Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has emerged as a watershed moment for Hindi cinema, signalling a dramatic shift in Bollywood’s subject matter focus and political leanings. The first instalment, launched in December 2025, became the biggest box office success in India before being split into two parts during post-production. Now, with the second instalment “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” currently dominating cinemas nationwide, the intelligence-based narrative is set to solidify what many observers view as a worrying change in Indian commercial cinema: the blanket endorsement of patriotic-inflected tales that deliberately pursue official support and leverage national pride. The films’ unabashed fusion of entertainment and governmental messaging has revived debates about Bollywood’s connections with political influence, particularly under PM Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Intelligence Thriller to Political Manifesto
The storytelling framework of the “Dhurandhar” duology demonstrates a strategic movement from escapism to political messaging. The first film deliberately positioned before Modi’s 2014 election victory, sets up its ideological framework through characters who repeatedly voice their desperation for a figure prepared to pursue decisive action against both external and internal dangers. This strategic timing allows the narrative to present Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the solution for the nation’s prayers, transforming what seems like a conventional spy thriller into an elaborate endorsement of the ruling government’s stance on homeland defence and armed action.
The sequel intensifies this propagandistic impulse by showcasing Modi himself as an virtually ever-present supporting character through strategically placed news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than enabling the fictional narrative to stand independently, the filmmakers have woven the Prime Minister’s genuine appearance and rhetoric throughout the story, effectively blurring the boundaries between entertainment and official discourse. This deliberate narrative choice distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from prior cases of Bollywood’s political positioning, elevating them from understated ideological messaging to direct state promotion that transforms cinema into a vehicle for political legitimacy.
- First film calls for a powerful leader before Modi’s election victory
- Sequel presents Modi in a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative conflates fictional heroism alongside government policy endorsement
- Films blur the distinction between entertainment and state propaganda by design
The Transformation of Bollywood’s Ideological Shift
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology indicates a profound transformation in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist ideology and state power. Whilst the Indian film industry has traditionally upheld strong connections to political establishments, the brazen nature of these films represents a qualitative shift in how overtly cinema now channels governmental messaging. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—with the first instalment emerging as the top-earning Hindi film in India upon its December release—demonstrates that viewers are growing more receptive to entertainment that seamlessly integrates state messaging. This receptiveness indicates a basic shift in what Indian viewers consider acceptable film content, moving beyond the subtle ideological positioning of prior cinema toward direct governmental promotion.
The implications of this change extend beyond simple entertainment metrics. By attaining remarkable box office gains whilst explicitly merging fictional heroism with political agenda, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively endorsed a novel framework for Indian film production. Future filmmakers now have access to a established model for blending patriotic feeling with commercial success, arguably creating politically-driven cinema as a viable and lucrative category. This shift reflects larger cultural shifts within India, where the dividing lines separating entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have become less distinct, prompting significant inquiries about cinema’s role in forming political consciousness and sense of nationhood.
A Pattern of National Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not appear in a vacuum but rather constitutes the apotheosis of a expanding movement within contemporary Indian cinema. Recent years have witnessed a surge of films utilising nationalist rhetoric and anti-Muslim framing, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These productions share a common ideological framework that recasts Indian history through a Hindu-centred perspective whilst depicting Muslims as existential threats. However, what distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from these predecessors is their superior cinematic execution and production values, which give their propaganda a sheen of artistic credibility that more artless Islamophobic films lack.
This distinction shows notably troubling because the “Dhurandhar” duology’s technical sophistication and entertainment value conceal its inherently ideological nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” operate as blunt political instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series deploys cinematic craft to render its ideological content palatable to general viewers. The franchise thus represents a troubling progression: propaganda elevated through professional filmmaking into what resembles government-endorsed filmmaking. This refined method to political narrative may prove more influential in influencing audience views than overtly provocative films, as audiences may accept political messaging when it arrives wrapped in engaging storytelling.
