or 600 million worldwide, she said, points out, quote, but it only made 350 million and only 130 million in America when there are movies easily making 200 million or 300 million domestically, unquote. Now, Spielberg's film ultimately It pays homage to the source material, but would elevate it to the realm of fast paced Hitchcockian nightmare, which is very Philip K. Dick as well in its way. But Hitchcock, of course, very cinematic. So it really elevated it in that cinematic vein with a sleek and genre defining style of filmmaking. And while the film is considered something of a modern masterpiece, it only became so due to the convergence of three very important pieces Spielberg, Cruz and According to Dallas, most importantly, eerily prescient world building. Damn right. So what is the A-list director of the day to do when he has a daunting sci-fi film starring the A-list actor of the day, but no clue how to ground it in reality? Well, he convenes the Idea Summit with one mission and one mission only. World building, world building, world building. Quote unquote, the summit as it has become to be known was Steven Spielberg's idea to bring together a world building super team of multidisciplinary experts to participate in a pre pre production process. The goal was to build out a plausible vision of life in 2054 with technology and its trappings rooted in the known and theorized scientific possibilities of the day. Called brainstorming session in service of the scriptwriting phase, this idea exchange or world building mega flex as I call it, would become a foundational element to the world of film. The three day event commenced at the Shutter's Hotel in Santa Monica, California. And while there were only 15 or so special invitees to sit on the summit team, there were teams of film development department types taking the ideas and working them through in real time. They join Spielberg, screenwriter Scott Frank, production designer Alex McDowell, and others for a wide ranging exploration of where culture and tech may be headed in the not too distant future. Now, Dave, let's imagine for a moment you are the Spielberg in this scenario, and I know your ego, so you are already imagining that, and you need to assemble a team of super minds, minds that think in creative ways for future forward. What kinds of specialists do you think you'd need for such a super important mission? Hmm. Well, you'd need a few futurists, namely Peter Schwartz, co-founder of Global Business Network, who helped frame the social and political shifts of the future. Then maybe a virtual reality expert like Jaron Lanier, who contributed insights on digital immersion and human machine interaction. Then maybe someone from MIT Center for Bits and Adams, incredible name. As its director so much, such as that. Places director Neil Gershenfeld who predicted intelligent devices, AKA AI and ubiquitous computing, AKA right now, everything about our lives. Yes. Then we're going to pile on Douglas Kupland, author of Generation X. Yes, he's the guy who saddled us with that term. Thank you, Douglas, who brought the anthropological viewpoint. Now, many of the participants have reiterated over the years the unpredictability and near chaotic creativity of the experience. Their edict was to postulate and interrogate their collective scientific disciplines in order to create a predictive production design inspired by real technological and societal trends. In short, they needed to find a way to make this film and its tech seem real and plausible. Many of the experts postulated that dark societal changes would likely be on the horizon and holy shit were they right. ah They warned Spielberg that the right to privacy would likely be eroding by this point, if not nonexistent. Personalized advertising, retinal scans, targeted personalized billboards and data-driven intrusions all feature in the film and are all things we are actually grappling with now. A central theme of the film is the concept of predictive modeling. Predictive policing, also features as an ever growing threat to our own personal liberties today. uh And that is something that we should mention real quick, because predictive policing, it covers a lot of different things. But most of you have probably heard, especially in the papers, like New York Times covered a lot of New York's bullshit policing, where you had like the stop and frisk policies, which is very much somewhat predictive. Like you would try to find cars that just looked rundown and shoddy. And you're like that that person is going to be a criminal because they're. horror, right? And so that which is sort of the problem of the whole thing. Broken window theory comes from predictive tracing. Broken window theory being if like if you see a whoever would live in a place with a broken window would likely also be a place where criminal activities happening. The problem is, it would be, you know, it's criminal activity that would be like petty drug possession or usage, or people, you know, you would never find like, you know, owning a gun when you didn't have the license to but there's no evidence you ever used it. Right. Or you used it in anything or committed any crime with it. So it's one of the end to be fair with predictive policing and with broken window theory, you're like, yeah, but they found crime. So how does it not work? So let me tell you something, If you want to especially let's take drug use, right? Let's say you went around instead. Let's inverse the broken window theory. Let's say every time you saw a mansion with a gate in front of it. You were like, fuck that. They have a gate. They're not letting anyone in. Let's plow through that gate, get in that mansion. Let me tell you, you would find drug use every single time in that rich ass mansion. That is how because they have the money and they have the privacy and they