Sunday, February 15, 2009

Seven Pounds

Yeah, watched the movie. The poem from my previous post didn't get the desired appreciation. So, this movie shouldn't get the desired appreciation as well. Same reason. It went beyond the common man's intellect. My companions for the movie represent the common man, in this case. I liked the movie because, it wasn't a mainstream film. But i couldn't love it, because, according to me, it failed to satisfy the main criterion of a creation. According to me, a creation, be it a painting or a poem, or a movie or a peice of music, should satisfy the following criteria:
1. The common man should understand it.
2. The common man should love it.
3. It should, in all possible ways, benefit the common man.
If some work fails to satisfy the above criteria, it's a selfish work. It means that the creator has just expressed himself. His "expression" doesn't benefit the common man. So, he shouldn't expect the common man to spend money in 'viewing'  his work. Moreover, he isn't contributing to the society. So, the society ought not "sympathise" with him, his creative moods etc. That's why my poem wasn't satisfying. Because my friends found it "deep", "aatel" and beyond their comprehesive powers.
Anyway, so talking about the movie "Seven Pounds", it was beyond the comprehension of many. No wonder it won awards. (will comment on that sometime later). About Seven Pounds, it was the story of a man who's life shatttered in an accident. He lost his wife. Six other people died. He thinks he's reponsible. So he sets out to "help" the people who has been affected. Ok, nothing wrong with that. Great philanthropy,  must say. But, the "common" man isn't capable of such benevolence. That's wrong. He cares for those strangers, but not for his own blood-brother, not for his best friend. What kind of philanthropy does that show? Shedding your responsibility towards your family, towards yourself is a sin as well! That's wrong. Moreover, he's dying in the process, in order to donate his eyes, his heart (and his bone marrow). Why? Because the death of his beloved wife makes living worthless for him? Is that why he's not bothered about himself? Is that what the flick tries to show, to teach? If yes, the that's wrong. A movie that doesn't teach you to look at life in a better way, which doesn't teach you to overcome mishaps and move on, which teaches you, on the contrary, to succumb to the tragdey, isn't the kind for public viewing. It's a depressing movie all throughout. That's wrong. I'm not talking about myself, mind you. I like depressing stuff, but, they don't help me. So, I shouldn't watch them.
Anyway, afterwards, Payal treated us, since we had run out of money. I didn't have money enough to go back home! Poor me. I'm paying heavily for my days of extragavance! I guess, I'll have to stop smoking cigarettes now...may switch over to biris now...they come at 4 for a rupee!
Coming home, I spent the entire night before the "living screen". One after another "friends" came online. And I kept chatting. What the fucking hell am I doing?

No comments:

What can make the world a better place?