Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has established itself as a watershed moment for Hindi cinema, marking a pronounced transformation in Bollywood’s subject matter focus and political leanings. The first instalment, unveiled in December 2025, turned out to be the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India before being separated into two parts throughout the editing process. Now, with the follow-up “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” currently dominating cinemas nationwide, the spy saga is positioned to establish what various commentators consider to be a concerning transformation in Indian commercial cinema: the blanket endorsement of nationalist-leaning stories that deliberately pursue official support and capitalise on national pride. The films’ brazen conflation of entertainment and governmental messaging has reignited discussions concerning Bollywood’s ties to political authority, especially during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Espionage Thriller to Political Statement
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology demonstrates a calculated progression from escapism to political messaging. The first film deliberately positioned before Modi’s 2014 electoral triumph, establishes its ideological framework through characters who repeatedly voice their yearning for a leader willing to take forceful measures against both external and internal threats. This temporal positioning allows the narrative to present Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the answer to the country’s aspirations, converting what seems like a standard espionage film into an elaborate endorsement of the ruling government’s approach to national security and armed action.
The sequel intensifies this promotional agenda by presenting Modi himself as an almost omnipresent supporting character through deliberately inserted news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than enabling the fictional narrative to stand independently, the filmmakers have threaded the Prime Minister’s real likeness and rhetoric throughout the story, substantially obscuring the boundaries between entertainment and state communication. This deliberate narrative choice distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from prior cases of Bollywood’s political positioning, raising them from understated ideological messaging to overt political backing that transforms cinema into a instrument for political credibility.
- First film prays for a powerful leader before Modi’s election victory
- Sequel includes Modi as a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative blends fictional heroism alongside government policy approval
- Films obscure the boundaries between entertainment and also state propaganda deliberately
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Ideological Evolution
The commercial success of the “Dhurandhar” duology indicates a significant shift in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist ideology and state power. Whilst the Indian cinema sector has historically maintained close ties with political establishments, the explicit character of these films constitutes a meaningful change in how directly cinema now conveys governmental messaging. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—with the opening film becoming the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India upon its December release—shows that audiences are increasingly receptive to entertainment that seamlessly integrates state messaging. This acceptance suggests a basic shift in what Indian audiences regard as acceptable film content, progressing past the understated ideological framing of prior cinema toward explicit state advocacy.
The ramifications of this change extend beyond simple box office figures. By achieving unprecedented commercial success whilst directly blending cinematic heroics with state policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively endorsed a novel framework for Indian film production. Next-generation filmmakers now possess a tested formula for blending patriotic feeling with financial gains, potentially establishing propagandistic cinema as a viable and lucrative category. This shift demonstrates broader societal transformations within India, where the boundaries between cinema, patriotism, and official discourse have grown more blurred, raising critical questions about cinema’s role in influencing public awareness of politics and national identity.
A Trend of National Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather represents the culmination of a growing trend within modern Indian film. The past few years have seen a proliferation of films utilising nationalist rhetoric and anti-Muslim narratives, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These productions share a common ideological framework that reinterprets Indian history through a Hindu-centred perspective whilst depicting Muslims as existential threats. However, what sets apart the “Dhurandhar” films from these earlier works is their better filmmaking craft and production values, which lend their propaganda a veneer of artistic legitimacy that more crude anti-Muslim productions do not possess.
This differentiation shows particularly troubling because the “Dhurandhar” duology’s technical sophistication and entertainment value conceal its fundamentally propagandistic nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” serve as crude ideological instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series employs cinematic craft to render its political messaging acceptable to mass audiences. The franchise thus constitutes a dangerous evolution: messaging refined through expert direction into material bordering on state-sanctioned cinema. This refined method to ideological content may exert greater influence in influencing audience views than explicitly divisive films, as audiences may accept ideological content when it arrives wrapped in compelling entertainment.
Filmmaking Artistry Versus Political Messaging
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most insidious quality lies in its fusion of technical excellence with political radicalism. Director Aditya Dhar displays substantial expertise of the action thriller genre, crafting sequences of emotional force and plot propulsion that captivate audiences. This technical competence becomes problematic precisely because it acts as a medium for political propaganda, reshaping what might otherwise be overt political rhetoric into something considerably compelling and influential. The films’ refined visual presentation, sophisticated cinematography, and compelling performances by actors like Ranveer Singh add legitimacy to their deeply divisive narratives, rendering their political message more digestible to wider audiences who might otherwise reject blatantly incendiary messaging.
