Human rights for an animal?

India is a country full of people with super-tolerance levels; tolerance to religious disparities, corruption, poverty, illiteracy and even terrorism. I was stunned when I read in the papers that Ajmal, the lone surviving gunman of the Mumbai Taj hotel terror plot had the courage to demand to be tried by an international court because he doesn't trust the Indian courts. And the judiciary amazingly has the time to listen to whatever he's saying. How more crappy can this country's judicial system get? The man is a terrorist who killed people and destroyed the country's premier hotel causing panic in Mumbai for more than two days. And we're treating him like a VIP who has his fundamental rights. This man is an animal. He doesn't deserve human rights. Why not simply shoot him down and get down to other businesses, like the Arabs do? By empowering terrorists with human rights, we are feeding terrorism. As Kamal Haassan says in UPO, terrorism is the only way to fight terrorism. We live in an age where the end is what matters the most, not the means to it. It's high time the judicial system wakes up to face this truth. People might argue that by employing extremism about terrorists, we are forgetting to impose the difference between the sane man and insane animal. Well, that doesn't really matter because if a rabid dog keeps infecting people, shooting it down solves the problem entirely. Let's be practical.

HP6

I'm a huge fan of the Harry Potter books. The last three books in the series are very complex and it's very tough to adapt them to movies. So many nuances are bound to be missing in the plot. And this was the case with HP5, though David Yates succeeded to a fair extent in making a good movie. The spirit was there. So, I went to watch HP6 fully expecting a good movie, if not one faithful to the book. I'm one among millions who believe 'The Dark Knight' was treated very unfairly at the Oscars. So when I heard that HP6 had beaten TDK's pre-release screening record, I was thinking, "This movie better be good". Have to say, HP6 is one of the crappiest movies I've seen in recent times. The problem with it is that the director has tried too hard to be cheesy that the spirit of the story is lost. Terrible acting and screenplay make matters worse. The movie is so pathetic that you hardly feel Dumbledore's loss when he is killed. The scene of Harry persuading Slughorn to divulge the memory looks silly(Supposed to be the defining moment in the story) and Lavender Brown looks like a pumpkin. The movie has its moments though. The problem is that the good moments are too few. The Quidditch scenes are very enjoyable, and in the adventure in the cave to destroy the horcrux when Dumbledore fights the inferi, the movie translates the feeling of the book when one understands why Dumbledore is the greatest wizard of all time. Agreed that HP6 the book has a lighter mood than the dark HP5. With the movie, David Yates has tried too much to be cheesy. Daniel Radcliffe sucks so much that he just stands stiff like a rock during Dumbledore's death and leaves you to wonder if there was any bond at all between Harry and Dumbledore. A total disappointment and one for the Razzies. I remember breaking down completely while reading about Dumbledore's death, for he was the one person who cared for Harry from his childhood, apart from Sirius. And this movie doesn't even have a bloody funeral for Albus! Shame!

Before the fifth movie came out, I thought it was the trademark of the HP movies to be sucky(barring the third installment). The fifth one gave me some hope that David Yates can end the series well. I seriously doubt his credentials now. The books have been such a integral part of the lives of so many fans that it pains to see the movies suck so much. It's all shame and no substance!

The case of religion and God

I have nothing against people's religions and their concept of god. But I feel it is necessary that people get the right idea of god and understand the true purpose of religion. I am an atheist, but I very much respect others' faith and expect them to do the same to me. God and religion, besides the ever lasting discussion of whether or not are true, are meant to inspire people to a good life. Nothing more than that. But then, why is there war in the name of God? God gives inspiration. Just like how Star Wars, Rocky Balboa training and the idea of hobbits triumphing inspires me. The reason is people think that fairy tale stories are for real. God is an invention of mankind. It's not wrong to believe in God at all. Many people need it to keep things on an even keel. But squandering your money and wasting your life in the name of service to God is not simple bull shit. I have seen the dearest of my friends and relatives do this. There is nothing more important than your own lives. Discover your talents and work on them. Never for a moment think God will save you without you putting in enough smart work.

