The movie was directed by the Father of Indian Cinema, Dadasaheb Phalke, real name Dhundiraj Govind Phalke, in 1913. It was the first full length motion picture. Though the first Indian film was a shot film "The flowers of Persia" by Hiralal Sen made in the year 1898. This movie is considered as a milestone that marked the beginning of Indian Cinema. An interesting fact about the movie is that even the female characters are played by males. A 40 minute long movie, talks about the life of "The King" Harishchandra and his legend of ideal life. He never backed out from his word and he never lied. For his word he donates his kingdom to Vishwamitra, the great Indian sage. To complete the "Dakshina" (given to sages in olden times), he even sells his wife and son. Pleased with his virtues, he is given back his kingdom by lord and his glory restored. Dadasahib got inspired to make this movie after watching "The life of Christ".
9 Reviews
The first...or among the first.
planktonrules10 February 2019
How long is "Raja Harishchandra"? ImDB says it's 40 minutes but the copy I found on YouTube is only 11. Either way, it's regarded by the Indian government as the first full-length Indian film...though other sources credit "Shree Pundalik" with being the first.
The story is told using both nice sets as well as being filmed outdoors. It tells the story of the Raja who is apparently being tested by the gods. They put him through hell after he encounters three supernatural ladies and he even ultimately dies. Is there any saving the poor Raja?
I was actually pretty impressed by the film. While it wasn't great, for a first or one of the first, it was very competently made and the multilanguage intertitle cards mean most Indians and English speakers can enjoy it.
The story is told using both nice sets as well as being filmed outdoors. It tells the story of the Raja who is apparently being tested by the gods. They put him through hell after he encounters three supernatural ladies and he even ultimately dies. Is there any saving the poor Raja?
I was actually pretty impressed by the film. While it wasn't great, for a first or one of the first, it was very competently made and the multilanguage intertitle cards mean most Indians and English speakers can enjoy it.
It's Remarkable That Any of This Historic Film Still Survives, If It Does
richardchatten20 May 2017
I have just seen what remains of 'Raja Harishchandra' at London's National Film Theatre on the South Bank. Transferred to DVD from the print preserved in the National Film Archive of India - the picture quality of which is far superior to the awful print on YouTube - this presumably represents the definitive cut of this film presently available (except that this might not actually be the 1913 but the 1917 version; disputes exist on this point).
Apart from the fact that much of it is staged out of doors drenched in luxuriant Indian sunlight, it otherwise strongly recalls the films made ten years earlier by Georges Méliès. All of the action takes place in a series of tableaux staged far from the camera, there are occasional special effects to depict supernatural occurrences, and it's cast busily saunter back and forth across the screen as in Méliès.
The brisk pace of the action brings us to its running time, which I clocked in at just 16 minutes - rather less than the 40 minutes it reputedly originally ran; especially as it's bilingual English & Hindi titles also occupy quite a bit of its running time. Stills exist from the 1913 original of scenes not in the present version (which again might be the result of it actually being the 1917 remake) but had it been projected slower we would have nevertheless have seen a slightly longer, more stately film.
Apart from the fact that much of it is staged out of doors drenched in luxuriant Indian sunlight, it otherwise strongly recalls the films made ten years earlier by Georges Méliès. All of the action takes place in a series of tableaux staged far from the camera, there are occasional special effects to depict supernatural occurrences, and it's cast busily saunter back and forth across the screen as in Méliès.
The brisk pace of the action brings us to its running time, which I clocked in at just 16 minutes - rather less than the 40 minutes it reputedly originally ran; especially as it's bilingual English & Hindi titles also occupy quite a bit of its running time. Stills exist from the 1913 original of scenes not in the present version (which again might be the result of it actually being the 1917 remake) but had it been projected slower we would have nevertheless have seen a slightly longer, more stately film.
Pioneer Indian Feature.
Mozjoukine24 July 2014
Like most national industries, India has a candidate for the status of first feature film - this 1913 hit, seen as the departure point of Hindi cinema and it's mythological cycle. Both time and culture separate outside viewers from it. Even so, it is disappointing as a piece of film history.
While hunting, King Harishchandra disturbs the sage who is upset, so to atone our hero gives him his kingdom. It looks like this will precipitate a tragic outcome but Shiva intervenes.
Photographer turned filmmaker Phalke took two years to get his first film made. The technique is basic - jump cut disposal of the three women deities that the sage has summoned is as adventurous as it gets.
The mime in the style of regional theater is broad and having boys play the female parts is disturbing now.
While hunting, King Harishchandra disturbs the sage who is upset, so to atone our hero gives him his kingdom. It looks like this will precipitate a tragic outcome but Shiva intervenes.
Photographer turned filmmaker Phalke took two years to get his first film made. The technique is basic - jump cut disposal of the three women deities that the sage has summoned is as adventurous as it gets.
