&w=3840&q=100)
When Aishwarya Rai declined to star opposite Aamir Khan in one of the biggest hits of his career, director says "She had to go to..."
The director once told Bollywood Hungama, 'She was also my first choice for the role of Memsaab in Raja Hindustani (1996). My heart was on her.' read more
Aishwarya Rai and Aamir Khan have shared the screen only in one film Mela back in 2000. They were supposed to do the 2005 period drama Mangal Pandey and the 1996 blockbuster Raja Hindustani too. And the director of this film Dharmesh Darshan spoke about why Rai could not come on board.
The director once told Bollywood Hungama, 'She was also my first choice for the role of Memsaab in Raja Hindustani (1996). My heart was on her. But she urgently had to go for Miss World. I didn't want to take any chances, as I wanted an actress who could devote her full time to the film and Bollywood. It was her sheer grace that she didn't hold it in her heart.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Mansoor Khan on casting Shah Rukh Khan and not Aamir Khan in Josh
I was intending to cast Aamir as the romantic lead opposite Aishwarya. But when I narrated the script to Aamir, he thought he was playing Max. Then I went to Shah Rukh; he was really excited about Max. I narrated it to him; he suggested a lot of things for Max's character.
While rumours of Aishwarya Rai and Abhishek Bachchan's divorce have been grabbing the headlines for quite some time, the speculations garnered limelight after none of the Bachchan family members wished Ash on her birthday, which was on 1st November.
Amid this, an old interview has surfaced online where she spoke about overcoming challenges with Abhishek Bachchan .
'There's a lot of adjustment, a lot of give and take. There will be agreements and disagreements. But it's important to keep the communication going. That's something I've always believed in," Rai told Filmfare.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India.com
5 hours ago
- India.com
Aishwarya Rai refused to work with Aamir Khan in this blockbuster, earned Rs 400 crore, made Karisma Kapoor superstar; Movie is...
Aishwarya Rai and Aamir Khan—two titans of Indian cinema—have only shared screen space once, in Mela (2000). But that wasn't supposed to be their only collaboration. They were almost cast together in not one, but two significant films: Raja Hindustani (1996) and Mangal Pandey (2005). Director Dharmesh Darshan opened up about the missed opportunity in Raja Hindustani, a film that later went on to become a blockbuster. Speaking to Bollywood Hungama, he recalled, 'She was also my first choice for the role of Memsaab in Raja Hindustani (1996). My heart was with her. But she urgently had to go for Miss World. I didn't want to take any chances, as I wanted an actress who could devote her full time to the film and Bollywood. It was her sheer grace that she didn't hold it in her heart.' Meanwhile, another near-collaboration—this time in Josh—was sidestepped by a casting misread. Director Mansoor Khan said, 'I was intending to cast Aamir as the romantic lead opposite Aishwarya. But when I narrated the script to Aamir, he thought he was playing Max. Then I went to Shah Rukh; he was excited about Max. I narrated it to him; he suggested a lot of things for Max's character.' Raja Hindustani earned Rs 76.34 crore worldwide, including a domestic gross of Rs 73.84 crore. Its domestic nett was Rs 43.15 crore, and its adjusted worldwide gross is equivalent to Rs 400 crore. While these cinematic what-ifs remain part of industry lore, real-life speculations are currently casting a shadow over Aishwarya's personal life. Rumours of a split with Abhishek Bachchan have been circulating, especially after the Bachchan family's silence on Aishwarya's birthday this November 1st. Amidst the noise, an old interview with Filmfare has resurfaced, where she spoke about the reality of relationships behind the glamour, 'There's a lot of adjustment, a lot of give and take. There will be agreements and disagreements. But it's important to keep the communication going. That's something I've always believed in.' From missed roles to muted wishes, Aishwarya's timeline reads like a series of graceful exits—both scripted and unscripted.
