Originally posted by: Sindhu_18
Wow !! They perfectly gave the justification in the first minute itself by calling it Stockholm Syndrome !!
Wow !! On Point.Something I have always tried saying, to those who were unconvinced with this change in attitude of Sid to Sadiq. HE WAS VULNERABLE. And in such a state of vulnerability and weakness, he found humanity and humans who were capable of loving and being loved. Exactly what Vikram also said in his voice over.PERFECT !!Loved it.Will be right back.
Originally posted by: RollingStones
They named it STOCKHOLM SYNDROME ...
f**k
Originally posted by: Sindhu_18
I think its a right justification. He indeed was a victim, a captured soul, who began to feel for his captivator and felt his captivator was right.The situation he was in, his behaviour, and the meaning of Stockholm syndrome is the same. One cant deny that you know. A captive who begins to feel for his captivator is called to be suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Even Alia Bhatt's character in Highway suffered from that syndrome.
But I even feel had there not been the rush to finish things off they might have shown it in a different way.
Though I have my reasons of being upset with quite number of things and their way of execution but yes I must admit I absolutely loved the episode. Not merely because it belonged to a character I've loved the most in the show but because the reason of those flashbacks came out clear to me.But my point is, why name it epilogue then if you want us to re-analyse the same thing again? And honestly we were all aware of how turbulent and bumpy the ride was for both the POWs. Had the epilogue not been shown, I would still have regarded Sartaj Singh and Imaan Khan as heroes.
[DIV][/DIV]
comment:
p_commentcount