Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has become a pivotal turning point for Hindi cinema, signalling a dramatic shift in Bollywood’s narrative priorities and ideological positions. The opening film, unveiled in December 2025, proved to be the top-earning Hindi film in India before being separated into two parts throughout the editing process. Now, with the follow-up “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” presently commanding cinemas nationwide, the intelligence-based narrative is positioned to establish what numerous critics view as a concerning transformation in Indian mainstream film: the blanket endorsement of patriotic-inflected tales that openly seek official support and capitalise on nationalist sentiment. The films’ overt blending of commercial entertainment and state narratives has reignited conversations around Bollywood’s connections with political influence, especially during Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Espionage Thriller to Political Statement
The storytelling framework of the “Dhurandhar” duology demonstrates a strategic movement from entertainment to political messaging. The opening instalment strategically set before Modi’s 2014 electoral triumph, establishes its ideological framework through characters who repeatedly voice their yearning for a leader willing to take decisive action against both external and internal dangers. This temporal positioning enables the story 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 comprehensive validation of the ruling government’s approach to homeland defence and armed action.
The sequel intensifies this promotional agenda by showcasing Modi himself as an almost omnipresent supporting character through deliberately inserted news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than permitting the fictional narrative to exist separately, the filmmakers have interwoven the Prime Minister’s genuine appearance and rhetoric throughout the story, substantially obscuring the boundaries between entertainment and government messaging. This calculated narrative approach distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from prior cases of Bollywood’s ideological affiliation, advancing them from subtle ideological positioning to direct state promotion that transforms cinema into a tool for political validation.
- First film calls for a powerful leader ahead of Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel includes Modi in a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative merges fictional heroism alongside government policy endorsement
- Films blur the distinction between entertainment and state propaganda by design
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Ideological Evolution
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a significant shift in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist thought and state power. Whilst the Indian film industry has historically maintained close ties with political structures, the explicit character of these films represents a meaningful change in how directly cinema now conveys state communications. The franchise’s box office dominance—with the opening film emerging as the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India upon its December release—shows that audiences are increasingly receptive to entertainment that seamlessly integrates political propaganda. This acceptance suggests a fundamental change in what Indian audiences consider acceptable film content, moving beyond the understated ideological framing of prior cinema toward direct governmental promotion.
The consequences of this change extend beyond mere commercial performance. By attaining unprecedented commercial success whilst explicitly merging cinematic heroics with political agenda, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively endorsed a novel framework for Bollywood production. Next-generation filmmakers now possess a proven blueprint for blending patriotic feeling with financial gains, conceivably fostering propagandistic cinema as a viable and lucrative category. This development indicates wider social changes within India, where the dividing lines separating entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have grown more blurred, prompting important concerns about cinema’s role in influencing political consciousness and sense of nationhood.
A Pattern of Nationalist Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not appear in a vacuum but rather constitutes the culmination of a expanding movement within modern Indian film. Recent years have witnessed a surge of films employing nationalist rhetoric and anti-Muslim narratives, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These films possess a common ideological framework that recasts Indian history through a Hindu-centric lens whilst depicting Muslims as existential threats. However, what sets apart the “Dhurandhar” films from these predecessors is their superior cinematic execution and production values, which lend their propaganda a sheen of artistic credibility that more crude anti-Muslim productions lack.
This difference proves particularly troubling because the “Dhurandhar” duology’s technical sophistication and audience engagement mask its fundamentally propagandistic nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” serve as blunt political instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series utilises filmmaking expertise to present its nationalist agenda appealing to mass audiences. The franchise thus constitutes a dangerous evolution: messaging refined through sophisticated production into what resembles state-sanctioned cinema. This sophisticated approach to political narrative may become increasingly impactful in shaping public opinion than overtly provocative films, as audiences may accept ideological content when it is presented in engaging storytelling.
