Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has emerged as a watershed moment for Hindi cinema, signalling a significant change in Bollywood’s thematic preoccupations and ideological positions. The initial chapter, released in December 2025, turned out to be the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India before being split into two parts in the post-production phase. Now, with the sequel “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” actively dominating cinemas nationwide, the intelligence-based narrative is positioned to establish what numerous critics view as a concerning transformation in Indian commercial cinema: the wholesale embrace of jingoistic narratives that openly seek state approval and capitalise on nationalist sentiment. The films’ brazen conflation of entertainment and state propaganda has reignited conversations around Bollywood’s ties to political authority, notably under Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Espionage Thriller to Political Declaration
The storytelling framework of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a strategic movement from escapism to ideological advocacy. The first film strategically set before Modi’s 2014 electoral triumph, establishes its political foundation through protagonists who consistently express their desperation for a leader willing to take forceful measures against both external and internal threats. This temporal positioning allows the narrative to frame Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the solution for the nation’s prayers, transforming what seems like a conventional spy thriller into an comprehensive validation of the administration’s approach to national security and armed action.
The sequel amplifies this promotional agenda by presenting Modi himself as an almost omnipresent supporting character through deliberately inserted news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than allowing the fictional narrative to operate on its own, the filmmakers have interwoven the Prime Minister’s real likeness and rhetoric throughout the story, substantially obscuring the boundaries between entertainment and government messaging. This calculated narrative approach distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from previous instances of Bollywood’s ideological affiliation, advancing them from muted ideological content to overt political backing that transforms cinema into a vehicle for political legitimacy.
- First film appeals for a strong leader before Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel presents Modi in a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative blends fictional heroism with government policy endorsement
- Films erase the distinction between entertainment and also state propaganda by design
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Ideological Evolution
The commercial success of the “Dhurandhar” duology indicates a significant shift in Bollywood’s relationship with nationalist ideology and government authority. Whilst the Indian film industry has traditionally upheld close ties with political structures, the brazen nature of these films constitutes a meaningful change in how directly cinema now channels governmental messaging. The franchise’s box office dominance—with the opening film emerging as the top-earning Hindi film in India upon its December release—shows that viewers are growing more receptive to content that smoothly incorporates political propaganda. This acceptance indicates a basic shift in what Indian viewers consider acceptable cinematic content, progressing past the understated ideological framing of prior cinema toward direct governmental promotion.
The ramifications of this change go beyond mere entertainment metrics. By achieving extraordinary financial performance whilst openly conflating cinematic heroics with state policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively endorsed a new template for Indian film production. Next-generation filmmakers now have access to a proven blueprint for combining nationalist sentiment with financial gains, arguably creating politically-driven cinema as a sustainable and profitable category. This shift reflects larger cultural shifts within India, where the boundaries between cinema, patriotism, and official discourse have become less distinct, raising important concerns about the cinema’s influence in influencing public awareness of politics and national identity.
A Trend of Patriotic Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather represents the culmination of a growing trend within modern Indian film. Recent years have witnessed a proliferation of films employing nationalist rhetoric and anti-Muslim narratives, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These productions possess a shared ideological structure that reinterprets Indian history through a Hindu-centred perspective whilst portraying Muslims as existential threats. However, what distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from these predecessors is their better filmmaking craft and production quality, which give their propaganda a sheen of artistic credibility that more artless Islamophobic films do not possess.
This difference shows particularly troubling because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ production quality and entertainment value conceal its essentially propagandist nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” function as simplistic propagandist instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series utilises cinematic craft to make its nationalist agenda appealing to mass audiences. The franchise thus represents a concerning development: propaganda elevated through sophisticated production into what resembles officially-backed production. This polished strategy to ideological content may exert greater influence in affecting popular sentiment than explicitly divisive films, as audiences may accept ideological content when it is presented in absorbing narrative.
Filmmaking Artistry Versus Political Messaging
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most troubling quality lies in its combination of technical excellence with political radicalism. Director Aditya Dhar demonstrates impressive command of the thriller genre, crafting sequences of raw power and storytelling drive that captivate audiences. This technical competence becomes concerning precisely because it acts as a conduit for ideological messaging, transforming what might otherwise be blunt political content into something far more seductive and persuasive. The films’ polished aesthetic, skilled camera work, and strong performances by actors like Ranveer Singh lend credibility to their deeply divisive narratives, making their political content more acceptable to general audiences who might otherwise spurn overtly inflammatory material.
