Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has become a landmark achievement for Hindi cinema, signalling a pronounced transformation in Bollywood’s thematic preoccupations and ideological positions. The initial chapter, launched in December 2025, became the top-earning Hindi film in India prior to being divided into two parts in the post-production phase. Now, with the second instalment “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” presently commanding cinemas across the country, the espionage thriller is poised to cement what numerous critics view as a worrying change in Indian popular cinema: the comprehensive adoption of patriotic-inflected tales that deliberately pursue government favour and leverage national pride. The films’ overt blending of commercial entertainment and state narratives has revived conversations around Bollywood’s connections with political influence, especially during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Espionage Thriller to Political Declaration
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology demonstrates a strategic movement from escapism to ideological advocacy. The first film strategically set before Modi’s 2014 election victory, sets up its political foundation through characters who repeatedly voice their desperation for a leader willing to take forceful measures against both external and internal threats. This temporal positioning enables the story to frame Modi’s subsequent rise to power as the solution for the country’s aspirations, transforming what appears to be a standard espionage film into an elaborate endorsement of the administration’s stance on national security and military aggression.
The sequel amplifies this propagandistic impulse by showcasing Modi himself as an near-constant supporting character through strategically placed news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than allowing the fictional narrative to exist separately, the filmmakers have interwoven the Prime Minister’s real likeness and rhetoric throughout the story, substantially obscuring the boundaries between entertainment and state communication. This intentional storytelling decision distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from prior cases of Bollywood’s ideological affiliation, elevating them from subtle ideological positioning to explicit governmental advocacy that transforms cinema into a instrument for political credibility.
- First film prays for a powerful leader ahead of Modi’s election victory
- Sequel presents Modi in a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative conflates fictional heroism with government policy endorsement
- Films obscure the boundaries between entertainment and also state propaganda intentionally
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Philosophical Change
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a profound transformation in Bollywood’s relationship with nationalist thought and state power. Whilst the Indian film industry has traditionally upheld strong connections to political establishments, the brazen nature of these films constitutes a qualitative shift in how overtly cinema now channels governmental messaging. The franchise’s box office dominance—with the opening film becoming the top-earning Hindi film in India following its December launch—shows that viewers are growing more receptive to content that smoothly incorporates political propaganda. This acceptance suggests a basic shift in what Indian audiences consider acceptable cinematic content, moving beyond the subtle ideological positioning of earlier films toward explicit state advocacy.
The consequences of this change go beyond mere entertainment metrics. By attaining remarkable box office gains whilst explicitly merging fictional heroism with state policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have successfully established a novel framework for Indian film production. Future filmmakers now possess a tested formula for merging patriotic feeling with financial gains, potentially establishing propagandistic cinema as a viable and lucrative category. This shift reflects broader societal transformations within India, where the boundaries between cinema, patriotism, and official discourse have grown more blurred, raising critical questions about the cinema’s influence in influencing public awareness of politics and national identity.
A Pattern 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 surge of films utilising nationalist messaging and anti-Muslim narratives, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These films possess a shared ideological structure that recasts Indian history through a Hindu-centred perspective whilst depicting Muslims as existential threats. However, what distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from these earlier works is their superior cinematic execution and production quality, which lend their propaganda a veneer of artistic legitimacy that more artless Islamophobic films do not possess.
This differentiation shows especially troubling because the “Dhurandhar” duology’s cinematic craft and popular appeal mask its fundamentally propagandistic nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” function as simplistic propagandist instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series utilises filmmaking expertise to present its ideological content palatable to mainstream audiences. The franchise thus represents a troubling progression: messaging refined through professional filmmaking into material bordering on government-endorsed filmmaking. This refined method to nationalist messaging may become increasingly impactful in influencing audience views than explicitly divisive films, as audiences may absorb propagandistic material when it comes packaged in absorbing narrative.
Film Production Versus Political Communication
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most pernicious quality lies in its marriage of production sophistication with ideological extremism. Director Aditya Dhar exhibits substantial expertise of the action-thriller format, assembling sequences of raw power and narrative momentum that captivate audiences. This technical competence becomes contentious precisely because it functions as a medium for political propaganda, converting what might otherwise be blunt political content into something far more seductive and persuasive. The films’ refined visual presentation, accomplished visual composition, and strong performances by actors like Ranveer Singh lend credibility to their deeply divisive narratives, rendering their ideological messaging more acceptable to wider audiences who might otherwise spurn explicitly provocative content.
