Recently I saw “Ship of Theseus”. I am left with a kind of obligatory feeling that I must appreciate it. I cannot describe that feeling. I just cannot watch it again. I cannot recommend it to anyone. But I feel that I should not criticise it. This also happens with me when I read some deep and complex poem or try to understand some metaphysical philosophy.
In that sense it can be said that I prefer to swim in the emotionally undemanding shallows rather than jumping into the deep end of life. I cannot withstand too much sophistication. For instance in college, I downloaded all the Beatles songs only to get back to Hindi numbers in a few days. But again here I am watching a movie which got the rare distinction of four and half stars by The Indian Express.
The movie is definitely original and raw work or art. It is thought provoking and unpretentious.
If you dismantle a ship, plank by plank, and reassemble it, does it remain the same ship? Like all eternal questions which have remained tantalisingly out of our leaden reach, this one too doesn’t lend itself to any easy answers. It could well be yes, no, and maybe, and that would pretty much encompass all of life.
The movie starts with a beautiful Egyptian girl – Aida Elkashef. She is not able to reconcile the fact that chance necessarily plays a role in our success. While people who fail always accept the role of chance (probability/ Bhagya/ kismat), people who got successful do not easily accept its direct contribution. Their failures are God’s will, successes are because of own willpower.
In the second part a Jain monk takes Samadhi or slow but graceful path towards exit from life. It is taken when a trained sage is not able to fulfil his vows properly because of some incurable disease. This is a very controversial issue and this movie makes it no simpler. Like a true philosophy it does not answer any questions rather raises more for what is called intellectual masturbation.
The third part is a bit simpler and not so deeply intriguing because it raises a familiar question – How much portion of life one should give for the welfare of common men. A commonly observed phenomenon is that one who tries to do good for the welfare of the downtrodden get robbed themselves. Often people are not ready to accept it and change readily. Isn’t Arvind Kejriwal an example of the same.
Overall, I cannot recommend the movie. There are questions in it but no answers. Or may be they are not revealed to me yet as the curtain of Maya is not yet lifted for me.
And ya, the movie is not totally devoid of humor for there was a joke in it- “Which email can attain cyber enlightenment? The one that has no attachments.”