Did I offend you?

I am offended - I know, I've said this before and will, probably say it again and again. 

I am offended because there was NOTHING - absolutely NOTHING - in Vishwaroopam that offended me.

I went to see the movie yesterday. Ok, not really Vishwaroopam in Tamil but close enough, I saw Vishwaroop in Hindi. And I waited, and waited, to be offended.

The man sitting to my left, he had his cell phone on silent mode but the damn phone kept ringing off and on and even though he did not speak, those flashing lights.... THEY certainly offended me.

The cinema hall attendants, taking orders for pop corn and soft drinks, walking around, stepping on one's toes - THEY certainly offended me.

People laughing at inappropriate moments - THEY too offended me.

But the movie? With all its theatrical embellishments, some little over acting, all the graphic violence, and all that.... the movie failed to offend me. 

It was/is a reasonably good movie - could have been even better if it were not too long. Have seen many much better movies starring K Haasan. He is a very fine actor - he is yet to become a truly great director. One hopes he will improve.

But is the movie offensive? Should it have been banned?

If one is to say YES to these two questions then I propose we also ban all news papers, we ban all TV news anchors and channels, we ban reality. 

We must insist on the following:

• The Congress party must get offended every time Kejriwal opens his mouth.
• Kejriwal must get offended every time ANYONE opens his/her mouth.
• The BJP must get offended every time the Left parties say anything at all.
• Mamta Bannerji must get offended - period!
• The BCCI must get offended every time Australia play gilli danda in the Caribbeans.

I mean, where the bloody hell are we going? Why all this fuss about what is essentially a documentary film done up with glitz and glamour? 

Is it anybody's argument that Afghanistan is not an Islamic country? Is it anybody's argument that there are no suicide bombers in that bleak yet beautiful land?

Isn't it BASIC the duty of "the State" (that almighty impotent omnipresent non existent entity) to provide security to "ordinary people" (that's you and I, just in case we're in doubt) - to ensure that "non ordinary people", the kind that takes offence at all and sundry, for all and sundry reasons, do not take the law into their lumpen hands and create a "law & order situation"?

If we cannot depend on "the State" for this, we might as well stop calling ourselves a democracy - let's face it, we already are a dynastocrazy.

Long Live, Freedom!