Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has become a watershed moment for Hindi cinema, marking a dramatic shift in Bollywood’s subject matter focus and political allegiances. The initial chapter, launched in December 2025, became the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India before being split into two parts during post-production. Now, with the sequel “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” presently commanding cinemas across the country, the espionage thriller is poised to cement what various commentators regard as a troubling shift in Indian popular cinema: the wholesale embrace of patriotic-inflected tales that deliberately pursue official support and capitalise on nationalist sentiment. The films’ unabashed fusion of entertainment and governmental messaging has revived discussions concerning Bollywood’s connections with political influence, especially during Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Spy Thriller to Political Declaration
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a strategic movement from entertainment to ideological advocacy. The opening instalment deliberately positioned before Modi’s 2014 election victory, establishes its political foundation through characters who repeatedly voice their desperation for a figure prepared to pursue forceful measures against both foreign and domestic dangers. This temporal positioning enables the story to present Modi’s subsequent rise to power as the solution for the country’s aspirations, converting what seems like a conventional spy thriller into an comprehensive validation of the ruling government’s approach to national security and armed action.
The sequel intensifies this promotional agenda by featuring Modi himself as an almost omnipresent supporting character through strategically placed news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than enabling the fictional narrative to exist separately, the filmmakers have interwoven the Prime Minister’s actual image and rhetoric throughout the story, significantly erasing the boundaries between entertainment and government messaging. This calculated narrative approach distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from previous instances of Bollywood’s political alignment, advancing them from subtle ideological positioning to explicit governmental advocacy that transforms cinema into a tool for political validation.
- First film prays for a strong leader before Modi’s election victory
- Sequel features Modi as a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative merges fictional heroism alongside government policy endorsement
- Films erase the distinction between entertainment and state propaganda deliberately
The Development of Bollywood’s Ideological Evolution
The commercial success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a significant shift in Bollywood’s relationship with nationalist thought and government authority. Whilst the Indian cinema sector has historically maintained close ties with political establishments, the brazen nature of these films represents a qualitative shift in how overtly cinema now channels governmental messaging. The franchise’s box office dominance—with the opening film becoming the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India upon its December release—shows that viewers are growing more receptive to content that smoothly incorporates state messaging. This acceptance indicates a basic shift in what Indian audiences consider acceptable film content, progressing past the understated ideological framing of prior cinema toward direct governmental promotion.
The consequences of this transition go beyond mere commercial performance. By attaining unprecedented commercial success whilst directly blending fictional heroism with state policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively legitimised a new template for Bollywood production. Next-generation filmmakers now have access to a proven blueprint for blending nationalist sentiment with financial gains, conceivably fostering propagandistic cinema as a viable and lucrative genre. This evolution demonstrates wider social changes within India, where the dividing lines separating entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have grown more blurred, prompting significant inquiries about the cinema’s influence in shaping political consciousness and national identity.
A Trend of National Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather constitutes the culmination of a growing trend within modern Indian film. The past few years have seen a proliferation of films utilising nationalist rhetoric 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-centred perspective 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 artless Islamophobic films do not possess.
This distinction proves particularly concerning because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ cinematic craft and audience engagement conceal its essentially propagandist nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” function as simplistic propagandist instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series utilises filmmaking expertise to make its political messaging acceptable to mass audiences. The franchise thus constitutes a troubling progression: ideological content enhanced through professional filmmaking into what resembles government-endorsed filmmaking. This polished strategy to political narrative may prove more influential in affecting popular sentiment than overtly provocative films, as audiences may absorb propagandistic material when it comes packaged in compelling entertainment.
Film Production Versus Political Messaging
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most pernicious quality lies in its marriage of technical excellence with political radicalism. Director Aditya Dhar exhibits considerable mastery of the action-thriller format, assembling sequences of emotional force and narrative momentum that enthrall audiences. This cinematic proficiency becomes problematic precisely because it functions as a conduit 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 strong performances by actors like Ranveer Singh add legitimacy to their deeply divisive narratives, rendering their political content more digestible to mainstream viewers who might otherwise reject blatantly incendiary messaging.