This combination of creative excellence and propagandistic intent creates a unique challenge for film criticism and cultural commentary. Audiences often find it difficult to separate aesthetic appreciation from political analysis, especially when entertainment value proves genuinely compelling. The “Dhurandhar” films leverage this tension intentionally, relying on the idea that viewers absorbed in exciting action scenes will absorb their embedded messaging without critical resistance. The danger grows because the films’ technical achievements bestow them credibility within critical discourse, allowing their nationalist ideals to circulate more widely and shape public consciousness more effectively than earlier, more simplistic examples ever could.
| Film | Narrative Strength |
|---|---|
| Dhurandhar | Espionage intrigue with compelling character development and moral ambiguity |
| Dhurandhar: The Revenge | Political thriller capitalising on nationalist sentiment and state apparatus mythology |
| The Kashmir Files | Historical narrative lacking cinematic sophistication or narrative complexity |
- Technical excellence transforms propagandistic content into mass-market content
- Advanced cinematography conceals ideological messaging from critical scrutiny
- Filmmaking skill raises nationalist rhetoric beyond blunt inflammatory language
The Problematic Ramifications for Indian Cinema
The box office and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology suggests a concerning trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor grows to influence box office performance and cultural significance. Where once Bollywood served as a forum for multiple perspectives and competing viewpoints, the emergence of these nationalist action films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ remarkable achievement indicates that audiences are becoming more drawn to entertainment that explicitly validates state power and frames disagreement as treachery. This shift reflects broader societal polarisation, yet cinema’s distinctive ability to shape collective imagination means its political orientation carry significant influence in influencing public consciousness and political attitudes.
The consequences go further than mere entertainment preferences. When a nation’s cinema sector consistently produces narratives that lionise state power and vilify foreign adversaries, it runs the danger of hardening public opinion and restricting meaningful dialogue with intricate international political dynamics. The “Dhurandhar” movies illustrate this danger by presenting their perspective not as one perspective among many, but as objective truth combined with production quality and star power. For critics and cultural observers, this constitutes a pivotal turning point: Indian film industry’s shift from occasionally accommodating state interests to actively functioning as a propaganda apparatus, albeit one considerably more refined than its earlier incarnations.
Propaganda Dressed up as Entertainment
The troubling nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology lies in its deliberate obfuscation of political messaging within layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar constructs complex action scenes and character arcs that capture audience attention, deftly deflecting from the films’ relentless promotion of nationalist ideology and uncritical belief in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, nominally a personal quest for redemption, functions simultaneously as a exaltation of governmental power and military might. By incorporating propagandistic content within entertaining narratives, the films attain what cruder political messaging cannot: they transform ideology into spectacle, rendering viewers complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst believing themselves merely entertained.
This strategy demonstrates particularly effective because it works beneath deliberate notice. Viewers absorbed in exhilarating action sequences and emotional character moments internalise the films’ underlying messages—that forceful state intervention is essential, that enemies are irredeemable, that personal sacrifice for governmental objectives is honourable—without detecting the manipulation at work. The polished camera work, powerful acting, and real technical skill add legitimacy to these stories, allowing them to look less like ideological material and more like authentic storytelling. This appearance of authenticity permits the films’ divisive ideology to infiltrate general understanding far more successfully than overtly inflammatory material ever could.
What This Signifies for Worldwide Audiences
The international popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a troubling precedent for how state-backed cinema can cross geographic borders and cultural contexts. As streaming platforms like Netflix distribute these films globally, audiences in Western nations and beyond encounter sophisticated propaganda wrapped in the familiar language of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the understanding of cultural and political contexts required to decode the films’ nationalist messaging, overseas audiences may inadvertently consume and legitimise Indian state ideology, effectively extending the reach of propagandistic narratives far beyond their original domestic viewership. This worldwide distribution of politically sensitive material poses critical concerns about platform responsibility and the ethical implications of distributing state-backed films to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films create a concerning template that other nations might attempt to emulate. If state-sponsored filmmaking can secure both critical acclaim and financial returns whilst advancing nationalist agendas, other governments—particularly those with authoritarian tendencies—may recognise cinema as a exceptionally influential tool for ideological propagation. The films demonstrate that propaganda doesn’t need to be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when combined with authentic creative talent and considerable resources, it becomes nearly irresistible. For global audiences and cinema critics, the duology’s success indicates a troubling outlook where entertainment and state messaging become increasingly indistinguishable.