This combination of artistic merit and propagandistic intent creates a unique challenge for film criticism and cultural analysis. Audiences often find it difficult to distinguish between artistic enjoyment from political critique, especially when entertainment appeal demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films leverage this tension intentionally, relying on the notion that audiences engaged with exciting action scenes will absorb their underlying messages without critical resistance. The risk intensifies because the films’ technical achievements bestow them legitimacy within critical discourse, allowing their nationalist ideals to spread more extensively and influence public consciousness more successfully 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 |
- Professional quality transforms ideological material into popular media
- Advanced cinematography masks ideological messaging from critical scrutiny
- Cinematic craft raises patriotic messaging past blunt inflammatory language
The Problematic Implications for Indian Film Industry
The box office and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a concerning trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor grows to influence box office performance and cultural importance. Where once Bollywood operated as a forum for multiple perspectives and differing opinions, the rise of these nationalist action films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ unprecedented success indicates that audiences are increasingly receptive to entertainment that openly champions state power and positions dissent as treachery. This shift reflects broader societal polarisation, yet cinema’s unique capacity to shape collective imagination means its ideological leanings carry significant influence in influencing public consciousness and political attitudes.
The implications extend beyond simple entertainment preferences. When a country’s film industry regularly generates stories that celebrate state power and portray negatively foreign adversaries, it risks ossifying public opinion and restricting meaningful dialogue with complex geopolitical realities. The “Dhurandhar” movies exemplify this danger by presenting their perspective not as a single viewpoint amongst others, but as objective truth packaged with production quality and star power. For critics and cultural observers, this constitutes a watershed moment: Indian film industry’s evolution from sometimes serving state interests to actively functioning as a propaganda machine, albeit one considerably more refined than its historical predecessors.
Propaganda Presented as Entertainment
The troubling nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology lies in its intentional concealment of political messaging beneath layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar develops intricate action set-pieces and character arcs that command viewer attention, deftly deflecting from the films’ relentless promotion of nationalist ideology and blind faith in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, ostensibly a personal quest for redemption, functions simultaneously as a exaltation of governmental power and military might. By weaving propagandistic content inside compelling stories, the films achieve what cruder political messaging cannot: they transform ideology into spectacle, turning audiences complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst regarding themselves as merely entertained.
This strategy shows particularly compelling because it functions beneath deliberate notice. Viewers captivated by thrilling set pieces and intimate character scenes absorb the films’ underlying messages—that decisive governmental control is essential, that enemies are irredeemable, that personal sacrifice for governmental objectives is noble—without recognising the manipulation at work. The refined visual composition, powerful acting, and real technical skill lend credibility to these stories, making them appear less like persuasive messaging and more like true storytelling. This appearance of authenticity enables the films’ divisive ideology to reach popular awareness far more effectively than overtly inflammatory material ever would.
What This Means for Worldwide Audiences
The global success of the “Dhurandhar” duology presents a troubling pattern for how state-backed cinema can cross geographical boundaries and cultural contexts. As streaming services like Netflix release these films globally, audiences in Western nations and beyond encounter sophisticated propaganda wrapped in the recognizable style of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the understanding of cultural and political contexts needed to interpret the films’ nationalist rhetoric, overseas audiences may inadvertently absorb and validate Indian state ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic content far beyond their original domestic viewership. This worldwide distribution of politically sensitive material raises urgent questions about platform responsibility and the moral dimensions of circulating state-backed films to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films establish a disquieting template that other nations could try to emulate. If state-aligned cinema can attain both critical recognition and financial returns whilst promoting nationalist agendas, other states—particularly those with authoritarian leanings—may acknowledge cinema as a exceptionally influential tool for the spread of ideology. The films demonstrate that propaganda need not be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when paired with genuine artistic talent and substantial budgets, it becomes almost inescapable. For worldwide audiences and film critics, the duology’s success indicates a troubling outlook where entertainment and government messaging become progressively harder to distinguish.