News18
11 hours ago
- News18
Aishwarya Mohanraj Reveals The Story Behind Her Name And It's Not What You Think
Last Updated: Aishwarya Mohanraj shared the story behind her name and it came with a plot twist that fans couldn't get enough of. Behind every name, there lies a story. Sometimes it's inspired by our parents, grandparents or siblings and sometimes it's borrowed from a fictional character or a film star. Comedian Aishwarya Mohanraj shared the story behind her name and it came with a plot twist that fans couldn't get enough of. Given her name, many assume she was named after the graceful Aishwarya Rai. After all, Aishwarya Mohanraj was born in 1994 — the very same year Aishwarya Rai won the Miss World crown. But here comes the first twist. Taking to Instagram, Mohanraj shared a video revealing the real story behind her name. She explained, 'Aishwarya Rai became Miss World in 1994 and I was born in 1994, so obviously people assume that I was named after her. But I was born on July 26, and she became Miss World on November 19, so I was not named after her." So, how did she end up being named Aishwarya? She revealed that too. She shared, 'When my mom was young, she used to attend 'Bal Vikas' classes where they taught about gods, prayers, scriptures, and good values. Every year, they'd put up a value-based play with songs, dances, and drama. When my mom was 14, she took part in one such play. One of the characters was Mother India, played by a nine-year-old girl named Aishwarya." It was the first time her mother had heard the name, and she instantly fell in love with it. The girl's charm and innocence left such a lasting impression that her mother decided that if she ever had a daughter, she would name her Aishwarya. Cut to 14 years later, she gave birth to a daughter and named her Aishwarya. But here comes the second twist. 'Fourteen years after that play, she gave birth to her daughter and named her Aishwarya. Fourteen years after that play, the girl who played Mother India went on to become Miss World—Aishwarya Rai," Mohanraj revealed, leaving everyone stunned. Connecting these beautiful coincidences with humour, she wrapped it up by saying, 'So I guess, I am named after her." The storytelling, filled with charm and surprises left fans delighted, One fan commented, 'Plot I was not ready for," while another fan wrote, 'I'm fully convinced that your life is a movie and we're all side characters including Aishwarya. She's there just for the plot and the plot is great." Yes, this truly feels like the script of a short film and what could be filmier than her caption itself: 'Phir apne mohalle mein Aishwarya aayi." First Published:
Mint
11 hours ago
- Mint
How Dilip Kumar let it all out on the screen
By the time Indian cinema entered its classical phase in the late 1940s, Dilip Kumar had completed his self-discovery as an actor to a large extent. The basic features of his hero were earmarked: an introvert who had been wronged, takes it to his heart and generates a complete catharsis of a whole range of emotions. He portrayed the search for an ideal self—one proclaiming true emancipation through love but desires it to be materialized only in a just society; and as that is not possible in actual reality, the self has to perish to validate this idealized conviction. The actor, in fact, represented the popular novelist Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay's model of a vulnerable, self-destructing hero in Bengali literature. Several of his films depicted Dilip Kumar as an unrequited lover seeking a kind of liberation from the unjust world through a prolonged internalized suffering (often ending in death) as seen in S.U. Sunny's Mela, S.K. Ojha's Hulchul (1951), Nitin Bose's Deedar and Gunga Jumna (1961), Ram Daryani's Tarana (1951), Bimal Roy's Devdas, S.U. Sunny's Uran Khatola (1955), Hrishikesh Mukherjee's Musafir (1957) and K. Asif's Mughal-e-Azam (1960). In contrast, he, during this phase, was also seen in somewhat morbid anti-hero characters such as in Shaheed Latif's Arzoo (1950), S.U. Sunny's Babul, Mehboob Khan's Andaz and Amar, and R.C. Talwar's Sangdil (1952). Explaining the roles Dilip Kumar played in most of his films right through the 1950s, Nikhat Kazmi says: '[He] always opted for internal emigration as a course of action. This was a great escape. A voyage into the unknown, which is undertaken not because one is enticed, but because one is disgusted by something. In his