The mime in the style of regional theater is broad and having boys play the female parts is disturbing now.
First Feature Film in India
springfieldrental27 April 2021
India has a long, rich history in cinema dating even before its first feature film, May 1913's Raja Harishchandra." The country had an established movie studio by 1907, despite no film production equipment was being made in India. But it was "Raja's" release on May 3 at the Coronation Theater in Bombay, complete with a live performance of music and chanting, that marked the point where India's public embraced movies and made the film industry viable.
Dadasaheb Phalke is solely responsible for introducing cinema to India's passionate movie lovers. Known as "The Father of Indian Cinema," Phalke as a businessman had a successful career running a printing press company before getting the movie bug. He gave up his business and hocked all his family's possessions to begin a studio, focused on producing a feature film. Through a series of trials and tribulations, Phalke finally competed the 53-minute film version of the Indian mystic legend of Harishchandra's life.
Phalke's adventures in gathering cast and tech crew and filming the feature are portrayed in 2009's "Harishchandrachi Factory." The Paresh Mokashi written/directed movie was India's official Best Foreign Language Film Oscar submission for that year's Academy Awards.
Dadasaheb Phalke is solely responsible for introducing cinema to India's passionate movie lovers. Known as "The Father of Indian Cinema," Phalke as a businessman had a successful career running a printing press company before getting the movie bug. He gave up his business and hocked all his family's possessions to begin a studio, focused on producing a feature film. Through a series of trials and tribulations, Phalke finally competed the 53-minute film version of the Indian mystic legend of Harishchandra's life.
Phalke's adventures in gathering cast and tech crew and filming the feature are portrayed in 2009's "Harishchandrachi Factory." The Paresh Mokashi written/directed movie was India's official Best Foreign Language Film Oscar submission for that year's Academy Awards.
India enters the film industry
Horst_In_Translation18 February 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"Raja Harishchandra" is a 1913 movie from India and as it is over 100 years old now and as such a black-and-white silent film. According to IMDb, the run-time is 40 minutes, but I have also read other numbers, so the only one who knows for sure is probably writer and director Dhundiraj Govind Phalke and he has been dead for a long time. But it is not that important anyway as only fragments of the film still exist apparently. Do not be fooled by a 50-minute version on Youtube or other video sites. This one includes a long introduction that is not part of the film I think, unless they included something similar to a making of early on as part of the film. For example, we find out about how women would not appear in front of a camera and as such the female characters were played by men. The actual movie (or what we still have preserved from it) runs for clearly under 20 minutes in the version I saw. Also, another movie by the same filmmaker is show in the last 10 minutes and it is also not part of "Raja Harishchandra". As for the film itself, it is obvious that costumes were at least as important back then already as they are today in Bollywood's finest. The story is so-so only though and the lack of a sufficient amount of subtitles makes this a mediocre watch at best. But for a first film, it's really not a failure. Then again Europe and the United States have been making movie for 20 years or so already at that point in 1913 and India sure had a huge gap to close in both quality and quantity. I give this one a thumbs-down. Only worth seeing for film historians.
First Indian film
luigicavaliere27 February 2019
The king is with his wife while he teaches archery to his son. At the request of the citizens the King goes out on an hunting excursion. The sage Vishwamitra achieves the help of the three powers against their will. The king keeps pulling arrows and the sage is offended and the king calms himself and gives him a sword, receiving the blessing of the sage. The king and the queen leave for abroad and entrust their son to the wise man.
Phalke, the father of Indian cinema, used some members of the family as actors. In the cast, male actors played female roles, as happened in Greek tragedy. The story comes from the Indian epic written in Sanskrit: "Mahabharata"
Raja Harischandra review
JoeytheBrit28 June 2020
Only a portion of India's first feature-length film exists today, but that's enough to tell us that the development of Indian cinema was lagging some way behind Europe and the United States in 1913. What survives are mostly static long shots, and it's difficult to makeout what is going on - although that's to be expected when viewing a fragment of a much longer work.
Its the first movie from India.
newuser7 August 1999
Only bits and pieces of this movie are available. I have seen those, its silent, its shaky, its like any other good movie that would come from 1913.
Most of the roles are played by Dadabhai Phalke (Harischandra and his wife) because he could not get any woman to act in front of camera and pretend to be his wife.
But this movie is historical. It is the first movie from India. From this movie Indian film industry graduated to making the most number of movies in the world and being biggest film exporter.
An award has been named after him, Dadabhai Phalke award. which is of same status in India as is Oscar in USA.
Most of the roles are played by Dadabhai Phalke (Harischandra and his wife) because he could not get any woman to act in front of camera and pretend to be his wife.
But this movie is historical. It is the first movie from India. From this movie Indian film industry graduated to making the most number of movies in the world and being biggest film exporter.
An award has been named after him, Dadabhai Phalke award. which is of same status in India as is Oscar in USA.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
