Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has emerged as a watershed moment for Hindi cinema, marking a significant change in Bollywood’s thematic preoccupations and political allegiances. The first instalment, launched in December 2025, turned out to be the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India before being separated into two parts in the post-production phase. Now, with the follow-up “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” presently commanding cinemas across the country, the spy saga is positioned to establish what numerous critics view as a concerning transformation in Indian mainstream film: the blanket endorsement of patriotic-inflected tales that explicitly court government favour and leverage national pride. The films’ unabashed fusion of entertainment and governmental messaging has reignited conversations around Bollywood’s ties to political authority, notably under PM Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Intelligence Thriller to Political Statement
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a strategic movement from entertainment to political messaging. The first film strategically set before Modi’s 2014 electoral triumph, sets up its political foundation through characters who repeatedly voice their desperation for a leader willing to take decisive action against both foreign and domestic threats. This strategic timing enables the story to present Modi’s subsequent rise to power as the solution for the country’s aspirations, transforming what appears to be a conventional spy thriller into an elaborate endorsement of the administration’s approach to national security and armed action.
The sequel amplifies this propagandistic impulse by showcasing Modi himself as an virtually ever-present supporting character through deliberately inserted news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than enabling the fictional narrative to exist separately, the filmmakers have threaded the Prime Minister’s actual image 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 political alignment, advancing them from muted ideological content to explicit governmental advocacy that transforms cinema into a vehicle for political legitimacy.
- First film calls for a strong leader ahead of Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel presents Modi in a supporting character through news clips
- Narrative blends fictional heroism with government policy endorsement
- Films erase the boundaries between entertainment and state propaganda by design
The Development of Bollywood’s Ideological Evolution
The commercial success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a profound transformation in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist ideology and government authority. Whilst the Indian cinema sector has traditionally upheld 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 box office dominance—with the first instalment becoming the top-earning Hindi film in India following its December launch—demonstrates that audiences are increasingly receptive to content that smoothly incorporates state messaging. This receptiveness indicates a basic shift in what Indian viewers consider acceptable film content, moving beyond the understated ideological framing of earlier films towards explicit state advocacy.
The ramifications of this shift go beyond mere commercial performance. By attaining remarkable box office gains whilst explicitly merging cinematic heroics with governmental policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively legitimised a new template for Bollywood production. Future filmmakers now possess a established model for merging patriotic feeling with financial gains, arguably creating state-aligned filmmaking as a viable and lucrative genre. This development indicates broader societal transformations within India, where the boundaries between entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have become increasingly porous, prompting critical questions about the cinema’s influence in shaping public awareness of politics and national identity.
A Trend of Patriotic Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather represents the culmination of a expanding movement within contemporary Indian cinema. Recent years have witnessed a proliferation of films utilising 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 existential threats. However, what distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from these earlier works is their better filmmaking craft and production values, which give their propaganda a veneer of artistic legitimacy that more crude anti-Muslim productions do not possess.
This distinction proves especially problematic because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ cinematic craft and entertainment value obscure its fundamentally propagandistic nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” operate as simplistic propagandist instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series deploys cinematic craft to present its nationalist agenda palatable to mass audiences. The franchise thus constitutes a concerning development: propaganda elevated through sophisticated production into what resembles officially-backed production. This sophisticated approach to political narrative may exert greater influence in influencing audience views than explicitly divisive films, as audiences may accept political messaging when it arrives wrapped in absorbing narrative.
Film Production Versus Political Messaging
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most insidious quality lies in its combination of production sophistication with ideological extremism. Director Aditya Dhar displays impressive command of the action-thriller format, crafting sequences of emotional force and storytelling drive that captivate audiences. This cinematic proficiency becomes contentious precisely because it serves as a vehicle for nationalist propaganda, reshaping what might otherwise be crude political messaging into something far more alluring and convincing. The films’ refined visual presentation, sophisticated cinematography, and powerful acting by actors like Ranveer Singh add legitimacy to their inherently polarizing narratives, rendering their ideological messaging more palatable to general audiences who might otherwise dismiss overtly inflammatory material.
