Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has become a watershed moment for Hindi cinema, marking a dramatic shift in Bollywood’s thematic preoccupations and political leanings. The initial chapter, released in December 2025, turned out to be the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India prior to being divided into two parts in the post-production phase. Now, with the follow-up “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” currently dominating cinemas nationwide, the intelligence-based narrative is poised to cement what many observers consider to be a concerning transformation in Indian mainstream film: the comprehensive adoption of patriotic-inflected tales that deliberately pursue official support and leverage patriotic feeling. The films’ overt blending of entertainment and state propaganda has rekindled discussions concerning Bollywood’s relationship with political power, notably under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Espionage Thriller to Political Declaration
The storytelling framework of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a strategic movement from escapism to political messaging. The opening instalment strategically set before Modi’s 2014 election victory, establishes its political foundation through characters who repeatedly voice their desperation for a leader willing to take forceful measures against both foreign and domestic dangers. This temporal positioning enables the story to frame Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the solution for the nation’s prayers, transforming what appears to be a standard espionage film into an elaborate endorsement of the ruling government’s approach to national security and military aggression.
The sequel amplifies this propagandistic impulse by showcasing Modi himself as an virtually ever-present supporting character through deliberately inserted news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than permitting the fictional narrative to stand independently, the filmmakers have interwoven the Prime Minister’s real likeness and rhetoric throughout the story, effectively blurring the boundaries between entertainment and government messaging. This deliberate narrative choice distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from previous instances of Bollywood’s political alignment, raising them from muted ideological content to overt political backing that transforms cinema into a tool for political validation.
- First film calls for a powerful leader before Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel includes Modi in a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative conflates fictional heroism alongside government policy approval
- Films blur the boundaries between entertainment and also state propaganda deliberately
The Transformation of Bollywood’s Ideological Shift
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology indicates a significant shift in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist thought 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 overtly cinema now channels governmental messaging. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—with the opening film becoming the top-earning Hindi film in India following its December launch—demonstrates that audiences are increasingly receptive to entertainment that seamlessly integrates state messaging. This acceptance indicates a fundamental change in what Indian audiences consider acceptable cinematic content, progressing past the understated ideological framing of prior cinema toward explicit state advocacy.
The consequences of this change go beyond simple entertainment metrics. By achieving unprecedented commercial success whilst openly conflating fictional heroism with governmental policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively legitimised a novel framework for Indian film production. Next-generation filmmakers now have access to a tested formula for blending patriotic feeling with box office returns, conceivably fostering state-aligned filmmaking as a sustainable and profitable genre. This shift demonstrates larger cultural shifts within India, where the dividing lines separating cinema, patriotism, and official discourse have become less distinct, prompting important concerns about film’s function in influencing political consciousness and national identity.
A Pattern of National Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not appear in a vacuum but rather constitutes the apotheosis of a growing trend within contemporary Indian cinema. Recent years have seen a surge of films utilising nationalist rhetoric and anti-Muslim narratives, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These films share a common ideological framework that recasts Indian history through a Hindu-centric lens whilst depicting Muslims as existential threats. However, what distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from these predecessors is their superior cinematic execution and production values, which lend their propaganda a veneer of artistic legitimacy that more crude anti-Muslim productions do not possess.
This difference demonstrates notably concerning because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ cinematic craft and popular appeal obscure its inherently ideological nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” serve as crude ideological instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series employs cinematic craft to present its political messaging appealing to mainstream audiences. The franchise thus represents a concerning development: ideological content enhanced through professional filmmaking into something approaching state-sanctioned cinema. This polished strategy to political narrative may exert greater influence in influencing audience views than overtly provocative films, as audiences may embrace ideological content when it comes packaged in engaging storytelling.
Filmmaking Artistry Versus Political Messaging
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most insidious quality lies in its marriage of cinematic mastery with ideological extremism. Director Aditya Dhar demonstrates substantial expertise of the thriller genre, crafting sequences of raw power and storytelling drive that engage audiences. This technical competence becomes contentious precisely because it functions as a conduit for ideological messaging, transforming what might otherwise be crude political messaging into something significantly seductive and persuasive. The films’ polished aesthetic, sophisticated cinematography, and powerful acting by actors like Ranveer Singh add legitimacy to their fundamentally divisive narratives, rendering their political message more digestible to general audiences who might otherwise reject overtly inflammatory material.
