Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has become a watershed moment for Hindi cinema, marking a dramatic shift in Bollywood’s subject matter focus and ideological positions. The first instalment, unveiled in December 2025, became the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India before being split into two parts throughout the editing process. Now, with the follow-up “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” presently commanding cinemas nationwide, the espionage thriller is positioned to establish what numerous critics view as a concerning transformation in Indian mainstream film: the blanket endorsement of nationalist-leaning stories that deliberately pursue official support and leverage national pride. The films’ brazen conflation of commercial entertainment and state narratives has revived conversations around Bollywood’s relationship with political power, particularly under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Intelligence Thriller to Political Manifesto
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology demonstrates a calculated progression from escapism to ideological advocacy. The first film deliberately positioned before Modi’s 2014 electoral triumph, sets up its ideological framework through protagonists who consistently express their yearning for a figure prepared to pursue forceful measures against both external and internal dangers. This temporal positioning enables the story to frame Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the solution for the nation’s prayers, converting what appears to be a standard espionage film into an elaborate endorsement of the ruling government’s approach to homeland defence and military aggression.
The sequel heightens this propagandistic impulse by presenting 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 threaded the Prime Minister’s actual image and rhetoric throughout the story, effectively blurring the boundaries between entertainment and state communication. This intentional storytelling decision distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from prior cases of Bollywood’s political alignment, advancing them from understated ideological messaging to direct state promotion that transforms cinema into a instrument for political credibility.
- First film calls for a strong leader ahead of Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel presents Modi in a supporting character through news clips
- Narrative conflates fictional heroism with government policy approval
- Films blur the boundaries between entertainment and state propaganda deliberately
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Philosophical Change
The commercial success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a significant shift 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 represents a qualitative shift in how overtly cinema now conveys state communications. The franchise’s box office dominance—with the opening film becoming the top-earning Hindi film in India upon its December release—shows that viewers are growing more receptive to entertainment that seamlessly integrates state messaging. This receptiveness indicates a basic shift in what Indian audiences consider acceptable film content, moving beyond the understated ideological framing of earlier films toward explicit state advocacy.
The implications of this shift go beyond mere entertainment metrics. By achieving remarkable box office gains whilst explicitly merging fictional heroism with governmental policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively legitimised a new template for Indian film production. Upcoming directors now have access to a tested formula for merging patriotic feeling with commercial success, conceivably fostering propagandistic cinema as a sustainable and profitable genre. This evolution reflects broader societal transformations within India, where the dividing lines separating cinema, patriotism, and official discourse have grown more blurred, prompting important concerns about the cinema’s influence in forming public awareness of politics and national identity.
A Example of Nationalist Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather represents the apotheosis of a expanding movement within contemporary Indian cinema. Recent years have seen a surge of films utilising nationalist messaging and anti-Muslim framing, 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 portraying Muslims as existential threats. However, what sets apart the “Dhurandhar” films from these predecessors is their better filmmaking craft and production quality, which give their propaganda a sheen of artistic credibility that more crude anti-Muslim productions lack.
This differentiation proves particularly problematic because the “Dhurandhar” duology’s technical sophistication and popular appeal mask its inherently ideological nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” operate as blunt political instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series deploys professional technique to make its political messaging acceptable to mass audiences. The franchise thus embodies a troubling progression: propaganda elevated through expert direction into what resembles officially-backed production. This sophisticated approach to nationalist messaging may exert greater influence in affecting popular sentiment than more obviously inflammatory films, as audiences may absorb ideological content when it arrives wrapped in compelling entertainment.
Cinematic Technique Versus Political Communication
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most pernicious quality lies in its marriage of cinematic mastery with nationalist ideology. Director Aditya Dhar displays impressive command of the action-thriller format, crafting sequences of emotional force and narrative momentum that engage audiences. This filmmaking skill becomes concerning precisely because it functions as a vehicle for ideological messaging, transforming what might otherwise be overt political rhetoric into something far more alluring and convincing. The films’ glossy production values, skilled camera work, and strong performances by actors like Ranveer Singh lend credibility to their fundamentally divisive narratives, making their ideological messaging more palatable to general audiences who might otherwise dismiss blatantly incendiary messaging.
