Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has become a pivotal turning point for Hindi cinema, signalling a significant change in Bollywood’s narrative priorities and ideological positions. The first instalment, unveiled in December 2025, proved to be the biggest box office success in India before being separated into two parts in the post-production phase. Now, with the sequel “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” presently commanding cinemas across the country, the espionage thriller is poised to cement what many observers regard as a concerning transformation in Indian commercial cinema: the wholesale embrace of nationalist-leaning stories that deliberately pursue official support and exploit patriotic feeling. The films’ overt blending of commercial entertainment and state narratives has rekindled conversations around Bollywood’s relationship with political power, particularly under PM Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Spy Thriller to Political Declaration
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a strategic movement from escapism to ideological advocacy. The first film strategically set before Modi’s 2014 electoral triumph, sets up its ideological framework through protagonists who consistently express their desperation for a leader willing to take forceful measures against both external and internal dangers. This strategic timing enables the story to present Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the solution for the country’s aspirations, transforming what seems like a conventional spy thriller into an elaborate endorsement of the ruling government’s approach to homeland defence and military aggression.
The sequel amplifies this promotional agenda by featuring 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 real likeness 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 positioning, raising them from muted ideological content to explicit governmental advocacy that transforms cinema into a tool for political validation.
- First film appeals for a powerful leader ahead of Modi’s election victory
- Sequel presents Modi in a supporting character through news clips
- Narrative blends fictional heroism alongside government policy endorsement
- Films blur the distinction between entertainment and also state propaganda deliberately
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Ideological Shift
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a profound transformation in Bollywood’s relationship with nationalist ideology and government authority. Whilst the Indian film industry has historically maintained strong connections to political establishments, the brazen nature of these films represents a meaningful change in how directly cinema now channels state communications. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—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 content that smoothly incorporates political propaganda. This receptiveness suggests a fundamental change in what Indian viewers regard as acceptable film content, progressing past the understated ideological framing of earlier films towards explicit state advocacy.
The implications of this transition extend beyond mere commercial performance. By attaining extraordinary financial performance whilst explicitly merging fictional heroism with political agenda, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively legitimised a new template for Bollywood production. Upcoming directors now have access to a tested formula for blending nationalist sentiment with financial gains, potentially establishing politically-driven cinema as a enduring and profitable category. This shift indicates broader societal transformations within India, where the dividing lines separating entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have grown more blurred, generating important concerns about film’s function in influencing political consciousness and national identity.
A Trend of Patriotic Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not appear in a vacuum but rather represents the apotheosis of a expanding movement within contemporary Indian cinema. The past few years have seen a surge of films employing nationalist rhetoric and anti-Muslim narratives, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These productions share a shared ideological structure that reinterprets Indian history through a Hindu-centric lens whilst depicting Muslims as existential threats. However, what sets apart the “Dhurandhar” films from these earlier works 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 distinction shows notably problematic because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ production quality and popular appeal obscure its essentially propagandist nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” function as blunt political instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series utilises professional technique to make its nationalist agenda palatable to mainstream audiences. The franchise thus represents a troubling progression: propaganda elevated through professional filmmaking into material bordering on state-sanctioned cinema. This refined method to nationalist messaging may prove more influential in affecting popular sentiment than explicitly divisive films, as audiences may embrace ideological content when it is presented in absorbing narrative.
Filmmaking Artistry Versus Political Narratives
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most pernicious quality lies in its marriage of cinematic mastery with nationalist ideology. Director Aditya Dhar exhibits considerable mastery of the thriller genre, assembling sequences of visceral intensity and plot propulsion that enthrall audiences. This cinematic proficiency becomes problematic precisely because it serves as a medium for nationalist propaganda, reshaping what might otherwise be blunt political content into something far more seductive and persuasive. The films’ glossy production values, skilled camera work, and compelling performances by actors like Ranveer Singh provide plausibility to their fundamentally divisive narratives, rendering their political content more palatable to mainstream viewers who might otherwise spurn explicitly provocative content.
This intersection of creative excellence and ideological messaging establishes a distinctive difficulty for film criticism and cultural analysis. Audiences frequently struggle to separate artistic enjoyment from political critique, especially when entertainment value proves genuinely compelling. The “Dhurandhar” films exploit this conflict intentionally, relying on the notion that viewers absorbed in thrilling action sequences will internalise their embedded messaging without critical resistance. The risk grows because the films’ technical accomplishments bestow them legitimacy within critical conversation, enabling their nationalist ideals 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 converts propagandistic content into mass-market content
- Advanced cinematography masks ideological messaging from critical scrutiny
- Film technique raises patriotic messaging past blunt inflammatory language
The Troubling Implications for Indian Film Industry
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a worrying trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor progressively shapes box office performance and cultural significance. Where once Bollywood served as a forum for varied storytelling and alternative standpoints, the rise of these patriotic suspense films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ extraordinary performance indicates that audiences are becoming more drawn to entertainment that explicitly validates state power and positions dissent as treachery. This shift mirrors increased public polarization, yet cinema’s particular power to shape public imagination means its ideological leanings carry considerable importance in shaping popular opinion and political attitudes.
The consequences extend beyond simple viewing habits. When a country’s cinema sector consistently produces narratives that lionise state power and demonise external enemies, it runs the danger of ossifying collective views and limiting critical engagement with complex geopolitical realities. The “Dhurandhar” movies demonstrate this risk by portraying their worldview not as a single viewpoint amongst others, but as objective truth combined with production quality and celebrity appeal. For critics and cultural observers, this marks a pivotal turning point: Indian film industry’s evolution from sometimes serving government objectives to deliberately operating as a propaganda machine, albeit one considerably more refined than its earlier incarnations.
Propaganda Dressed up 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 develops intricate action set-pieces and character arcs that capture audience attention, successfully diverting from the films’ constant endorsement of nationalist ideology and uncritical belief in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, purportedly a personal quest for redemption, operates concurrently as a glorification of governmental power and military might. By embedding propagandistic content within entertaining narratives, the films achieve what cruder political messaging cannot: they reshape ideology into spectacle, turning audiences complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst believing themselves merely entertained.
This strategy shows particularly effective because it works beneath deliberate notice. Viewers engrossed by gripping dramatic moments and poignant character development internalise the films’ core themes—that decisive governmental control is essential, that enemies are irredeemable, that individual sacrifice for state interests is honourable—without recognising the manipulation occurring. The polished camera work, powerful acting, and genuine technical accomplishment provide authenticity to these stories, causing them to seem less like persuasive messaging and more like true storytelling. This appearance of authenticity allows the films’ divisive ideology to infiltrate general understanding far with greater success than overtly inflammatory material ever could.
What This Means for Worldwide Audiences
The global popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a concerning pattern for how state-aligned cinema can cross geographical boundaries and cultural differences. As streaming services like Netflix release these films worldwide, audiences in Western countries and elsewhere encounter advanced propagandistic content wrapped in the recognizable style of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the cultural and political literacy needed to interpret the films’ nationalist rhetoric, overseas audiences may unknowingly absorb and validate Indian state ideology, effectively extending the reach of propagandistic narratives far beyond their intended domestic audience. This worldwide distribution of politically sensitive material poses urgent questions about platform responsibility and the ethical implications of distributing state-backed films to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films set a disquieting template that other nations might attempt to emulate. If state-aligned cinema can achieve both critical acclaim and financial returns whilst furthering nationalist agendas, other states—particularly those with authoritarian leanings—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 coupled with authentic creative talent and significant funding, it becomes nearly irresistible. For international viewers and cinema critics, the duology’s success suggests a worrying prospect where entertainment and government messaging become increasingly indistinguishable.