This convergence of artistic merit and propagandistic intent presents a unique challenge for film criticism and cultural commentary. Audiences often find it difficult to distinguish between artistic enjoyment from political critique, particularly when entertainment value demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films exploit this tension intentionally, relying on the notion that viewers absorbed in thrilling action sequences will internalise their underlying messages without critical scrutiny. The danger intensifies because the films’ technical accomplishments grant them credibility within critical conversation, enabling their nationalist ideals to spread more extensively and influence public opinion 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 |
- Technical excellence turns propagandistic content into mass-market content
- Sophisticated filmmaking masks ideological undertones from close examination
- Cinematic craft elevates nationalist rhetoric above crude inflammatory discourse
The Concerning Ramifications for Indian Film Industry
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology suggests a concerning trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor progressively shapes box office performance and cultural importance. Where once Bollywood served as a forum for varied storytelling and alternative standpoints, the ascendancy of these jingoistic thrillers suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ unprecedented success indicates that audiences are becoming more drawn to entertainment that openly champions state power and frames disagreement as treachery. This shift reflects broader societal polarisation, yet cinema’s distinctive ability to shape public imagination means its ideological stance carry significant influence in shaping popular opinion and political attitudes.
The consequences extend beyond simple viewing habits. When a country’s film industry consistently produces stories that celebrate government authority and demonise foreign adversaries, it risks hardening collective views and restricting meaningful dialogue with intricate international political dynamics. The “Dhurandhar” films illustrate this danger by presenting their worldview not as a single viewpoint amongst others, but as factual reality combined with production quality and star power. For critics and cultural observers, this marks a pivotal turning point: Indian cinema’s transition from sometimes serving state interests to actively functioning as a propaganda apparatus, albeit one far more sophisticated than its historical predecessors.
Propaganda Presented as Entertainment
The troubling nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology rests upon its intentional concealment of political messaging within layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar crafts elaborate action sequences and character arcs that demand viewer engagement, deftly deflecting from the films’ constant endorsement of nationalist ideology and uncritical belief in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, nominally a personal quest for redemption, operates concurrently as a exaltation of governmental power and military might. By weaving propagandistic content inside compelling stories, the films attain what cruder political messaging cannot: they convert ideology into spectacle, turning audiences complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst considering themselves simply entertained.
This strategy proves particularly compelling because it operates beneath active perception. Viewers engrossed by exhilarating action sequences and intimate character scenes take in the films’ core themes—that strong-handed government action is essential, that opponents cannot change, that personal sacrifice for state interests is honourable—without detecting the manipulation occurring. The refined visual composition, engaging portrayals, and authentic craftsmanship lend credibility to these stories, allowing them to look less like persuasive messaging and more like authentic storytelling. This appearance of authenticity allows the films’ polarising worldview to penetrate mainstream consciousness far more successfully than overtly inflammatory material ever could.
What This Means for Worldwide Audiences
The international popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a concerning precedent for how state-aligned cinema can cross geographical boundaries and cultural contexts. As streaming services like Netflix release these films globally, audiences in Western countries 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 messaging, international viewers may unknowingly consume and legitimise Indian state ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic content far beyond their intended domestic audience. This globalisation of politically charged content raises critical concerns about platform accountability and the moral dimensions of distributing state-backed films to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films set a troubling template that rival states could try to emulate. If state-aligned cinema can secure both critical acclaim and commercial success whilst furthering nationalist agendas, rival administrations—particularly those prone to authoritarianism—may recognise cinema as a exceptionally influential tool for ideological propagation. The films demonstrate that propaganda doesn’t have to be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when combined with real artistic ability and considerable resources, it becomes almost inescapable. For worldwide audiences and film critics, the duology’s success indicates a worrying prospect where popular entertainment and state communication become progressively harder to distinguish.