Cinematic Technique Versus Political Communication
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most insidious quality lies in its combination of technical excellence with political radicalism. Director Aditya Dhar exhibits impressive command of the thriller genre, crafting sequences of raw power and plot propulsion that engage audiences. This filmmaking skill becomes contentious precisely because it serves as a vehicle for political propaganda, reshaping what might otherwise be overt political rhetoric into something far more alluring and convincing. The films’ glossy production values, accomplished visual composition, and strong performances by actors like Ranveer Singh provide plausibility to their fundamentally divisive narratives, making their political content more digestible to general audiences who might otherwise dismiss overtly inflammatory material.
This combination of artistic merit and ideological messaging creates a unique challenge for cinematic analysis and cultural analysis. Audiences often find it difficult to distinguish between artistic enjoyment from political analysis, especially when entertainment appeal demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films exploit this tension deliberately, relying on the idea that viewers absorbed in thrilling action sequences will internalise their underlying messages without critical resistance. 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 effectively 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 converts ideological material into mainstream entertainment
- Advanced cinematography obscures ideological undertones from close examination
- Film technique elevates nationalist rhetoric beyond raw inflammatory speech
The Concerning Consequences for Indian Cinema
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology suggests a worrying trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which nationalist fervour increasingly determines box office performance and cultural importance. Where once Bollywood served as a forum for diverse narratives and competing viewpoints, the ascendancy of these patriotic suspense films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ unprecedented success indicates that audiences are becoming more drawn to entertainment that explicitly validates state power and positions dissent as treachery. This shift demonstrates wider social division, yet cinema’s distinctive ability to shape public imagination means its ideological leanings carry significant influence in affecting political attitudes and political attitudes.
The ramifications extend beyond simple entertainment preferences. When a country’s cinema sector consistently produces narratives that lionise government authority and demonise external enemies, it risks calcifying public opinion and limiting critical engagement with intricate international political dynamics. The “Dhurandhar” films exemplify this risk by presenting their perspective not as a single viewpoint amongst others, but as factual reality combined with production quality and celebrity appeal. For critics and media analysts, this represents a watershed moment: Indian film industry’s transition from occasionally accommodating state interests to deliberately operating as a propaganda apparatus, albeit one considerably more refined than its historical predecessors.
Propaganda Presented as Entertainment
The pernicious nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology stems from its calculated obscuring of political messaging within layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar constructs complex action scenes and character arcs that command viewer attention, successfully diverting from the films’ persistent advancement of nationalist ideology and blind faith in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, nominally a personal quest for redemption, works at once as a glorification of governmental power and military might. By embedding propagandistic content inside compelling stories, the films achieve what cruder political messaging cannot: they reshape ideology into spectacle, making audiences complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst regarding themselves as merely entertained.
This strategy proves particularly successful because it functions beneath conscious awareness. Viewers absorbed in exhilarating action sequences and emotional character moments absorb the films’ underlying messages—that strong-handed government action is necessary, that adversaries lack redemption, that self-sacrifice for state interests is worthy—without detecting the manipulation at work. The refined visual composition, engaging portrayals, and genuine technical accomplishment provide authenticity to these stories, allowing them to look less like persuasive messaging and more like genuine narrative. This surface credibility allows the films’ polarising worldview to infiltrate mainstream consciousness far more successfully than explicitly provocative content ever could.
What This Implies for Global Audiences
The international popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a troubling pattern for how state-aligned cinema can transcend geographic borders and cultural contexts. As streaming services like Netflix release these films worldwide, audiences in Western countries and beyond encounter advanced propagandistic content wrapped in the familiar language of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the cultural and political literacy required to decode the films’ nationalist rhetoric, international viewers may inadvertently consume and legitimise Indian state-sponsored ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic narratives far outside their intended domestic audience. This worldwide distribution of politically sensitive material poses urgent questions about platform responsibility and the ethical implications of distributing state-sponsored cinema to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films establish a concerning template that other nations might attempt to emulate. If state-aligned cinema can secure both critical recognition and box office success whilst furthering nationalist agendas, other states—particularly those with authoritarian tendencies—may identify cinema as a distinctly potent tool for ideological dissemination. The films show that propaganda doesn’t have to be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when combined with genuine artistic talent and significant funding, it becomes almost inescapable. For global audiences and film critics, the duology’s success indicates a concerning future where entertainment and government messaging become increasingly indistinguishable.