This intersection of artistic merit and propagandistic intent presents a distinctive difficulty for cinematic analysis and cultural commentary. Audiences often find it difficult to distinguish between aesthetic appreciation from political critique, especially when entertainment appeal demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films leverage this tension deliberately, banking on the idea that viewers absorbed in exciting action scenes will internalise their embedded messaging without critical scrutiny. The danger grows because the films’ technical achievements bestow them legitimacy within critical conversation, enabling their nationalist ideology to circulate more widely and shape public opinion more successfully than cruder predecessors 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 |
- Skilled craftsmanship transforms ideological material into popular media
- Polished production techniques obscures ideological messaging from close examination
- Film technique lifts patriotic messaging beyond raw inflammatory speech
The Troubling Consequences for Indian Film Industry
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a concerning trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor increasingly determines box office performance and cultural importance. Where once Bollywood operated as a forum for varied storytelling and competing viewpoints, the emergence of these jingoistic thrillers suggests a contraction in acceptable discourse. The films’ unprecedented success indicates that audiences are becoming more drawn to entertainment that directly endorses state power and characterises opposition as treachery. This shift mirrors wider social division, yet cinema’s unique capacity to shape collective imagination means its political orientation carry significant influence in influencing public consciousness and political attitudes.
The consequences go further than simple viewing habits. When a country’s cinema sector regularly generates stories that lionise state power and demonise foreign adversaries, it runs the danger of ossifying public opinion and restricting critical engagement with intricate geopolitical realities. The “Dhurandhar” movies exemplify this danger by presenting their perspective not as one perspective among many, but as objective truth wrapped in production quality and star power. For commentators and media analysts, this represents a pivotal turning point: Indian cinema’s shift from occasionally accommodating government objectives to actively functioning as a propaganda apparatus, albeit one far more sophisticated than its earlier incarnations.
Propaganda Presented as Entertainment
The troubling nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology rests upon its calculated obscuring of political messaging within layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar crafts elaborate action sequences and character arcs that command viewer attention, deftly deflecting from the films’ relentless promotion of nationalist ideology and unquestioning faith 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 embedding propagandistic content inside compelling stories, the films achieve what cruder political messaging cannot: they transform ideology into spectacle, rendering viewers complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst regarding themselves as merely entertained.
This strategy demonstrates particularly compelling because it works beneath deliberate notice. Viewers captivated by thrilling set pieces and poignant character development internalise the films’ fundamental narratives—that strong-handed government action is necessary, that opponents cannot change, that individual sacrifice for governmental objectives is worthy—without detecting the manipulation occurring. The sophisticated cinematography, powerful acting, and authentic craftsmanship provide authenticity to these narratives, causing them to seem less like persuasive messaging and more like true storytelling. This appearance of authenticity permits the films’ contentious beliefs to reach popular awareness far more successfully than overtly inflammatory material ever could.
What This Signifies for Global Audiences
The global success of the “Dhurandhar” duology presents a concerning precedent for how state-backed cinema can transcend geographical boundaries and cultural differences. 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 cultural and political literacy required to decode the films’ nationalist rhetoric, overseas audiences may inadvertently consume and legitimise Indian state ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic narratives far outside their original domestic viewership. This worldwide distribution of politically sensitive material raises critical concerns about platform accountability and the moral dimensions of distributing state-sponsored cinema to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films set a troubling template that other countries might attempt to emulate. If state-aligned cinema can achieve both critical acclaim and commercial success whilst advancing nationalist agendas, rival administrations—particularly those with authoritarian tendencies—may identify cinema as a exceptionally influential tool for ideological propagation. The films show that propaganda need not be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when paired with real artistic ability and substantial budgets, it becomes almost inescapable. For worldwide audiences and film critics, the duology’s success indicates a troubling outlook where popular entertainment and state communication become increasingly indistinguishable.