This convergence of creative excellence and ideological messaging establishes a unique challenge for film criticism and cultural analysis. Audiences frequently struggle to distinguish between aesthetic appreciation from political analysis, particularly when entertainment appeal proves genuinely compelling. The “Dhurandhar” films exploit this tension intentionally, banking on the idea that viewers absorbed in exciting action scenes will absorb their underlying messages without critical scrutiny. The danger intensifies because the films’ technical achievements grant them legitimacy within critical discourse, allowing their nationalist ideology to circulate more widely and influence public consciousness 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 |
- Technical excellence transforms ideological material into mass-market content
- Advanced cinematography masks ideological messaging from rigorous analysis
- Film technique raises nationalist rhetoric above crude inflammatory discourse
The Problematic Consequences for Indian Cinema
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology indicates a concerning trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor grows to influence box office performance and cultural relevance. Where once Bollywood functioned as a forum for varied storytelling and competing viewpoints, the emergence of these patriotic suspense films suggests a contraction in acceptable discourse. The films’ remarkable achievement indicates that audiences are growing more accepting of entertainment that directly endorses state power and frames disagreement as treachery. This shift demonstrates increased public polarization, yet cinema’s particular power to shape shared cultural consciousness means its ideological leanings carry particular weight in influencing public consciousness and political attitudes.
The consequences go further than mere entertainment preferences. When a country’s film industry regularly generates narratives that celebrate government authority and portray negatively foreign adversaries, it runs the danger of ossifying collective views and restricting critical engagement with complex 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 watershed moment: Indian cinema’s transition from occasionally accommodating state interests to actively functioning as a propaganda machine, albeit one far more sophisticated than its earlier incarnations.
Propaganda Dressed up as Entertainment
The troubling nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology lies in its deliberate obfuscation of political messaging under layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar develops complex action scenes and character arcs that demand viewer engagement, deftly deflecting from the films’ relentless promotion of nationalist ideology and uncritical belief in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, purportedly a personal quest for redemption, works at once as a celebration of governmental power and military might. By embedding propagandistic content within entertaining narratives, 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 shows particularly successful because it works beneath active perception. Viewers engrossed by gripping dramatic moments and emotional character moments absorb the films’ fundamental narratives—that decisive governmental control is necessary, that adversaries lack redemption, that self-sacrifice for national priorities is honourable—without acknowledging the manipulation occurring. The polished camera work, engaging portrayals, and genuine technical accomplishment add legitimacy to these narratives, making them appear less like persuasive messaging and more like genuine narrative. This surface credibility permits the films’ divisive ideology to reach general understanding far more effectively than overtly inflammatory material ever could.
What This Signifies for Worldwide Audiences
The international popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology presents a concerning precedent for how state-backed cinema can transcend geographic borders and cultural contexts. As streaming platforms like Netflix distribute these films globally, audiences in Western nations and elsewhere 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 inadvertently absorb and validate Indian state ideology, effectively extending the reach of propagandistic content far beyond their original domestic viewership. This globalisation of politically charged content poses critical concerns about platform responsibility and the ethical implications of circulating state-sponsored cinema to unsuspecting international audiences.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films establish a disquieting template that rival states might attempt to emulate. If state-sponsored filmmaking can attain both critical recognition and financial returns whilst furthering nationalist agendas, rival administrations—particularly those with authoritarian leanings—may acknowledge cinema as a uniquely powerful tool for the spread of ideology. The films illustrate that propaganda doesn’t need to be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when combined with authentic creative talent and considerable resources, it becomes almost inescapable. For worldwide audiences and movie reviewers, the duology’s success suggests a troubling outlook where entertainment and government messaging become ever more difficult to tell apart.