have the protection. Right. And is more to the point if you really wanted to find not just the people using the drugs, but you want to find the drug kingpin, that drug kingpin ain't living in a broken window building. OK. So if you want to find the top of the crime food chain, You're not gonna find them in these run down buildings. That's not where they live. Those are the rich ass people. That's where the... lot of these predictive models are about, you know, you think of crime, for instance, as a tree, they're not necessarily interested in finding the root. uh Rarely are they interested in finding the root because there's a lot of money being made off the existence of that. They'll end also the root. The root will have lawyers. The root will have protections. You can't break laws to go after them. Whereas the poor people don't have these protections. So you can bend the law a lot and these and then strong arm them into just making a plea deal. And you get a conviction and you you get to put a feather in your cap and say you did your job and where the root the people at the roots are like those are the people that are very difficult to go after they will sue your ass for everything if you don't do it 100 % right so on and so. Right. Absolutely. So predictive policing, we're going to talk a little bit more about that when we talk about how it is in this movie as well. anyway, Dallas, pick it back up. Yeah, so uh some of the world building from this somewhat would go on to inspire not only productions and design of film that followed, but also real world tech and science. For instance, it was science advisor John Underkoffler who pioneered the gesture based computer interface of the film. Spielberg told Underkoffler to design it like conducting an orchestra resulting in the iconic transparent screens. Cruz's character, Anderton manipulates with sweeping hand gestures. Under Koffler later built real prototypes and founded oblong industries, mezzanine, et cetera, applying those ideas to collaborative interfaces. And following the end of the summit, Alex McDowell and his department finalized an 80 or so page document detailing the world from its social systems to the architecture, advertising ethos and the specific technology interfaces. The document would be called 2054 Bible. And I'm going to go ahead and say this now in about 100 years, this thing is going to be a tome that we refer to as a benchmark in the end of our civilization. ah So yeah. We'll We'll see. mean, the good thing I don't know about like the 2054 Bible. I'm sure for the time it was good, but like there's been so many books about AI and AI and all these different technologies that are coming out that. Yeah, I mean, it's it's it is what it is. But let's talk about this movie. Let's talk about what it does. Let's talk about now me and Dallas have already really we know we're on the same page in just this movie holds up as an entertain in terms of entertainment value. One hundred percent. um It's a thrill ride. is definitely Spielberg and Cruz firing like it's it's All cylinders. oh All cylinders, it is over two hours long, but it doesn't feel it at all. um Even though we mentioned it is austere and kind of somber, like when the action kicks in the very first action set piece, you're a little like, hmm, this is this feels a little off like the car chase thing. And then he's like jumping around on them. And you're like, this feels like it's jumping the shark a little bit. um But after that one, all the ones that preceded it, you're like, OK, this fits. I'm with you. I'm with you. This school. Because it is it's basically a futuristic the fugitive. Right. It's just a man on the run and the cops chasing after them. Now, I will say as much as I enjoy the movie and it holds up as a thrill ride, there are things about and this goes back to the O.G. Philip K. Dick short story to some degree, because I made sure what the what the plot of the short story was to see like how it differed. And it does differ in certain ways. But One of the things that is interesting about the whole crux of Minority Report is that there are, of course, the precogs in this world that are predicting, they see visions of the future and then this division, this new police division. So it's kind of experimental and they're trying to prove themselves. And so they're like, they're the pre-crime division. crime has authentically gone way down since they said in this place where they're doing it. So it does function, which is the interesting thing of all of this is the precox aren't complete bullshit. Like they are working more often than not. What happens is we learn that there is such a thing as a minority report where one of the precox can have a different vision where there's like there's two branches of the future. Right. And then the the head of the pre-crime division is basically trying, there's kind of a cover up where they're like, no, there can't be any doubt in the pre-crime division. yes. Well, and also like we can't, it's a weird thing. That's the one thing where I'm like, huh, I wish they could have explored that a bit more because for two reasons. ah Actually, I have no idea if it's only two. We're gonna find out. ah So for reasons, plural. I say that off the top of my head and then I'm like, wait a minute, hold on, let me not commit to that. So for reasons, plural. The main one is that it does work, which is the, again, the interesting thing is you would think where the story would go is like you cannot convict people on something they haven't yet done. Right. Right. That's the main crux. That's what we think will be the moral. And if you really look at the story, that's not true. It's like it's actually saying no, 99 out of 100 times, if not more, 100 percent. This would as far as we know, this would have happened. And ever since pre crimes started doing