Truth, Religion and Sun Rise...

Today morning it so happened that I shared some pictures with inspirational messages over Facebook. I do that regularly, when my eye catches something that I feel is relevant and to which i agree, I share it. One of which was this:

I received immediately a comment from one of my dear friend who is an atheist. Now, that comment became the cause of a pretty long conversation that really stimulated me. I love it when I get an opportunity to arrange my scattered thoughts and give it some form. I thought I will reproduce it over here as a blog post have more permanency than a Facebook post. I am indebted to my friend for this conversation and I sincerely hope he will not mind me using his words. I have done some editing to the conversation just to maintain the flow. There were instances were both of us commented together about different aspects of the topic.

In the below transcription, F stands for my friend and M for me.

F: As per you, are the religious priests doing truthful job??

M: Are doctors doing truthful job prescribing drugs with side effects? Are teachers doing truthful job telling kids that sun rises in East and sets in West, which is factually wrong? Are advocates doing truthful jobs when to save a client manipulation of truth is done? Are politicians doing truthful job, are engineers doing it, are govt servants doing truthful job?

F: No government will allow life threatening side effect wala drug in the market and how will the doctors prescribe them??

M: So no prescribed drug has any side effects?

F: No society which depends on logical thinking will allow to teach Sun rising east and setting west story. Deeply religious poisoned country like ours still teaches such nonsense..

M: So teachers are liars.

F: Religious dominated system is a lie.

M: So no prescribed drug  has any side effects?

F: I already answered this. (About advocates) There can be 2 sides for every story. Advocates try to establish their truth. Finally the truth based on evidence wins

M: But one of them is a liar. 50% advocates are liars.

F: Oh man.... I already answered to this advocate issue as well...

M: I never told about life threatening side effects (of drugs).you assumed it. Just side effects. Yes as per you 50% advocates are liars.

F: I can read self conscious cheating on all your answers because I know that your intelligence level is much better than in these answers... :)

M: Didn't answer my drug question. Aren't doctors prescribing drugs with side effects. Not life threatening may be.

F: Instead of asking counter questions, why don't you give direct answers to my question, if you have..... :)

M: My answer is there in those questions.

F: Counter questions are answers??  :)

M: Can be. If you can read between lines.
Now if you cannot do that, take direct answer.

Doctors know that painkillers have side effects. Still they prescribe them in limited quantities.

Teachers know that the statement sun rises in East is a lie. They teaches that to small kids because to make them connect with the world as they perceive. Later when the kid grow and learn more about solar system he understand that we perceive it only in earth. But when you take the bigger picture truth shifts.

Advocates help their client not by telling lie but by manipulation of facts. In their perspective they are doing their work.

So none of them are liars.

Religion is required to weak minded people in small doses (with side effects included) for quick relief. Religion is fatal in bigger doses like paracetamol is.

For common people to reach the bigger realm of spirituality some lies are told first. When they matures, they realise that miracles and beliefs are just hokum and your self (spirit- whats inside you) is your master. It is the mastering of your self (who is your master now) that is important and not fighting about what meat to eat or which direction to face while praying.

For people suffering from inner guilt religion slightly manipulates the truth, like advocates do. They get ready to face the world believing some bigger entity has removed their guilt.

(Once I get a reply and if this conversation continues I will update the post.)

Don't Breathe: Terrible Choice for Breaking-In

Don't Breathe,  the 2016 sleeper hit movie by director Fede Alvarez  reminded me of two superb but harrowing films that I watched recently. The first is Room, an award winning movie about a mother and her kid imprisoned in a tiny room.  The second is 10 Cloverfield Lane in which a lady is forced to stay in an underground bunker along with two characters of seemingly dubious intentions. While the first movie was more sober and not at all about thrills, the second fizzled out in its extended third act, precisely the moment that the aliens entered.

Like these two movies, Don't Breathe also is about somebody who are forced into captivity and as harrowing and claustrophobic, if not more. Though billed as a horror flick, it is actually a home invasion movie. The factor that separates it from other movies of the genre is that it reverses the regular plot somewhat.

Here, we have three thieves, who are pretty likeable and who usually never steal cash and doesn't resort to violence, deciding to make an old blind veteran the victim of their next crime. But once inside the house, they realise that they bit much more than they can chew. The old man or the house is not what it seemed from outside. Now it becomes a fight to get out alive.

The narrative structure of the movie is very simple and basic. Though, as I mentioned earlier it features a reversal of generic plot, the movie thankfully never tries to play it on our face. It's very restrained in its style. The atmosphere of suspense and intrigue that is set the moment our three friendly thieves enter the house, never gets lifted till the climax plays out. The audience never get a moment of respite even though every plot twist is easily decipherable to genre fans. That is the strength of the movie.

That, and Stephen Lang who played the blind old man. He was able to convey limitless menace into the minds of viewers. Most of the latter part of the movie is shouldered effectively by him. One can find fault with the characterisation and accuse that most of the characters have the personality of mere cardboard cut-outs. But I believe any more deliberation on characters would have severely affected the core strength of the film- suspense.

Painful and clichéd attempt to setup a sequel in the last moments is one huge turn-off. But if the sequel has any chance to be as good as Don't Breathe, I think I can overlook it.

True Memoirs of an International Assassin

Normally, before watching any movie,  I try to do a preliminary research, basic things like it's genre, the lead actors, director, critical reaction etc. But when I sat to watch the 2016 movie True Memoirs of an International Assassin, I was blank. I had never read any reviews,  didn't know if it's a serious biopic or an action comedy, didn't even know who the lead actor was.





