Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has emerged as a pivotal turning point for Hindi cinema, marking a dramatic shift in Bollywood’s thematic preoccupations and political allegiances. The first instalment, released in December 2025, turned out to be the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India before being split into two parts throughout the editing process. Now, with the sequel “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” currently dominating cinemas throughout the nation, the spy saga is set to solidify what numerous critics regard as a concerning transformation in Indian commercial cinema: the wholesale embrace of patriotic-inflected tales that deliberately pursue government favour and capitalise on nationalist sentiment. The films’ unabashed fusion of entertainment and governmental messaging has reignited conversations around Bollywood’s relationship with political power, especially during Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Espionage Thriller to Political Declaration
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a calculated progression from escapism to ideological advocacy. The opening instalment deliberately positioned before Modi’s 2014 electoral triumph, establishes its ideological framework through protagonists who consistently express their desperation for a figure prepared to pursue forceful measures against both foreign and domestic dangers. This strategic timing allows the narrative to frame Modi’s subsequent rise to power as the answer to the country’s aspirations, converting what seems like a standard espionage film into an comprehensive validation of the ruling government’s approach to homeland defence and military aggression.
The sequel heightens this promotional agenda by showcasing Modi himself as an almost omnipresent supporting character through strategically placed news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than permitting the fictional narrative to operate on its own, the filmmakers have threaded the Prime Minister’s real likeness and rhetoric throughout the story, effectively blurring the boundaries between entertainment and government messaging. This calculated narrative approach distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from earlier examples of Bollywood’s political positioning, advancing them from muted ideological content to direct state promotion that transforms cinema into a vehicle for political legitimacy.
- First film prays for a powerful leader ahead of Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel includes Modi as a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative blends fictional heroism with government policy approval
- Films blur the boundaries between entertainment and state propaganda deliberately
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Philosophical Change
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology indicates a significant shift in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist ideology and government authority. Whilst the Indian film industry has historically maintained close ties with political structures, the brazen nature of these films constitutes a meaningful change in how overtly cinema now conveys state communications. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—with the first instalment becoming the top-earning Hindi film in India upon its December release—shows that audiences are increasingly receptive to content that smoothly incorporates political propaganda. This receptiveness suggests a fundamental change in what Indian audiences consider acceptable film content, moving beyond the subtle ideological positioning of prior cinema towards direct governmental promotion.
The consequences of this transition extend beyond mere box office figures. By achieving remarkable box office gains whilst directly blending cinematic heroics with state policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively endorsed a fresh blueprint for Bollywood production. Upcoming directors now have access to a established model for combining patriotic feeling with commercial success, conceivably fostering politically-driven cinema as a enduring and profitable category. This evolution indicates broader societal transformations within India, where the boundaries between entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have become increasingly porous, prompting critical questions about cinema’s role in shaping political consciousness and national identity.
A Example of National Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather constitutes the apotheosis of a growing trend within contemporary Indian cinema. Recent years have witnessed a proliferation of films utilising nationalist messaging 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-centred perspective whilst depicting Muslims as fundamental dangers. However, what sets apart the “Dhurandhar” films from these earlier works is their better filmmaking craft and production values, which lend their propaganda a sheen of artistic credibility that more artless Islamophobic films lack.
This differentiation shows especially concerning because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ technical sophistication and popular appeal obscure its essentially propagandist nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” operate as blunt political instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series deploys cinematic craft to render its nationalist agenda appealing to general viewers. The franchise thus constitutes a concerning development: ideological content enhanced through expert direction into something approaching officially-backed production. This sophisticated approach to nationalist messaging may prove more influential in influencing audience views than explicitly divisive films, as audiences may absorb ideological content when it arrives wrapped in engaging storytelling.
