Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has emerged as a pivotal turning point for Hindi cinema, indicating a pronounced transformation in Bollywood’s subject matter focus and political leanings. The first instalment, released in December 2025, turned out to be the biggest box office success in India prior to being divided into two parts during post-production. Now, with the follow-up “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” presently commanding cinemas nationwide, the espionage thriller is poised to cement what many observers view as a worrying change in Indian popular cinema: the comprehensive adoption of patriotic-inflected tales that openly seek state approval and capitalise on national pride. The films’ brazen conflation of commercial entertainment and state narratives has revived conversations around Bollywood’s relationship with political power, notably under PM Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Spy Thriller to Political Declaration
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a calculated progression from entertainment to ideological advocacy. 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 forceful measures against both foreign and domestic threats. This strategic timing allows the narrative to present Modi’s subsequent rise to power as the answer to the country’s aspirations, converting what appears to be a standard espionage film into an elaborate endorsement of the ruling government’s approach to homeland defence and armed action.
The sequel amplifies this ideological drive by featuring Modi himself as an virtually ever-present 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, significantly erasing the boundaries between entertainment and state communication. This calculated narrative approach distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from previous instances of Bollywood’s ideological affiliation, raising them from subtle ideological positioning to overt political backing that transforms cinema into a vehicle for political legitimacy.
- First film appeals for a powerful leader ahead of Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel includes Modi in a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative blends fictional heroism with government policy approval
- Films erase the distinction between entertainment and also state propaganda deliberately
The Development of Bollywood’s Ideological Shift
The commercial success 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 strong connections to political establishments, the explicit character of these films constitutes a qualitative shift in how directly cinema now conveys state communications. The franchise’s box office dominance—with the first instalment becoming the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India upon its December release—demonstrates that viewers are growing more receptive to entertainment that seamlessly integrates state messaging. This receptiveness suggests a basic shift in what Indian viewers consider acceptable cinematic content, progressing past the subtle ideological positioning of earlier films towards direct governmental promotion.
The ramifications of this change go beyond simple box office figures. By achieving remarkable box office gains whilst openly conflating cinematic heroics with state policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively legitimised a fresh blueprint for Indian film production. Next-generation filmmakers now have access to a tested formula for merging nationalist sentiment with commercial success, conceivably fostering politically-driven cinema as a sustainable and profitable genre. This development indicates wider social changes within India, where the dividing lines separating cinema, patriotism, and official discourse have become less distinct, generating critical questions about film’s function in influencing public awareness of politics and sense of nationhood.
A Pattern of Nationalist Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather represents the apotheosis of a growing trend within modern Indian film. The past few years have witnessed a surge of films employing nationalist messaging 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-centric lens whilst portraying Muslims as fundamental dangers. However, what sets apart the “Dhurandhar” films from these predecessors is their better filmmaking craft and production values, which give their propaganda a sheen of artistic credibility that more crude anti-Muslim productions do not possess.
This differentiation proves especially problematic because the “Dhurandhar” duology’s production quality 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 political messaging acceptable to general viewers. The franchise thus constitutes a troubling progression: propaganda elevated through expert direction into material bordering on government-endorsed filmmaking. This polished strategy to political narrative may prove more influential in shaping public opinion than more obviously inflammatory films, as audiences may accept political messaging when it is presented in absorbing narrative.
Filmmaking Artistry Versus Political Narratives
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most pernicious quality lies in its combination of technical excellence with political radicalism. Director Aditya Dhar demonstrates considerable mastery of the action thriller genre, crafting sequences of emotional force and narrative momentum that engage audiences. This filmmaking skill becomes concerning precisely because it serves as a vehicle for ideological messaging, reshaping what might otherwise be crude political messaging into something far more alluring and convincing. The films’ polished aesthetic, sophisticated cinematography, and powerful acting by actors like Ranveer Singh provide plausibility to their inherently polarizing narratives, rendering their political message more acceptable to general audiences who might otherwise spurn explicitly provocative content.
