My ending for this movie would be different from the original, with Krypton given another chance to redeem itself.
ABU DHABI: This is with reference to Ayesha Siddiqa’s piece “Survival kit for the Egyptian military” (July 11). The comparisons that the writer has made between the planet Krypton and the current situation in Egypt are interesting. I would like to point out that Krypton perished because its inhabitants, in their desperation to access a much-needed but depleted source of energy, tapped the centre or core of their planet, which made it unstable and Krypton eventually imploded.
This is how I interpret the analogy with Egypt — millions seeking their fundamental rights, protesting against the tyranny of Hosni Mubarak. In the process, they reached out to the core, or to be more specific, the Muslim Brotherhood, to give them the energy that was beyond their reach. This approach worked in the beginning and everyone was happy with their new source of energy (freedom), but it made their planet (country) unstable because the Muslim Brotherhood was a volatile source of energy with dictatorial tendencies. As time passed, the Muslim Brotherhood wanted more power (energy) and dug deeper into their core by pushing its agenda, which eventually gave the military no choice but to take control of the government.
My ending for this particular movie would be different from the original, with Krypton being given another chance to redeem itself. I like happy endings. Why wish for total destruction of planets, or countries, in this case?
Arif Qadri
Published in The Express Tribune, July 12th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