This convergence of creative excellence and ideological messaging establishes a distinctive difficulty for film criticism and cultural commentary. Audiences often find it difficult to separate aesthetic appreciation from political analysis, especially when entertainment value demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films exploit this tension intentionally, relying on the notion that viewers absorbed in thrilling action sequences will internalise their embedded messaging without critical resistance. The danger intensifies because the films’ technical accomplishments grant them legitimacy within critical conversation, allowing their nationalist ideals 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 popular media
- Sophisticated filmmaking obscures ideological messaging from critical scrutiny
- Cinematic craft elevates patriotic messaging past raw inflammatory speech
The Problematic Ramifications for Indian Cinema
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology suggests a potentially troubling trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor progressively shapes box office performance and cultural importance. Where once Bollywood operated as a forum for varied storytelling and differing opinions, the ascendancy of these patriotic suspense films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ extraordinary performance indicates that audiences are increasingly receptive to entertainment that explicitly validates state power and frames disagreement as treachery. This shift reflects wider social division, yet cinema’s distinctive ability to shape public imagination means its political orientation carry considerable importance in influencing public consciousness and political attitudes.
The consequences extend beyond simple entertainment preferences. When a nation’s film industry regularly generates stories that lionise state power and portray negatively external enemies, it risks ossifying public opinion and limiting critical engagement with complex geopolitical realities. The “Dhurandhar” films demonstrate this danger by portraying their worldview not as one perspective among many, but as factual reality packaged with production quality and celebrity appeal. For commentators and cultural observers, this constitutes a watershed moment: Indian cinema’s shift from occasionally accommodating government objectives to actively functioning as a propaganda apparatus, albeit one considerably more refined than its historical predecessors.
Propaganda Disguised as Entertainment
The insidious nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology lies in its calculated obscuring of political messaging beneath layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar develops elaborate action sequences and character arcs that demand viewer engagement, successfully diverting from the films’ relentless promotion of nationalist ideology and blind faith 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 inside compelling stories, the films accomplish what cruder political messaging cannot: they convert ideology into spectacle, rendering viewers complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst considering themselves simply entertained.
This strategy shows particularly effective because it functions beneath active perception. Viewers engrossed by thrilling set pieces and emotional character moments internalise the films’ fundamental narratives—that forceful state intervention is required, that enemies are irredeemable, that individual sacrifice for state interests is worthy—without detecting the manipulation at work. The polished camera work, powerful acting, and authentic craftsmanship add legitimacy to these narratives, causing them to seem less like persuasive messaging and more like genuine narrative. This veneer of legitimacy permits the films’ divisive ideology to infiltrate popular awareness far more successfully than overtly inflammatory material ever could.
What This Signifies for Global Audiences
The global popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a concerning precedent for how state-aligned cinema can transcend geographic borders and cultural differences. As streaming services like Netflix distribute these films globally, audiences in Western nations and beyond encounter advanced propagandistic content wrapped in the familiar language of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the cultural and political literacy needed to interpret the films’ nationalist messaging, international viewers may unknowingly absorb and validate Indian state-sponsored ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic narratives far outside their original domestic viewership. This worldwide distribution of politically sensitive material poses critical concerns about platform responsibility and the moral dimensions of circulating state-backed films to unsuspecting international audiences.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films create a troubling template that other countries could try to emulate. If government-backed film can secure both critical recognition and financial returns whilst promoting nationalist agendas, rival administrations—particularly those with authoritarian leanings—may recognise cinema as a exceptionally influential tool for ideological propagation. The films illustrate that propaganda doesn’t have to be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when coupled with real artistic ability and considerable resources, it becomes almost inescapable. For international viewers and movie reviewers, the duology’s success suggests a troubling outlook where popular entertainment and state communication become increasingly indistinguishable.