Film Production Versus Political Communication
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most troubling quality lies in its marriage of technical excellence with ideological extremism. Director Aditya Dhar demonstrates considerable mastery of the thriller genre, crafting sequences of visceral intensity and storytelling drive that captivate audiences. This technical competence becomes concerning precisely because it serves as a vehicle for political propaganda, reshaping what might otherwise be blunt political content into something significantly compelling and influential. The films’ refined visual presentation, sophisticated cinematography, and powerful acting by actors like Ranveer Singh provide plausibility to their fundamentally divisive narratives, making their political message more acceptable to mainstream viewers who might otherwise reject overtly inflammatory material.
This convergence of creative excellence and ideological messaging establishes a unique challenge for film criticism and cultural analysis. Audiences frequently struggle to distinguish between artistic enjoyment from political analysis, particularly when entertainment appeal demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films leverage this tension deliberately, banking on the notion that viewers absorbed in thrilling action sequences will absorb their underlying messages without critical scrutiny. The risk grows because the films’ technical accomplishments grant them legitimacy within critical discourse, allowing their nationalist ideals to circulate more widely and shape 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 |
- Skilled craftsmanship converts propagandistic content into mass-market content
- Advanced cinematography obscures political messaging from rigorous analysis
- Cinematic craft lifts patriotic messaging beyond raw inflammatory speech
The Concerning Implications for Indian Film Industry
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a worrying trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which nationalist fervour grows to influence box office performance and cultural significance. Where once Bollywood functioned as a forum for multiple perspectives and competing viewpoints, the rise of these nationalist action films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ unprecedented success indicates that audiences are growing more accepting of entertainment that explicitly validates state power and frames disagreement as treachery. This shift mirrors broader societal polarisation, 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 ramifications go further than mere entertainment preferences. When a country’s cinema sector regularly generates stories that glorify state power and vilify external enemies, it runs the danger of calcifying public opinion and restricting critical engagement with intricate international political dynamics. The “Dhurandhar” movies exemplify this risk by presenting their worldview not as a single viewpoint amongst others, but as objective truth packaged with technical excellence and star power. For critics and cultural observers, this represents a pivotal turning point: Indian cinema’s transition from occasionally accommodating government objectives 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 stems from its calculated obscuring of political messaging within layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar crafts elaborate action sequences and character arcs that capture audience attention, effectively distracting from the films’ persistent advancement of nationalist ideology and blind faith in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, purportedly a personal quest for redemption, operates concurrently as a exaltation of governmental power and military might. By incorporating propagandistic content within entertaining narratives, the films accomplish 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 demonstrates particularly compelling because it operates beneath conscious awareness. Viewers engrossed by thrilling set pieces and emotional character moments absorb the films’ core themes—that strong-handed government action is required, that adversaries lack redemption, that self-sacrifice for governmental objectives is worthy—without detecting the manipulation occurring. The refined visual composition, compelling performances, and genuine technical accomplishment lend credibility to these accounts, allowing them to look less like persuasive messaging and more like genuine narrative. This veneer of legitimacy allows the films’ divisive ideology to reach popular awareness far with greater success than explicitly provocative content ever could.
What This Implies for Global Audiences
The international popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology presents a concerning pattern for how state-aligned cinema can cross geographic borders and cultural differences. As streaming platforms like Netflix release these films worldwide, audiences in Western nations and elsewhere encounter advanced propagandistic content wrapped in the recognizable style of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the cultural and political literacy needed to interpret the films’ nationalist rhetoric, international viewers may unknowingly consume and legitimise Indian state-sponsored ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic content far outside their original domestic viewership. This globalisation of politically sensitive material raises urgent questions about platform accountability and the moral dimensions of distributing state-sponsored cinema to unsuspecting international audiences.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films set a disquieting template that other nations may seek to emulate. If government-backed film can attain both critical acclaim and financial returns whilst promoting nationalist agendas, other governments—particularly those with authoritarian tendencies—may recognise 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 coupled with genuine artistic talent and substantial budgets, it becomes virtually unavoidable. For international viewers and film critics, the duology’s success suggests a troubling outlook where entertainment and government messaging become ever more difficult to tell apart.