this, murders are almost nonexistent in the world. And you're like, whoa, OK, did not expect that actually re watching this again. I'm like, that is and apparently the short story does this as well. That is true in the short story. Interestingly, in the short story. Not only is there a minority report from one of the precogs, all of them have a different vision in the short story, which is curious. it means that, and the idea in the short story is that as our main character or any character gets knowledge of their future, right? Because they are privy to what the precogs are seeing. That's a curious thing because are they saying that if anybody knew that they might kill someone in the future, that might change their future? Because that could be the far more humane way of trying to stop crime is just let them know the precogs did this. And like, who the fuck would go through with it after Almost no one. Like that alone. Completely different or story, completely different story, right? But the interesting thing is they are saying it works. And then the minority report is just something that happens occasionally. And if the pre-crime division, and this is the thing, this is why I think the story still works, but it is a curious thing and the movie doesn't really explore this and I kind of hate that, because I feel like this is the true crux of the moral of the story. We live in a current time where the criminal justice system is all about convictions, right? It's all about functioning. Like you're going after crime and the more convictions you get, the better you're doing your job. No one's talking about whether those are okay convictions. It's just the more. the better you're doing. And that's kind of how we define it. Right. And that's a terrible way to define it because it should matter whether those convictions are just and we are sure like these are crimes. These are real criminals and real crimes. We're not just kind of like what's going on with the immigration where it's like, are these criminals? Like, don't just round people up. We want them to be the ones you said you were going to go after, not just names in a hat. that you're all in like sure one or two of them are actual criminals but for fuck's sake that that's not what we that's not what any that's not what most people not that I voted for Trump my god but for even for those who did oh I was like, uh oh, where are going? Right. But for those that did, according to them, like when they talk about it, that's not what they thought they were voting for. Right. And now, yes, we all told them that wasn't what they were voting for. We're like, Trump isn't going to do it. Like, come on, man. Like, anyway, anyway, you're going off the rails. But the interesting thing is the moral of this story is like they could have just been straightforward and been like, OK, if if and when there's a minority report, we make that public knowledge and we go after the crime in a different way. Or maybe we even experiment with, if revealing to the perpetrator that this is a possibility for the future changes the future, that is the most humane way to eradicate crime, to make sure that it doesn't happen. None of this is explored, which is a shame because it's the most interesting part of the story. And the fact that It works in the movie and it works because like, yes, our own criminal justice system covers up when they're not sure. You know, it's like they will hide evidence that exonerates people that do it all the fucking time. And it always comes out. And you're like, if you're the criminal justice justice system, why would you hide evidence that exonerate someone like the point is that you're supposed to go after that? You're like, oh, shit. You know, DNA. Why wouldn't you DNA test everything through the roof? Because you're like, well. Now we know, now we know, and that is the whole point. And so it's interesting that even in this future world, it's all about cover up, not about this almost proves how effective the technology is because there is only occasionally a minority. I think what it makes me wonder in terms of like how, you know, the sort of unanswered questions for the film, right? Like you just mentioned the idea that you get this sort of precognition that tells you X is going to commit a crime and instead of in, you know, intersecting them and saying, hey, by the way, you're going to commit a crime, it's going to be horrible. And you could just not do that. And, you know, we've done our work. ah but they've taken a rather absolutist kind of approach, which makes me wonder what the rest of this world looks like punitively, because what happens once they do, uh you know what I mean, find these pre criminals, right? What is that? Is there a realm of rehabilitation? And they kind of mentioned some things in the film, but not really. What does that sort of structure look like? That's actually, more interesting to me. though. Interesting. I mean, but like our modern world, like we don't rehabilitate. We really don't. It's you know, like any. You're right. Right. Right. There's no rehabilitation really going on. It's not what we care about. So it is like even though they're they're finding these pre criminals and they're like, great, 20 years. And then they go into the stasis for 20 years. And then it's like you get out in 20 years. That's it. And that's all we really care about. So it. It's an interesting reflection of how probably in Philip K. Dick's day as well and our modern day, it's not much better. Probably the only thing that has kind of sort of gotten better is the death penalty. But even then it goes state to state and blah, blah, blah. And there's all this pushback of even trying to undo that. But for the most part, approach to crime, even here in the liberal bastion of California, we once again had an election year where it was all about getting