Film Production Versus Political Messaging
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most pernicious quality lies in its fusion of technical excellence with political radicalism. Director Aditya Dhar exhibits impressive command of the action thriller genre, assembling sequences of emotional force and plot propulsion that engage audiences. This cinematic proficiency becomes problematic precisely because it serves as a vehicle for ideological messaging, transforming what might otherwise be overt political rhetoric into something considerably compelling and influential. The films’ refined visual presentation, sophisticated cinematography, and strong performances by actors like Ranveer Singh add legitimacy to their fundamentally divisive narratives, making their political message more palatable to mainstream viewers who might otherwise dismiss overtly inflammatory material.
This combination of artistic merit and ideological messaging creates a unique challenge for film criticism and cultural commentary. Audiences frequently struggle to distinguish between artistic enjoyment from political analysis, particularly when entertainment appeal demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films exploit this tension intentionally, banking on the idea that viewers absorbed in exciting action scenes will internalise their embedded messaging without critical resistance. The danger intensifies because the films’ technical achievements grant them credibility within critical discourse, enabling their nationalist ideology to circulate more widely and shape public opinion more effectively 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 turns propagandistic content into mainstream entertainment
- Polished production techniques masks ideological messaging from rigorous analysis
- Filmmaking skill raises nationalist rhetoric above crude inflammatory discourse
The Concerning Consequences 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 progressively shapes box office performance and cultural relevance. Where once Bollywood operated as a forum for multiple perspectives and differing opinions, the ascendancy of these patriotic suspense films 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 reflects wider social division, yet cinema’s distinctive ability to shape shared cultural consciousness means its political orientation carry significant influence in affecting political attitudes and political attitudes.
The implications extend beyond mere entertainment preferences. When a country’s cinema sector regularly generates narratives that celebrate government authority and vilify foreign adversaries, it runs the danger of ossifying public opinion and limiting meaningful dialogue with intricate geopolitical realities. The “Dhurandhar” films demonstrate this danger by presenting their worldview not as a single viewpoint amongst others, but as objective truth wrapped in production quality and celebrity appeal. For commentators and cultural observers, this represents a pivotal turning point: Indian cinema’s transition from occasionally accommodating state interests to actively functioning as a propaganda machine, albeit one far more sophisticated than its historical predecessors.
Propaganda Disguised as Entertainment
The insidious nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology lies in its calculated obscuring of political messaging within layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar constructs elaborate action sequences and character arcs that capture audience attention, successfully diverting from the films’ relentless promotion of nationalist ideology and uncritical belief in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, purportedly a personal quest for redemption, functions simultaneously as a celebration of governmental power and military might. By embedding propagandistic content throughout engaging narratives, the films attain what cruder political messaging cannot: they convert ideology into spectacle, making audiences complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst believing themselves merely entertained.
This strategy proves particularly successful because it operates beneath active perception. Viewers captivated by exhilarating action sequences and poignant character development take in the films’ core themes—that forceful state intervention is required, that adversaries lack redemption, that self-sacrifice for governmental objectives is noble—without recognising the manipulation at work. The polished camera work, compelling performances, and authentic craftsmanship lend credibility to these narratives, allowing them to look less like ideological material and more like authentic storytelling. This surface credibility enables the films’ divisive ideology to reach popular awareness far with greater success than openly divisive messaging ever would.
What This Implies for International Viewers
The global popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a troubling pattern for how state-backed cinema can transcend geographical boundaries and cultural differences. As streaming services like Netflix release these films worldwide, audiences in Western countries and elsewhere 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 unknowingly absorb and validate Indian state ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic content far beyond their original domestic viewership. This globalisation of politically sensitive material poses urgent questions about platform accountability and the moral dimensions of circulating state-backed films to unsuspecting international audiences.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films create a concerning template that other nations could try to emulate. If government-backed film can secure both critical recognition and box office success whilst promoting nationalist agendas, rival administrations—particularly those with authoritarian tendencies—may recognise cinema as a exceptionally influential tool for the spread of ideology. The films illustrate that propaganda need not be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when paired with real artistic ability and considerable resources, it becomes virtually unavoidable. For global audiences and cinema critics, the duology’s success signals a troubling outlook where entertainment and government messaging become ever more difficult to tell apart.