iconoclasm, he represented a rebellion that was akin to that of the Bohemians of Baudelaire's age. He was like the group of desperadoes who tried to break away from the nice and easy positivism of bourgeois society. Charles Baudelaire, Verlaine, Arthur Rimbaud, Paul Gauguin, Van Gogh were the tramps, the heavy drinkers and the unrivalled artists who chose to destroy everything in themselves that may be of no use to society, who raged against themselves too. For them and for the hero as immortalized by Dilip Kumar, happiness itself was something that is banal and vulgar. In a letter of 1845, addressed to a friend, Baudelaire writes: 'You are a happy man, I feel sorry for you, Sir, for being happy so easily. A man must have sunk low to consider himself happy.' However, Dilip Kumar never wanted to sink so low. On the contrary, he doggedly sought nobility in sorrow and imbued it with a romanticism that lingers even today." Remember his famous dialogue from Devdas: Kaun kambakat hai jo bardasht karne ke liye peeta hai, main to peeta hun ki bas saans ley sakun (Which wretched person drinks to tolerate, I drink so that I can at least take a breath.) No wonder, the world of acting often ushers performers into the limelight, where performance anxiety can run high. The stakes are elevated, and heart rate may surge. Surprisingly, sometimes this stress can become a catalyst for improved performance, embracing the concept of positive stress in challenging situations. However, a more complex challenge arises when method actors choose to inhabit their characters beyond the stage or camera's lens. As they tap into past emotional experiences, whether joyful or traumatic, unresolved emotions can linger. This emotional baggage may manifest as heightened emotional instability, intensified anxiety, fear or even a sense of falsehood, accompanied by bouts of acute sleep deprivation. Such emotional turbulence can pave the way for psychological distress, leading to emotional fatigue. According to experts, this emotional fatigue often arises when actors create dissonance between their actions and authentic feelings. Research indicates that when method acting is employed judiciously and with proper emotional regulation, it need not lead to excessive fatigue. The key lies in striking a balance between immersion in the character and the ability to resurface, ensuring a harmonious coexistence of art and emotional well-being. Dilip Kumar's profound commitment to his roles and his deep involvement with the character he portrayed, in film after film, at that stage of his career, led to serious psychological issues, so much so that he had to consult a psychiatrist in England. The advice given was simple: switch to comic roles, which he did with aplomb and poise! His consummate performances in S.M.S. Naidu's Azaad (1959) and S.U. Sunny's Kohinoor (1960) in a carefree, jovial and jaunty manner revealed how he could move from one genre to another with remarkable ease and finesse. However, later in A. Bhim Singh's Gopi (1970) and Tapan Sinha's Bengali film Sagina Mahato (1970), Sagina in Hindi (1974) and Asit Sen's Bairaag (1976), Dilip Kumar attempted to introduce some new elements in his acting style, though not always with much success. He designed his comedy through an over-talkative, one-track mind and as an obsessed simpleton who was a victim of the circumstances, but unlike his earlier roles, he did not internalize his suffering; he responded to it with a sense of simplicity, quite the same way Raj Kapoor did in film after film. He also improvised his mannerisms spontaneously to depict the character he was portraying on the screen such as repeatedly jerking his head and clinking his eyes. However, the audience did not take to it... Dilip Kumar's second innings began with the 1981 multi-starrer Kranti by Manoj Kumar followed by Ramesh Sippy's Shakti. Eight films followed through the 1980s and another three in the 1990s, in which Dilip Kumar made his presence felt with his individualistic stamp and authority. These films included Subhash Ghai's Vidhaata (1982), Karma (1986) and Saudagar (1991), Ravi Chopra's Mazdoor (1983), and Yash Chopra's Mashaal (1984), not of course counting the 1998 Qila by Umesh Mehra, which was a complete dud... Excerpted with permission from The Man Who Became Cinema: Dilip Kumar, published by Penguin Random House India. Also read: 'Jungle Nama': A thrilling play for children reimagines the myth of Bonbibi