tougher on crime. Why? shop. shoplifting folks shoplifting not violent crime. Nobody was getting hurt in May in major ways. It was shoplifting and usually from like big box stores that can even absorb the loss. And not to mention there have been studies into how much the big box stores were claiming their shitty quarterly results were due to shoplifting. And it wasn't true. There there were more ah recorded events of shoplifting in like it was a little on the rise like that that was authentic that was true but not at the levels the big box stores were claiming where they were like we have lost millions of dollars in shoplifting it was like no you hadn't again had shitty results I think a lot of that sort of almost militaristic punitive response from policing organizations to those sort of simple crimes. First of all, you have to ask yourself, who benefits most from these actions, right? Like you said, you've got this Because we privatized the fucking prison system and that privatized and then our criminal justice system is all again. It's all about feather in your cap. Many convictions about the numbers and you reelected. And yes, so it's all volume. And there are there have been already in many places within the U.S. like with our private prison system. There's too many deals going on about just moving. mean, even right now, with Trump administration, with immigration, they're shuffling them into private. places privately owned places to house them and they're getting paid to house them. Or I say house house is not the right word right to imprison them and to keep them there and imprisonment costs tons and tons of money. And they don't want people to go get out because that is less money for them. They get paid per person. That's right. That they that they you know, they're not they're not paid like a lump sum. And then however many people you get, you get they get paid per person. They get paid. How long that person is there. They do not get paid on rehabilitation whatsoever. They are not judged based on that. They are not judged based on humanitarian conditions. They are not judged on anything else. It's all money, money, money. ultimately, Philip K. Dick's nightmares about, uh you know, the sort of paranoia of tech or tech in the deuce sort of paranoia and observation and surveillance, uh hyper surveillance. I mean, he's it's all proven correct, because there is barely a square inch of this planet where you could go without your identity being known, not that you need to, but the idea of autonomy of liberty. uh When you're living in a hyper surveilled world is it's it's mind numbing and it's it's also interesting that in 1956 1954 or 55 when he was writing this that this was on his mind. And you know, 50 years later here we fuck no God no 70 years later. Here we are. And this is where we are. This film I think also what it does because it's still so rooted in in our own future. mean, it's a tooth early 2000. So it was sort of postulating what was to come but also rooted in the tech of the day. It still feels so prescient. It still feels so of the times it still is this, you know, weird almost harbinger of doom. Do know what I mean? And uh I think you and I discussed this after we watched it. ah I saw this film in theaters the first time that summer. And I do agree with them saying that it probably would have done better in the winter. um It's interesting because I cannot agree or disagree on the winter versus summer thing, but I do remember watching that. I saw it in the theater as well, but I didn't. It didn't leave a mark. Yeah. At the time. Yeah. For whatever reason, it did not leave a mark. It wasn't fun enough, pure fun enough for summer release for me. And when I think of Spielberg and then I think of Tom Cruise at that time, they were giving me summer fun fucking blockbusters. And so the combination of those two things instantly sort of whetted my appetite for something that was going to be just this real fun experience. And so I remember specifically watching the film thinking, oh, okay, this is a bit a bit more cerebral than I was expecting a bit darker. Okay, all right. So I get what they're saying when they they, know, prioritize the idea of uh a winter release over summer release. But um I remember initially watching this and thinking, they're raising great points in this film. They are Yeah, I get it. This is great. And specifically remember thinking this film is going to be really important in like 20 years. ah And upon rewatch and I had seen it since I saw it the first time. um I didn't remember. I didn't remember that it was a Spielberg film. And so I was watching it the entire time and it was about halfway through. I was like, oh, this is a really well done sci fi film, almost too well done. Now, I also didn't remember it was Spielberg, although I did know it before I started watching it again. So I was like, I did go in remembering then that it was Spielberg, but it was, it is outside of uh his AI movie, which was really him picking it up from Cuba, of course, where Cuba couldn't finish it. And so Spielberg came in and he's like, well, I'll make this film as almost a nod to the master. Like, here's the thing you always wanted to see done and I'll do it. I'll do it kind of for you. This was very much not in his wheelhouse exactly at the time. could say Jurassic Park is similar because it's a sci fi ish setup and that becomes an adventure. Like, it's not completely out of his wheelhouse. But again, that and the feeling of it just felt, you know, but again, it was 2002. So I think Spielberg was finding what his 21st century flavor was going to be because he was finally moving on beyond his 20th century flavor. Yeah, I can get behind that because this was definitely a sort of era of flux for him for sure. I mean, like you said, coming on to AI. And I remember watching AI and