My Love From The Star In Hindi Download 480p Filmywap
Deb Cartelli
The film's core plot was reported to be inspired by the 1992 Kannada-language film Mysore Mallige,[2] which itself was based on the 1942 work of same title by K. S. Narasimhaswamy.[3] The screenplay was jointly written by Sanjay Leela Bhansali, Kamna Chandra and Chopra. Binod Pradhan acted as the cinematographer while Renu Saluja edited the film. R. D. Burman composed the highly successful soundtrack with lyrics penned by Javed Akhtar. This was the last film work of R. D. Burman, who died before the release of the film. It was the first Indian film on Dolby Stereo.
The film is set in 1942, when the British Raj was declining in power. It was a time when many Indian citizens were either working for the British regime or rallying in underground meetings and protests against them. In this atmosphere, Narendra Singh (Anil Kapoor) falls in love with Rajeshwari Pathak (Manisha Koirala). Their romance is shown developing in spite of the political and social unrest at the time.
Narendra's father, Diwan Hari Pratap Singh (Manohar Singh) is a loyal British employee working for the brutal British General Douglas (Brian Glover), who is infamous for tracking down and executing citizens who are believed to be revolutionaries. Rajeshwari's father, Raghuveer Pathak (Anupam Kher) is a revolutionary fighting against British rule, as he holds a grudge against Douglas for murdering his son. When Narendra asks Raghuveer for Rajeshwari's hand in marriage, Raghuveer becomes livid. However, Narendra declares that he is willing to sacrifice everything for Rajeshwari and convinces Raghuveer of his love for her. Raghuveer relents but tells Narendra to talk to his father first. When Narendra does so, Hari is angry that his son has chosen the daughter of a revolutionary, but he pretends that he will do anything for Narendra's happiness.
However, Hari tricks Narendra into revealing Raghuveer's secret location and leaks the information to Major Bisht (Danny Dengzongpa) and the British authorities. Soon, police barge into Raghuveer's hideaway and try to kill him, only to find him waiting to light a bomb, killing both himself and the men. Rajeshwari, who was out at that time, realizes what has happened and runs away. She is taken into refuge by Shubhankar (Jackie Shroff), a compatriot of Raghuveer who has learned of his death. Under Shubhankar's tutelage, Rajeshwari follows her father's revolutionary path. Meanwhile, Narendra gets furious at his father for using him to kill Raghuveer and drive Rajeshwari away. Promising to make up to Rajeshwari and help her cause, Narendra pledges to become a revolutionary by severing all ties with his father; even Bisht's daughter Chanda (Chandni) does the same after witnessing Bisht murdering her teacher Abid Ali Baig (Pran), who is a revolutionary allied with Shubhankar, much to Bisht's remorse.
To prove his point, Narendra attempts to murder Douglas in front of the city but is caught in the act after shooting down a few soldiers. Narendra is then convicted and sentenced to hang for attempted murder. Douglas then orders his troops to fire at the town square, resulting in the deaths of several citizens, including Chanda. However, Shubhankar saves Narendra from being hanged, and Bisht develops a change of heart after witnessing Chanda's death, helping Shubhankar and Narendra finish off Hari and the remaining loyalists and stabbing Douglas with a flagpole. With the loyalists dead, Narendra reconciles with Rajeshwari while Shubhankar hangs Douglas to death, avenging all those who perished under Douglas' wrath. The film ends with Narendra, Rajeshwari, Shubhankar, Bisht, and the surviving citizens hoisting and saluting the Indian flag.
Vinod told me that he only makes dark films. I said I have a love story and asked him to listen to it. I read him two or three ideas and he liked one and asked me to develop it. After a year's hardship and constant quarrels and bickering, I finished the script and dialogues. Then one day Vinod called and said, 'I don't want a love story set in today's time. What if we take this story and set it in another era?'