There was this essay competition in my intra college culturals called Carpe Diem, which I won writing under the topic 'The Nature of reality'. In it I made a proposal which may seem ridiculous to many. It was this : Many believe the Ramayana and Mahabaratha are works of fact. And the evidence produced when the factual nature of the books is questioned is the the discovery of the city of Dwaraka under water, the existence of a place called Kurukshetra and the Indo-Sri Lankan bridge. Fine. 'The Da Vinci Code' is a runaway hit of fiction which is largely set at the Louvre, Paris. Say, for example, Paris drowns due to global warming. And 500 years from now, Paris is discovered under water and a copy of 'The Da Vinci Code' sans the opening declaration page by Dan Brown is retrieved. There is a fair chance to say that that generation of people will believe the events in 'The Da Vinci Code' to be totally true, that a person named Robert Langdon actually raced through the museum looking for clues, under the pretext that the Louvre which features in the book has been discovered. Now, this is no good. Similarly, in my opinion, the evidence produced for the factual nature of religious books is no good. You are welcome to disagree with me. An answer to this can never be found. But what we can do is get a strong hold of our lives and turn to religion for inspiration when needed and not take it too seriously.

I deeply regret it if I have offended anyone's faith as it is not my intention.
May the force be with you! :D:D

The Curious case

I'm smitten by the Oscar fever. By Oscar fever, I don't mean the excitement of who wins what. I mean the excitement of catching up on the movies which have been nominated. I recently watched 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button', a slow moving classic. Brad Pitt gives his best performance till date in a movie which has an unusual story in which the protagonist ages backwards. With this amazing idea in the storyline, a wonderful love story unfolds. The execution is simply poetic. Brad Pitt taking care of the child Blanchett and Blanchett baby sitting the child Pitt as their ages run in opposite tracks is just amazing. The scene where Benjamin learns to walk made me sit stunned at Pitt's stellar performance. I thought he can only play the cool dude. He proved me wrong and how! I'm watching 'Milk' tomorrow and I hear Sean Penn will steal the Oscar for his performance. Nevertheless, Brad Pitt is just too good.

Man! Where does David Fincher get his stories from! I can't forget the awesomeness of 'Fight Club' and the chills of 'Se7en'. He belongs right up there with Chris Nolan and Gus Van Sant.

Rory's First Kiss

Let me get my point straight. If 'Slumdog Millionaire' deserves 10 Oscar nominations, then 'The Dark Knight' ought to get at least two more. How can Christopher Nolan be left out of the Director's criteria and the blockbuster out of the Best Picture criteria? I know the reason. 'The Dark Knight' is a comic hero film. There's this whole génre thing in Hollywood. 'The Dark Knight', being a superhero movie has been left out of the two important categories simply because of what it is, inspite of all it's near flawlessness.
Coming back to 'Slumdog Millionaire', if A.R.Rahman deserves an Oscar nomination for 'Jai Ho' and 'O Saya', then he should have earned more Oscars and Golden Globes on numerous occasions previously, the latest being RDB. I think of this and I get reminded of Martin Scorcese. Scorcese won an Oscar for 'The Departed'. The movie was Oscar material, no doubt. But it was nothing compared to Scorcese's earlier classics like 'Taxi Driver', 'Goodfellas', 'Raging Bull' etc. Rahman deserves an Oscar, no doubt. But not for Slumdog Millionaire. The movie, in my opinion, is overhyped. There are moments where Danny Boyle's class is shown. But the movie's no classic. I'd rather see 'The Curious case of Benjamin Button' or 'Frost/Nixon' bag the top honours. 'The Dark Knight' wound will be hard to heal for many fans.
At such a moment, I think of Marlon Brando and how he snubbed the Oscars. To 'The Dark Knight' fans like me, Oscars don't mean a lot any more. To us, no matter what happens in Kodak Theatre, Heath Ledger's 'The Joker' will remain the greatest psychotic character ever portrayed and 'The Dark Knight' the best Batman movie till date. Personally, I don't think Chris Nolan would go for a third installment. But I know that if he does, it will be out of this world!