thinking, okay, again, another film that has some, you know, it's dealing with some very dense and potentially heavy subject matter and ideas existentially. But it just didn't land for me. uh Even though was beautiful. The tech was great. Fantastic. uh This one definitely landed uh a bit more seamlessly. But As I was saying, when I rewatched this film recently for this, it was halfway through I asked myself like who the fuck directed this because it seems like a Spielberg production. It had all the earmarks, all the benchmarks. was seamless. It was stylized. It was well thought out. The world building was amazing. There wasn't like a frame that was out of whack. And they're like two directors who do that on this scale. It was like, who the fuck directed this? Holy shit. I even texted you. It was like, The other thing that the thing that I feel is the Spielberg hallmark, every single character is bizarrely likable, even the absolutely right. It's like which every single character you're like, huh? Yeah, yeah. It's like no one you remember every single side character in a Spielberg movie. It's a doctor. Right. I mean, that's the thing. Jurassic Park was an ensemble piece. And yet somehow, you know, you remember every single even Wayne Knight. You know, his the bumbling, like, you know, a guy who's like also kind of scheming in the background. Everybody's completely memorable, even though you're keeping track of like 14 different major characters. And same thing with Minority Report, all the other cops, all his boss, all the people he meets along the way that are helping him out. Every single fucking character is memorable. It's and it is a testament to it's one of the reasons he's so effective uh in terms of his production, but also in terms of writing and the storytelling is because he does that central thing. And it's one of the simple one of the simplest things you get as a writer, early writer, any sort of writing education is you have to find a way to make all the characters sort of likable to a certain degree. They can't think of themselves as the villain. And it is one of those lessons that I came to very hard because when there's a villain, I need the villain to not only know he's an asshole, but I everyone else to know as well. And I find Walker wick around as well. But he does that so well that you find yourself empathetic. There's a he allows uh a way for the audience to find some empathy, not necessarily for what was done, but you understand perhaps how that character got to that place. You can understand how it got to that place, but I'm not. Sure, I'm not going with you on empathy, though, that not with that character and his like, because again, I was baffled. I'm like, this makes no sense. You're going to murder to keep the pre-crime thing going rather than just incorporate the minority report as something that strengthens because not only are you being transparent so people can trust the pre-crime uh division. But then you're also including like this only happens sometimes. And when it happens, we take we take action on that. Not we don't ignore it. Like everything about embracing it would have worked. Nothing about trying to cover it up does. So I'm not with you. And I know. But again, that's why I can't go with empathy. I'm like, no, no, no. He's not the villain where he's like, no, what was done to you was truly a wrong. Now, what you're doing now is another wrong of equal amount. And so we can't cheer for you. But we understand that's empathy. This guy wasn't wronged whatsoever. He's just doing it for selfish reasons and whatnot. Now, I will say that one of the cure, I kind of wish I know this would have been way too dark for Spielberg. I know why they didn't go with the original ending of the short story, but the original ending of the short story, which is where there are three different versions of like what he does. the three different versions are, you know, before Anderson and Anderton. Anderton, Anderton knew that he would then once he once he has the knowledge that he's going to murder this person, his future changes. And then once he realizes what his not murdering this person will mean, his future changes yet again, because and he goes and he looks at all his minority reports and then decides to go with the third one. And the third one is Anderton himself. Yeah. Saving the pre-crime division. Yeah. by committing the murder it said he was gonna do. And he did that explicitly so that pre-crime could survive because he believed in it that much. And that is a fascinating. That's a yeah, that's a thing. That's one of those deep dives because I there's a part of me I would really like to get a copy of and I couldn't find one and it's going to be impossible to find one unless Steven Spielberg is listening and he wants to send me copies of the early drafts of this script because I I remember hearing rumblings rumblings when we researching for this that some of the other drafts or maybe it was even some of the world building stuff dug deeper into the why he you know that character Anderson did that. um And I think that's an interesting conversation. also have some curiosity about what a sequel would look like now. I'll tell you right there. There would not be so many fucking glass shaped flop. Let's just say that that would be that would be the number one. It's so adorable. Everything is right. Right. Because it was 2002. It's like the smartphone wasn't there yet. Apps weren't a thing. So it's like. Yeah. So like everything's on a fucking desk. And I'm like, and of course, even if you're going to watch something, it's on a physical piece of something like a DVD or a what? Cause they didn't, that was still what technology was. They didn't have the foresight to be like, we're about to, we're about to like remove like you're going to have one device that you're essentially going to