The first scene looked like a genuine action set piece. But when I saw the action hero, I couldn't help exclaiming loudly, "That's the Mall Cop!.." It was Kevin James, the guy who acted in the two awfully bad Paul Blart: Mall Cop movies and in several other equally bad Adam Sandler movies in supporting roles. I was planning to stop watching it then and there, but by then the setup of the movie got interesting.

Kevin James acts as an author who gets a writer's block when he reaches the climax of his first spy novel which is narrated in first person. In a conversation with a friend, he gets the idea to make his protagonist The Ghost, a mysterious assassin whose legends are famous. His novel titled, Memoirs of an International Assassin is mistakenly published as non-fiction and become a best seller. He is abducted and taken to Caracas, where a revolutionary, played by Andy Garcia, is convinced that he is the Ghost and gives him a contract to kill the Venezuelan president. But our man is soon to realise that he has become a pawn in an international conspiracy involving a cruel drug Lord,  bad police men, dirty CIA agents, a power hungry general and an uninterested president.

The movie is nothing great to speak of. It is a good one time watch thanks to Kevin, who unlike his previous pathetic attempts, display some genuine comedic skills here. He is ably supported by all the supporting actors. Andy Garcia had a funny role. He seemed to be enjoying the silliness of it. Comedy is light, silly and thankfully not tiring most of the times.





Unfortunately, the movie and it's hero reminds you strongly of Spy, the 2015 action comedy starring Melissa McCarthy, Jude Law and Statham which also has a fish out of water plot and is more funnier.


 Read my post on Hindi movie Force 2 

Never Ever Want to Go Back

No way Tom Cruise can be Jack Reacher. Even though Lee Child, the creator himself had tried to make his fans warm up to the idea, it's not selling. That said, the latest installment in the movie series, Jack Reacher: Never Go Back is a reasonable one time watch. Tom Cruise and crew entertains you, especially if you've not read the books. The critics, it seems have trashed the movie. Its an action movie. I don't know why they expect Schindler's List when they watch an adaptation of a novel by Lee Child.

Lee Child novels are just bare basic readable stuff made in an assembly line. But they are THE MOST ENTERTAINING bare basic readable stuff from an assembly line. I never felt bad or bored after reading one. But I never felt a compulsion to grab any of his other books too after reading one.

In this post, I want to attempt the basic differences the character undergoes on his onscreen migration from book pages. Now to be fair, in the first movie Tom Cruise visibly was in an MI hangover. In this second outing it's like he has gone a teeny tiny step towards the Reacher persona.  He's become a bit weary and lost his charming edginess uncharacteristic of the ex-military cop that he plays. Probably by the 10th sequel we may get a perfect movie Reacher.

What I love about the novels were the delightful sense of space it display. Jack Reacher novels are specifically about a thing that happened in a specific place. The location is very much important and essential in narration. While reading of the events, the reader always gets a clear understanding about the place and all of the particulars of it. Both movies lack this speciality. The movie makers were just concerned to fill as many action set pieces in the running time and didn't care about the geography.

In the movies Jack Reacher is portrayed as a hyper active vigilante. But if you read the novels, we see him as a more reluctant, laid back kind of person. He tries very hard not to fall in trouble. Soon something bad inevitably happens and he has no way, but to involve. He seldom picks a fight but is a master in striking back and always gives the killer shot. In movies we see him too snoopy, trying hard to make out his surroundings and ever ready to be a pillar of support for aching hearts.

In novels the Reacher character enters like a western antihero. Just imagine Clint Eastwood entering a frontier town. Stylish, quiet, majestic... But in movies he just drops in... appears from nowhere. In film, gone are the measured tone, long silences and detached gait.

May be I'm wrong. Even after 10 sequels I doubt...

It's All In Black & White

People don't have any idea what's black money. Guys remember last month when you checked out of that hotel, the receptionist asked you if you need tax bill and you said you didn't need bill with a smirk? The Rs 2000 that you paid became black money the moment it was gone from your hand.

Or that Rs 100 you paid for a pirated dvd on roadside yesterday. That became black money and is now on its way to help drug Lords & terrorists break our nation apart.

Or that medicines you bought without tax bill and that electronic shaver which you bought from smuggled goods store. The money that you handed out is black money now.

You bought a piece of land showing paper value 5 lakh and paid 40 lakh. 35 lakh that you paid has now become black money...

That donation you paid without receipt to secure a seat for your kid in that posh school and that 500 that you paid the policeman to escape from his long hands has also became black money.


What happens is that all this amount moves out of the mainstream economy. Then it starts it's journey towards its masters. Because once it moves out of control all transactions that use this money will be nefarious,  illegal ones. Finally it reaches the coffers of hoarders. For hoarding money, obviously you need bigger denominations like 500 and 1000s. Now when these denominations are banned, suddenly all these currency gets worthless. But for all those who have genuinely earned white money, government has given chance to deposit in banks after revealing source. 

But it becomes impossible for black money to get legitimised because it's tough to reveal sources. May be a small portion may escape.

Now government has a clear account of how many 500& 1000 Rs notes is in circulation. It has to just check how much is returned to it. Remaining is a deficit which government can compensate by printing new currency. And this currency can be used for developmental and beneficiary purposes.

So any unaccounted money acquired illegaly gets back to government in a single stroke.