This convergence of creative excellence and ideological messaging presents a distinctive difficulty for cinematic analysis and cultural commentary. Audiences frequently struggle to separate aesthetic appreciation from political analysis, particularly when entertainment value demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films leverage this tension deliberately, banking on the idea that viewers absorbed in exciting action scenes will absorb their embedded messaging without critical resistance. The risk intensifies because the films’ technical achievements grant them credibility within critical conversation, allowing their nationalist ideology to spread more extensively and shape public consciousness 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 |
- Technical excellence transforms propagandistic content into popular media
- Polished production techniques conceals ideological undertones from rigorous analysis
- Cinematic craft elevates nationalist rhetoric past raw inflammatory speech
The Concerning Ramifications for Indian Film Industry
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology suggests a concerning trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which nationalist fervour grows to influence box office performance and cultural significance. Where once Bollywood operated as a forum for diverse narratives and alternative standpoints, the rise of these nationalist action films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ remarkable achievement indicates that audiences are becoming more drawn to entertainment that directly endorses state power and positions dissent as treachery. This shift mirrors wider social division, yet cinema’s distinctive ability to shape shared cultural consciousness means its ideological stance carry particular weight in shaping popular opinion and political attitudes.
The ramifications extend beyond simple entertainment preferences. When a country’s cinema sector regularly generates stories that glorify government authority and demonise foreign adversaries, it risks hardening public opinion and limiting meaningful dialogue with complex international political dynamics. The “Dhurandhar” films illustrate this risk by portraying their worldview not as one perspective among many, but as objective truth packaged with technical excellence and celebrity appeal. For commentators and cultural observers, this marks a pivotal turning point: Indian cinema’s shift from occasionally accommodating state interests to deliberately operating as a propaganda apparatus, albeit one considerably more refined than its earlier incarnations.
Propaganda Presented as Entertainment
The insidious nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology rests upon its calculated obscuring of political messaging beneath layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar crafts elaborate action sequences and character arcs that capture audience attention, successfully diverting from the films’ persistent advancement of nationalist ideology and unquestioning faith in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, ostensibly a personal quest for redemption, functions simultaneously as a glorification of governmental power and military might. By incorporating propagandistic content inside compelling stories, the films achieve what cruder political messaging cannot: they transform ideology into spectacle, making audiences complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst considering themselves simply entertained.
This strategy proves particularly compelling because it functions beneath conscious awareness. Viewers absorbed in thrilling set pieces and poignant character development internalise the films’ underlying messages—that decisive governmental control is essential, that adversaries lack redemption, that self-sacrifice for governmental objectives is honourable—without detecting the manipulation occurring. The sophisticated cinematography, engaging portrayals, and authentic craftsmanship provide authenticity to these accounts, causing them to seem less like persuasive messaging and more like authentic storytelling. This appearance of authenticity allows the films’ divisive ideology to reach popular awareness far more effectively than overtly inflammatory material ever could.
What This Signifies for International Viewers
The global popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a concerning precedent for how state-backed cinema can transcend geographic borders and cultural contexts. As streaming services like Netflix release these films globally, audiences in Western nations 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 messaging, overseas audiences may unknowingly absorb and validate Indian state-sponsored ideology, effectively extending the reach of propagandistic content far outside their intended domestic audience. This globalisation of politically sensitive material poses urgent questions about platform accountability and the ethical implications of circulating state-sponsored cinema to unsuspecting international audiences.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films create a troubling template that other nations might attempt to emulate. If state-sponsored filmmaking can attain both critical recognition and box office success whilst furthering nationalist agendas, rival administrations—particularly those prone to authoritarianism—may acknowledge cinema as a uniquely powerful tool for ideological dissemination. The films demonstrate that propaganda need not be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when paired with real artistic ability and considerable resources, it becomes nearly irresistible. For global audiences and film critics, the duology’s success indicates a troubling outlook where entertainment and government messaging become progressively harder to distinguish.
