A famous English proverb says,
"Mother Nature have enough resources for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed."
How relevant is this proverb on today's date? Do mother nature today have enough resources for everyone's need? May be yes? but will we be able to say this say twenty years from now.
A theory says that the reason for extinction of dinosaurs was that they grew large in numbers. They were dinosaurs, with brain size equal to that of a lizard, but we are humans, the wisest species on earth, are we not moving the way dinosaurs did?
Consider this: How many open spaces we see around today? Take for instance a simple journey to nearest town by bus. What do we see? Skyscrapers, Real estate buildings, urban jungles. Now remember those farmlands, fields and forests that were visible during the same journey say fifteen years before. Where have they all vanished?
Number of vehicles running on roads of Delhi or Mumbai have far outnumbered the capacity their roads can handle. The average time for traveling from ITO to Noida or say from VT to Navi Mumbai has increased to double what it was just few years ago. While cities have gained vehicles that can run at 200 kilometers per hour and numerous flyovers.
The average salary of a person may have doubled or may be trebled and so are his expenses but somehow his wings are crumbled. Building have started growing vertically than horizontally. The clusters of skyscrapers that were a sight to watch have today become a great hindrance to sight that winter sun or that full moon. Even in small towns that terrace has disappeared.
Problems may have changed. Malnutrition is today replaced by obesity. Unemployment finds substitute in Work overload. Poverty is replaced by insecurity. Ignorance has paved way to different phobias. Scarcity of food is now scarcity for land to grow food. Epidemics may by far have vanished but newer diseases are there to replace them. Today it is not required to go to America or Europe for a Heart Surgery, but that probably has given people an excuse to have heart diseases.
The problems of yesterday were unemployment, illiteracy, poverty, ignorance.
But which of them were irreversible?
The problems of today are pollution, population explosion, terrorism etc.
Are they not irreversible?
Times surely have changed. But have they changed for better?
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Monday, September 1, 2008
While watching Anand a few days back, I was wondering how different it would have been if it was not made by Late Hrishikesh Mukherjee.
Whereas Hrishiji crafted a masterpiece. Lets see how different it would have been, If it was made by few other directors.
If Anand was made by David Lynch
1. Anand would have been suffering from AIDS rather than cancer.
2. Prakash's wife and Anand would have been past lovers instead of brothers and sisters.
3. A gay relationship would have developed between Anand and Bhaskar towards the latter part of movie.
4. Last scene would have been a smooch between Bhaskar and Renu instead of Anand speaking on tape.
If Anand was made by Manoj Shyamalan
1. Anand would not have been ill but possessed by evil spirits
2. Dr. Bhaskar would have been dead but only visible to Anand
3. Renu would also have been dead but only visible to Anand
4. All characters would have been dead but only visible to Anand
If Anand was made by Quentin Tarantino
1. Half an hour scene of Anand's operation would have been shown, where each stitch and how doctors cut different body parts is shown clearly
2. Anand's death would have been by exploding of a vein, (preferably of head or throat) and it would have been shown very clearly how Anand's head breaks in two pieces after the vien explodes.
If Anand was made by Karan Johar
1. All the characters of movie would have been NRIs
2. Anand's role would have been played by Shahrukh Khan
3. The gal whom Bhaskar loves would actually have been the one who ditched Anand earlier.
4. Just before the climax, at least half an hour scene of weding between Dr. Bhaskar and Renu would have been shown.
If Anand was made by Madhur Bhandarkar.
1. In Dr. Bhaskar's hospital all doctors would have been shown as corrupt except Bhaskar and Prakash.
2. Doctors would have wanted to sell Anand's body part and make money out of it. (which Anand would have protested)
3. In the end Bhaskar would have died and Anand survived. (Anand's fate would not have been shown)
If Anand was made by Vikram Bhatt.
1. Anand would have been a gangster in his past.
2. Anand's girlfriend would have ditched him after knowing that he is a gangster.
3. There would have been ten kissing scenes in the movie
4. After coming in contact with Bhaskar Anand realises that his ex girlfriend is married to Dr. Bhaskar.
5. Hence Anand commits suicide.
Whereas Hrishiji crafted a masterpiece. Lets see how different it would have been, If it was made by few other directors.
If Anand was made by David Lynch
1. Anand would have been suffering from AIDS rather than cancer.
2. Prakash's wife and Anand would have been past lovers instead of brothers and sisters.
3. A gay relationship would have developed between Anand and Bhaskar towards the latter part of movie.
4. Last scene would have been a smooch between Bhaskar and Renu instead of Anand speaking on tape.
If Anand was made by Manoj Shyamalan
1. Anand would not have been ill but possessed by evil spirits
2. Dr. Bhaskar would have been dead but only visible to Anand
3. Renu would also have been dead but only visible to Anand
4. All characters would have been dead but only visible to Anand
If Anand was made by Quentin Tarantino
1. Half an hour scene of Anand's operation would have been shown, where each stitch and how doctors cut different body parts is shown clearly
2. Anand's death would have been by exploding of a vein, (preferably of head or throat) and it would have been shown very clearly how Anand's head breaks in two pieces after the vien explodes.
If Anand was made by Karan Johar
1. All the characters of movie would have been NRIs
2. Anand's role would have been played by Shahrukh Khan
3. The gal whom Bhaskar loves would actually have been the one who ditched Anand earlier.
4. Just before the climax, at least half an hour scene of weding between Dr. Bhaskar and Renu would have been shown.
If Anand was made by Madhur Bhandarkar.
1. In Dr. Bhaskar's hospital all doctors would have been shown as corrupt except Bhaskar and Prakash.
2. Doctors would have wanted to sell Anand's body part and make money out of it. (which Anand would have protested)
3. In the end Bhaskar would have died and Anand survived. (Anand's fate would not have been shown)
If Anand was made by Vikram Bhatt.
1. Anand would have been a gangster in his past.
2. Anand's girlfriend would have ditched him after knowing that he is a gangster.
3. There would have been ten kissing scenes in the movie
4. After coming in contact with Bhaskar Anand realises that his ex girlfriend is married to Dr. Bhaskar.
5. Hence Anand commits suicide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