wear or carry with you and everything comes through that device. So the, the sequel will correct that. That'll be number one is like, it'll be an extension of what we have today, which is so wildly different than what we had in 2000. even more interesting, it's likely that he would um assemble another team together. And now where we are in terms of tech postulating where we would be in, because the film takes place in 2054, which is again another 20 years in the future. um now I do hope. Sorry, go ahead. You had more. Oh, I was going to say, I do hope if they do a sequel, I would like them to dig in more into the philosophy and the moral questions that this brings up because they really don't. And I'm like, OK, now we've been exposed to it. We got right. We got the original. It was a thrill ride. Now dig deeper. Now what do we think more here? are we thinking about? Yeah. Yeah. Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. I also am, you know, here at Entertainment, we are always uh filled with ideas. um And there is a part of me that wants to, because this is just what I fucking do, uh world build what a sequel might look like, to at least start the process and open it up to other writers and creators and start to kind of just... you know, dig around in that space because as we said, it is so prescient it is we are now 20 years into the reality that this film kind of, you know, assisted. have tech on the horizon with Elon Musk's, you know, neural tech and other things coming around the corner got down the pipeline. It would be some Great conversation, I think, in terms of what the tech would be and its real world applications and ramifications. um And yeah, we'll see if anything comes of that. Maybe wine and some work. Have you ever seen the Minority Report TV show? Oh, that was a two season series, right? uh that. Yeah. One or two. I didn't even realize it went to eh one of those two. starred Megan Good, I think her name is. Yeah, I think I watched the pilot. The pilot was actually very interesting. It didn't sustain. It devolved. That was even was to be a television sequel from the movie. Yeah. So it was roughly the same time, but it was meant to be a sequel. So technically we have it. Alright, calm down. All right, let's talk about the wines. We are pairing with Minority Report Dallas. What do you got? What are you pairing with this? It is a world building master base um and any of you other world builders out there who spend time doing this shit Give us a shout out and let us know that you too live under a mountain of ideas when you're writing a script or anything but for me um I had initially paired this with an and Ali on a co um As the companion dragone 2018 um I'm pretty sure you and I have tried this together a while ago. I mean, we're talking at least three years now. um But a week ago, a week ago, I came across a Portuguese uh white. And for those of you who don't know, is now, we have entertainment here and mostly Dave, is deeply entrenched in the Portuguese wine world. And I came across a Quinta de Caimas and it is a Bronco, which is white, 2022. It is so fitting for this film because it is weirdly austere and the minerality is really high, but it's really elegant. You get lots of those... flavors I think that remind me of what I was expecting from a Spielberg, not even what I was expecting, what I got from this Spielberg and a Cruz pairing. I went back and got another bottle, drank the entire thing, which is rare for me because I'm a one glass, two glass guy sitting at the most and went through three glasses. I started rewatching the film. uh By the way, the opening of this film, I do think you're right, Dave, it just shoots you off into a direction that seems a little it just seems It seems odd. just the opening of this film is just so odd and it seems so disjointed and it seamlessly kind of comes together and it makes perfect sense as to why they opened this way. Anyway, I'm all over the place with this. I went with this Gita Daskaimas, which we got from Curated. And if you guys are here in LA, check out the... came us there it is uh it's spicy it's got the white fruit but again that minerality is so forward and it just seems like the kind of wine that just you don't sour on if that makes sense and this film is that for me as well like I know in 20 years I'm going to watch this film again and I will have forgotten that Spielberg directed it and I will say my god this film is really good I love the pacing, ideas are pretty deep. ah It's, you know, it's chic, it's all the things. um And uh I don't think I will tire on this film and I damn sure haven't tired on this white wine yet. So that's my pairing. What do you got there, buddy? I have a Portuguese wine as well. Go figure. But, you know, I'm going to try really hard not to do too many Portuguese wines in the future going forward because that is for those for those who don't know, I'm now a sales rep for a Portuguese wine importer here in L.A. So it's one of my one of my day jobs, one of my many day jobs, but one of my day jobs. And yes, this is going to be one of our wines. I it just it worked too well with when I came up with the concept of how I wanted to pair this. I was like, oh this is just like, why am I going, why am I thinking, why am I desperately trying to think outside this particular box because this works so well. So I'm gonna do it. And I've only done it once before with one of the wines that I represent, but I'm gonna try not to just make every episode a shill ah for the wines that I'm representing, but I'm gonna do it. I'm gonna do it at least today because Minority Report, I did want something that was Yes, it's dark. Yes, it's got a certain level of somber and somberness and austere, but it's it's a thrill ride. So like it does it it moves. It's got pace. It's over two hours. You don't notice it. Like I