All right. Here's what I didn't like (MINOR SPOILERS):

First, I didn't say that there were an excessive number of action scenes, but that the action scenes themselves were interminable, not to mention boring.

Second, I'm not really judging it against the story, but, at the same time, the story is about a million times better. In addition, it undermines the story. All of the themes expressed in the story are undercut and reversed by the movie. The only thing that really remains unchanged is the concept of pre-crime and that the ``chief'' is on the run. In fact, the story actually deals with the minority report, and even gives it a twist -- the movie mentions it and discards it. I don't want to give away the plot of either the movie or the story, but it just amazes me that they just discarded basically the entire plot and reversed the theme. Corollarily (it is now), it's not as if you could make the excuse that the story is too long to film, which certainly is a legitimate excuse for the legitimate liberties taken in some movies, and some of the liberties taken in this movie. The story is thirty pages -- that's too short for even a normal length movie, not to mention this two and a half hour snooze-a-thon.

Edit: I just reread my this (because I'm bored -- shut up! ) and realized that I claim that I'm not basing my viewpoints on the story, and then I seem to anyway. My point, really, is that you had a great story to start with, so why come up with something else that is much inferior? That's just another mark of incompetence in the filmmakers, IMHO. (The real answer to this is probably that the original story could be viewed as promoting the fascism that this movie was obviously made to complain about, despite the fact that it's not, really. It's just that filmmakers assume that we're stupid, and it's unfortunate to note that that is so often the case. Regardless, if that's the answer, then that's my point here, instead. Don't assume I'm stupid. That's one reason I liked The Bourne Identity, even though it wasn't otherwise a particularly good movie. It didn't treat me like an imbecile.)

Third, the plot that they did come up with is just a series of movie cliches. There's the guy haunted by the thought of his dead kid. There's the secretly manipulative politician. There's the estranged but still loving wife. There's both the nice and not-so-nice criminal contacts of the former policeman. There's the unexplained and ridiculous coincidences. There's the huge conspiracies. And those are just the ones I can think of right off the top of my head.

Fourth, the visuals, while pretty to look at (thanks, Janusz Kaminski) were just derivative of pretty much every other movie that this movie wanted to be. I don't really feel like supplying any evidence of this. It's pretty apparent, I think. (And probably the least of these reasons, anyway, except as point to the fact that Spielberg seems to have lost his imagination.)

Fifth -- slapstick. Did we really need all the totally inappropriate ``humor'' in the movie? The Chaplin-esque eyeball-chasing scene? The shots of the families being disturbed by the chase? All this undercut the movie itself. They were just stupid.

Sixth, the acting was largely abysmal. Tom Cruise turned in yet another non-performance (which, given, I was expecting). Max von Sydow was unable to break free of the caricature he was given to work with. All the guys at the office apparently didn't even have personalities, except for, maybe the Clancy Brown wannabe second-in-command guy. He got to be a caricature as well. Colin Farrell was okay, but largely due to just the fact that he's just entertaining to watch on screen. And Mike Binder was actually entertaining in his five minutes of screen time.

Seventh, I'm tired of all the human bodily fluids flying about in movies these days. The vomit and the snot were just gratuitous and nauseating for no reason other than that is the style of the day. (No one ever claimed that Spielberg wasn't a populist.)

Then there are just the random stupid things. Like the thing about going blind if he removed the bandages too soon, which was pounded into our heads, but then dropped on the floor. (Though it would have taken about 5 seconds of screen time to show that it wasn't. And that might have explained the eyeball-chasing scene.) The end of the opening scene where he can't decide what house to go into. He's got as many men as houses. Go into all of them. Which leads up to the fact that the cops are always in a big bunch, never spread out, when looking for someone (remember the inane balloon vendor thing?).

On the other hand, there were a few things that I think the movie got right on its own. Again, the cinematography was excellent. The explanation for the Lively woman's murder was kinda neat (even if it was a part of the poor treatment of the original story). The scene with Leo Crow was actually mostly very good, taken by itself. (It was the point at which the movie definitively became about the opposite of what the story was about, but I'll put that aside.) I liked the concept of the ubiquitous retinal scanners. That's a concept that would have worked well if they'd decided to actually make a film of Minority Report. I'm sure there were a few other things I liked as well, but they certainly didn't overcome the dregs of the rest of the movie.