Kamna Chandra, one of the script writers of the film, had gone to the United States to meet her daughters Tanuja and Anupama (whom Vidhu Vinod Chopra would later marry) as they were studying there. Having watched Chopra's film Parinda on video and being impressed with it, both of them asked their mother to write a story and approach him to direct it. Chandra had previously written Prem Rog and Chandni; both were love stories. She knew Chopra made "dark films", but decided to meet him.[4]
After returning, Chandra met Chopra at Natraj Studios. She made him listen to two or three of her ideas, among which he liked one and asked her to develop it. Chandra finished the script and dialogues by a year, until a day when Chopra himself called her and suggested that they should make a love story set in another era instead of the present time. This provoked Chandra, who could not sleep that night. However, she became excited in the next few days. Having grown up amidst the Indian freedom struggle, she decided to place the story at that time. This formed the core plot for 1942: A Love Story.[4]
Chopra had crafted the role of Rajeshwari Pathak in accordance to Madhuri Dixit, with lyricist Javed Akhtar also keeping her in mind while penning the lyrics for "Ek Ladki Ko Dekha To".[5] By the time the film was launched, Dixit had packed schedules, which subsequently prevented her inclusion in the film. Manisha Koirala, who had auditioned for the role of Rajjo's sister (the role being later excluded), was then asked by Chopra to give a screen test.[5] But, after seeing Koirala enacting a scene, Chopra deemed her a "terrible actress". Koirala, however, asked him for a second chance. She went back home, practised her lines and came back prepared the next day. She pleased Chopra with her performance and was thereafter signed.[7] Ashwini Bhave was also one of those who had auditioned for the role. She was rejected on the spot.[8]
Nana Patekar, who had previously worked with Chopra in Parinda (1989), was selected to portray Raghuvir Pathak. But he insisted on being cast as Shubankar, which caused a rift between him and Chopra. Anupam Kher was later signed for the role. Mithun Chakraborty had also been briefly considered for the role of Shubankar, when Shroff developed date issues. The distributors, however, somehow made Chopra retain Shroff in the film. Since the production started in the early 90s, it was speculated that Sanjay Kapoor was to replace his brother Anil as the latter's film Lamhe (1991) had not been successful. Nevertheless, it did not materialize.[8]
The Music Director of the film was Rahul Dev Burman who died before the release of the film, with lyrics by Javed Akhtar. The background Score was By Manohari Singh and Babloo Chakraborty.R. D. Burman won his last Filmfare Award for Best Music Director and Javed Akthar bagged the Filmfare Award for Best Lyricist for "Ek Ladki Ko Dekha To". Kumar Sanu won his 5th consecutive Filmfare Award for Best Male Playback Singer for "Ek Ladki Ko Dekha To" and Kavita Krishnamurthy won the Filmfare Award for Best Female Playback Singer for "Pyar Hua Chupke Se", the first of her hat-trick feat. The soundtrack was #13 on the list of "100 Greatest Bollywood Soundtracks of All Time", as compiled by Planet Bollywood. The music in the introduction of the film is from Gustav Holst's The Planets - Mars the bringer of war.
1942: A Love Story was released on 15 April 1994.[9] It opened to positive reviews from critics, with praise drawn towards the cast performances, cinematography, and the soundtrack by R. D. Burman.[10] Amitabh Bachchan had attended the preview screening of the film and congratulated Chopra for his endeavour.[11]
Didn't the makers of this movie understand thepoignancy at the very heart of the novel? The book begins with its hero, David,committing an act that will end all of his happiness for years. Forbidden to seehis girl, Jade, for thirty days, he sets a fire of newspapers on the porch ofher house hoping to win a reprieve by being the hero who "discovers"the fire. The house burns down, and David is sent into a long exile in a mentalinstitution. The novel's point of view is of a boy who has lost everything hevalues and remembers it with undying passion. But the movie rearranges theevents of the book into chronological order. That means that the love affairbetween Jade and David, instead of being remembered as a painful loss, is seenin the "now" as, well, as a teenage romance. Its additional level ofmeaning is lost.
A story that began as a poem to the fierce prideof adolescent passion gets transmuted into a sociological case study. Thismovie contains some of the same characters and events as Scott Spencer'swonderful novel (indeed, at times it is unnecessarily faithful to situationsand dialogue from the book), but it does not contain the book's reason forbeing. It is about events and it should be about passion.
There are many other problems in the film. Onecrucial mistake is in casting: Martin Hewitt, as David, the seventeen-year-oldboy, is a capable actor but is too handsome, too heavily bearded, too old inappearance to suggest an adolescent bundle of vulnerability and sensitivity.Another mistake is in narrative: The sequence of events involving David'srelease from the institution, his trip to New York, and exactly what happensthere, is so badly jumbled that some audience members will not know how and whyhe went to New York, and hardly anyone will be able to follow the circumstancesthat reunite him with Jade.
A third mistake is in this movie's ending, orrather, its lack of one: The final three minutes in this movie are enraging toanyone who has made an emotional investment in it, because they are a cop-out,a refusal to deal with the material and bring it to a conclusion. The fourthmistake is the one that made me most angry, because it deals with the centralact of the narrative, with the disaster around which the story revolves. In thebook, David sets fire to the newspapers as an act of passion, confusion, andgrief, sure it's dumb, but he's confused and in turmoil. The movie, withoffensive heavy-handedness, has another youth suggest the fire to David as astrategy. Apparently the filmmakers thought the fire had to be"explained." The result is to take a reckless act and turn it into astupid one, diminishing both David's intelligence and the power of his passion.
c80f0f1006