just watched this. I started this movie after midnight one night. I did stop it to go to bed and finish it next day, but I did not want to. Like I was like, fuck. And I felt like I was like. Huh, what time is it? At one point, there was a lull in the film and I was like, I should check the time because I know I started this late, but I was like, it doesn't feel like I've been watching this too long. no, I'd been watching it for a long time. It was already like, you one thirty in the morning and I still had like one more hour to go. And I was like, oh, all right. All right. I got to stop. So I wanted something that had a pep to it. I wanted something that had some energy to it, some lightness, some refreshingness. But at the same time, like philosophically. This movie is about choices, right? This movie is about you have the choice. You make choices. Our main character gets to choose whether he fulfills his destiny or not. um The movie starts with saying, like, not giving people the choice, not giving them the option to do the thing they were predestined to do. And rather than tell them they're quote unquote predestined to do it like fate or free will. Is it fate or free will? It's free will if you know your fate. Right? That's when it becomes free will. If you don't know your fate, sure, then you could argue it's fate. But if you don't know your fate, what's the difference? You're making the choice, but no one told you that is what you're going to do. So it's kind of free will in that regard. But it's the ultimate free will is when you know when you have been shown the future, you've been like, this is what this is. If you do anything else, you're on you're on your own. Right. It's like that is up to you. But this is the fate. And so this movie is all about free will and choice. So I wanted a wine that was all about pure, a wine that would not exist, has no reason to exist except for the choices this winemaker makes. And so I chose a sparkling wine from Portugal. It's a white sparkling, but it is Champenoise style. So it's secondary fermentation in the bottle, two years of aging in the bottle on the Lise. Lees are the dead yeast cells after that fermentation. So it soaks up all these like bready yeasty aromas. It gets that kind of flavor. It soaks up a lot of extra body in there. So it gets a little intensity. Even though it's a sparkling white, it like will have that champagne style intensity and body and depth and complexity. But this is all made out of 100 % of a grape called Gruner Weltliner, which is a grape from Austria. that has no reason to be in Portugal whatsoever. And this is a winemaker, Ferreira. uh Rita Ferreira Marques. uh Her family has been growing grapes in the Teja Valley, south of Douro River for generations. This is true because some of the wines they make and some of the wines I represent are from vineyards that have pre-Feloxera vines. So they have truly been doing this for generations. However, Rita was the first to make a commercial wine. They only grew it for themselves until this very recent history. So the vines and the grapes that are all indigenous to Portugal over there, they existed for all this time. They've been making it all the time. That's the stuff that's natural. That's like Rita's fate, right? Is just to grow those vines. And then she fell in love with Gruner-Veltliner. She has planted the only half hectare of Gruner in all of fucking Portugal. It does not exist anywhere else, has no reason to be there. It's her passion project, she loves it. Making a Champenoise style sparkling out of Gruner, nothing, nothing about this is about Portugal. Nothing about this is traditional. Nothing about this was her fate. This was all, I want to do this and I'm making the choice to do it. And that's the only reason this wine exists. So. This is the, her winery is called Conchetu. That is C-O-N-C-E-I-T-O. The E-I is kind of an A pronunciation in Portuguese. So Conchetu and the O, it's a single O, but you pronounce it like a OO. So Conchetu, this is the 2021 Brut Nature, which means no sugar. It's fully dry, no sugar left behind. 100 % Gruner-Welt Liener. It's... Delicious. I do know that right now there is an LA Place Bar and Garden that has quite a bit of it. I bought quite a bit of it from us recently, so you can go find it there and purchase it there. It is also sold elsewhere uh around, obviously in Europe. If you're in Portugal, there are other places in Europe that have our wines, but I sell it here just in California. Bar and Garden has it. Maybe the Winehouse will in August, if you're whenever you're listening to this. So August, 2025, you ah can maybe check them out. They don't have a. quite yet, but it's coming. So those are the two places in LA that should have it very soon. And uh one does have it when we'll have it very soon. But even if not this particular wine, this is not a wine that is available to you wherever you're listening to this from a wine of choices. That's what I want you to look for. Look for those wines where it's like this grape has no reason to be there. Or even even if it does have every reason to be there, like take a hybrid grape or Native American grape, right? It's not popular. So that is still a major choice. Like weirdly, venus vinifera, the European grapes being here in America in 2025 is still more of the fate because we've made it the thing. we've said that, so now buying a Cabernet Sauvignon in America that comes from America, no big deal. If you want a Catauba, if you want a Norton or a... a chardonnay or a Schamberson or a any of these types of grapes where it's like, yeah, these are choices because they have not been fully popularized yet and they're hard to find, but they can be amazing wines. That'll be a winemakers passion. They're making the choice against all the advice they would have gotten against what everyone says is a good