This convergence of artistic merit and propagandistic intent creates a distinctive difficulty for cinematic analysis and cultural commentary. Audiences often find it difficult to separate aesthetic appreciation from political analysis, especially when entertainment value proves genuinely compelling. The “Dhurandhar” films leverage this tension intentionally, relying on the idea that audiences engaged with thrilling action sequences will internalise their underlying messages without critical scrutiny. The risk intensifies because the films’ technical achievements grant them legitimacy within critical conversation, enabling their nationalist ideology to circulate more widely and influence 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 |
- Technical excellence turns ideological material into mass-market content
- Polished production techniques masks political messaging from close examination
- Cinematic craft elevates patriotic messaging past blunt inflammatory language
The Troubling Ramifications for Indian Cinema
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology suggests a concerning trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which nationalist fervour progressively shapes box office performance and cultural relevance. Where once Bollywood served as a forum for multiple perspectives and alternative standpoints, the rise of these nationalist action films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ unprecedented success indicates that audiences are increasingly receptive to entertainment that explicitly validates state power and characterises opposition as treachery. This shift mirrors broader societal polarisation, yet cinema’s particular power to shape public imagination means its ideological leanings carry particular weight in affecting political attitudes and political attitudes.
The consequences go further than mere entertainment preferences. When a nation’s film industry consistently produces narratives that lionise state power and vilify external enemies, it runs the danger of calcifying collective views and restricting meaningful dialogue with complex international political dynamics. The “Dhurandhar” movies demonstrate this threat by portraying their perspective not as one perspective among many, but as factual reality wrapped in technical excellence and celebrity appeal. For critics and media analysts, this represents a pivotal turning point: Indian film industry’s shift from occasionally accommodating state interests to deliberately operating as a propaganda machine, albeit one far more sophisticated than its earlier incarnations.
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 constructs intricate action set-pieces and character arcs that demand viewer engagement, effectively distracting from the films’ constant endorsement of nationalist ideology and unquestioning faith in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, nominally a personal quest for redemption, works at once as a exaltation of governmental power and military might. By embedding propagandistic content within entertaining narratives, the films achieve what cruder political messaging cannot: they convert ideology into spectacle, rendering viewers complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst regarding themselves as merely entertained.
This strategy demonstrates particularly successful because it functions beneath conscious awareness. Viewers captivated by thrilling set pieces and intimate character scenes internalise the films’ underlying messages—that strong-handed government action is necessary, that enemies are irredeemable, that self-sacrifice for governmental objectives is honourable—without acknowledging the manipulation at work. The polished camera work, compelling performances, and genuine technical accomplishment provide authenticity 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 more successfully than overtly inflammatory material ever could.
What This Means for International Viewers
The global popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology presents a concerning pattern for how state-aligned cinema can cross geographical boundaries and cultural differences. As streaming services like Netflix distribute these films worldwide, audiences in Western nations and elsewhere encounter advanced propagandistic content wrapped in the familiar language of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the understanding of cultural and political contexts needed to interpret the films’ nationalist rhetoric, overseas audiences may inadvertently absorb and validate Indian state ideology, effectively extending the reach of propagandistic content far beyond their original domestic viewership. This worldwide distribution of politically sensitive material raises urgent questions about platform responsibility and the moral dimensions of circulating state-backed films to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films create a concerning template that other nations might attempt to emulate. If state-sponsored filmmaking can attain both critical praise and financial returns whilst furthering nationalist agendas, other states—particularly those with authoritarian leanings—may acknowledge cinema as a distinctly potent tool for ideological propagation. The films illustrate that propaganda need not be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when combined with authentic creative talent and substantial budgets, it becomes nearly irresistible. For global audiences and film critics, the duology’s success signals a concerning future where popular entertainment and state communication become ever more difficult to tell apart.