idea against what anyone else would have done. So this movie is all about a wine of choices. And then on top of that, I would just say, find a wine that has a certain level of complexity, but has a vibrancy to it because this movie does move. It is not as dark, I don't think, as the original writers thought it was. I think this is especially looking back from 2025. is a thrill ride. This is fast paced Spielberg. It is entertainment in a nutshell. So find a wine that's going to matter. I'm going to say go with, reiterate, go with, again, I'm not the biggest fan of General White, but this is Inquisito, the grape, which Dave knows well. And find something that ages so well. Great, Hardy White's Portugal, it ages so well. that's honestly primarily What worked with me for this wine is because this film, like I said, in another 20 years, I'm gonna rewatch it and I'm gonna forget who fucking directed it. I'm gonna be like, this is great. And I'm gonna watch every minute. Just like this bottle. right, Go. Well, go check out. Go check out Minority Report, aka Total Recall 2. No, just kidding. Although I will say there is now actually a graphic novel total recall to they did a sequel to Total Recall officially and they did it as a graphic novel. So expect us to cover the total recall movie and that graphic novel someday soon, because that is something definitely on my short list of things I want to cover on this podcast. So we're gonna hit that one of these days. They made a whole book on the making of Total Recall so we can really do a deep dive on that and then hit the graphic novel sequel and see how did it do when they finally made a sequel and they made it as a graphic novel. Is it complete shit? It might be. I've never read it. I have no idea, but we're gonna find out and we're gonna cover that someday soon. Anyway. Thank you so much for listening everybody. As always, please make sure to hit that follow subscribe button. It really helps this podcast grow. It is organic. It's the only way the algorithm shows us new people is if you are actually subscribing and liking and leave a review, leave a rating. All of these things are amazing for helping this podcast grow. If you like it, if you want other people to know it exists, that is what helps us more than anything else. Also tell a friend or family member, them, anyone who loves wine and movies and books and comics. Too hard to shut up. Yeah. Yeah, it's a pod. If you like podcasts. So either way, recommend word of mouth organic again, so much better than advertising and we don't really have a budget yet. So we're not we're not doing paid advertising is all organic growth. So help us out. Recommend this to a friend or family member. And as always, you can find us at entertainment studios dot com. If you want to get to know us better, if you want to follow us a little deeper, a little more closely. ah We are on Substack at that entertainment studios.com vanity URL that'll take you to our Substack. And that is where we do extra bonus pairings. We do extra articles on the wine and entertainment industries. We have pairing directories that track all the pairings we've ever done historically over time, um all broken down by category. So it's a great place to come. and kind of do a deep dive into what we've done so far and what is to come. And last but not least, you can support this podcast by becoming a paid subscriber of that sub stack. ah It's only two dollars a month at the low level at $19 and 60 cents a year if you want to save a little bit of bucks there. And then for the big time spenders and you really love what we do and you're like, I want so much more of this. You can become a founding member, a.k.a. a produce. er for $50 a year. Yes $50 a year gets you a produce er credit where you get a shout out every single episode and you get to commission an episode and tell us one piece of entertainment that you want us to talk about and pair wines with. So do that if you are so inclined, you can find us once again at entertainment studios.com. And now our shout out of our three producers to date, we have Kate Rushell. of she has her own sub stack survives on wine dot sub stack.com. She is a Portuguese wine expert. Hey, hey, hey. So she actually knows more about it than I do. I'm not an expert. I just showed the stuff I hawk this stuff. I'm getting there. But Kate actually does work his wine. have Paul Kalamkarian who has his own podcast, podcast, wine talks with Paul K. That is an amazing podcast. He is old school. He's been doing this for a long, time. His podcast is lot better than ours. So if you like this, you will love his And last but not least, Jessica Mason, writer, novelist, graphic novelist extraordinaire at monster of the week dot sub stack dot com. Go check them all out. Support them. Subscribe for free. See if you like them, if you love them. Become a paid subscriber to support them as well. Anyways, thanks so much for listening, everybody. We will be back in one week, I think, unless we take another week off. No, won't. We will be back in one week with another wine and entertainment pairing for YORB Entertainment. Ciao until then. Later, guys. Jesus Christ. I think you just did too much yesterday and this is just the aftermath. You'll be fine tomorrow. no, no, I've had this sniffle for like two days. Okay, and you went out into public? You're an asshole. Well, I sat in the corner by myself, so it was usually. like, well, I can't catch anything anymore, so I don't care if I give it. This is why you're paranoid of everyone else, motherfucker. It's always you blame others for what you yourself do, right? All right. ah You're like, I know you dirty, filthy, selfish pigs. You're just like me. You'll go out. You're sick and you're and you're like, well, I need to go out and have other people take care of me. You'll do. That. I need to be waited on.