Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has emerged as a pivotal turning point for Hindi cinema, marking a dramatic shift in Bollywood’s thematic preoccupations and ideological positions. The first instalment, launched in December 2025, proved to be the top-earning Hindi film in India prior to being divided into two parts during post-production. Now, with the follow-up “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” actively dominating cinemas nationwide, the spy saga is set to solidify what numerous critics consider to be a troubling shift in Indian popular cinema: the wholesale embrace of patriotic-inflected tales that openly seek government favour and exploit national pride. The films’ overt blending of commercial entertainment and state narratives has revived discussions concerning Bollywood’s ties to political authority, especially during Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Intelligence Thriller to Political Declaration
The narrative structure of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a calculated progression from entertainment to political messaging. The first film deliberately positioned before Modi’s 2014 election victory, sets up its political foundation through characters who repeatedly voice their desperation for a leader willing to take forceful measures against both external and internal dangers. This temporal positioning allows the narrative to frame Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the solution for the country’s aspirations, converting what seems like a standard espionage film into an comprehensive validation of the ruling government’s approach to national security and military aggression.
The sequel amplifies this propagandistic impulse by showcasing Modi himself as an almost omnipresent supporting character through carefully positioned news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than allowing the fictional narrative to stand independently, the filmmakers have threaded the Prime Minister’s real likeness and rhetoric throughout the story, effectively blurring the boundaries between entertainment and state communication. This intentional storytelling decision distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from previous instances of Bollywood’s political alignment, raising them from subtle ideological positioning 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 includes Modi as a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative conflates fictional heroism alongside government policy endorsement
- Films erase the boundaries between entertainment and state propaganda by design
The Development of Bollywood’s Ideological Shift
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a significant shift in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist thought and state power. Whilst the Indian cinema sector has traditionally upheld close ties with political establishments, the explicit character of these films constitutes a meaningful change in how overtly cinema now conveys state communications. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—with the first instalment becoming the top-earning Hindi 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 regard as acceptable cinematic content, moving beyond the understated ideological framing of prior cinema towards direct governmental promotion.
The implications of this shift extend beyond mere entertainment metrics. By attaining unprecedented commercial success whilst openly conflating fictional heroism with governmental policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have successfully established a fresh blueprint for Indian film production. Next-generation filmmakers now possess a tested formula for blending patriotic feeling with box office returns, arguably creating politically-driven cinema as a enduring and profitable category. This evolution reflects broader societal transformations within India, where the dividing lines separating cinema, patriotism, and official discourse have become less distinct, prompting important concerns about cinema’s role in forming public awareness of politics and sense of nationhood.
A Pattern of Nationalist Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not appear in a vacuum but rather constitutes the apotheosis of a expanding movement within contemporary Indian cinema. 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 shared ideological structure that recasts 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 superior cinematic execution and production values, which give their propaganda a veneer of artistic legitimacy that more artless Islamophobic films do not possess.
This difference proves particularly troubling because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ technical sophistication and audience engagement obscure its essentially propagandist nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” serve as simplistic propagandist instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series utilises filmmaking expertise to present its ideological content acceptable to mass audiences. The franchise thus constitutes a troubling progression: messaging refined through professional filmmaking into something approaching government-endorsed filmmaking. This sophisticated approach to nationalist messaging may exert greater influence in shaping public opinion than more obviously inflammatory films, as audiences may embrace political messaging when it is presented in engaging storytelling.
Filmmaking Artistry Versus Political Messaging
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most troubling quality lies in its marriage of cinematic mastery with nationalist ideology. Director Aditya Dhar exhibits impressive command of the action-thriller format, assembling sequences of raw power and storytelling drive that captivate audiences. This technical competence becomes concerning precisely because it functions as a vehicle for political propaganda, converting what might otherwise be crude political messaging into something far more compelling and influential. The films’ glossy production values, skilled camera work, and powerful acting by actors like Ranveer Singh lend credibility to their deeply divisive narratives, making their ideological messaging more digestible to wider audiences who might otherwise spurn blatantly incendiary messaging.
This convergence of artistic merit and propagandistic intent presents a distinctive difficulty for film criticism and cultural commentary. Audiences often find it difficult to distinguish between artistic enjoyment from political analysis, especially when entertainment appeal proves genuinely compelling. The “Dhurandhar” films exploit this tension intentionally, banking on the notion that viewers absorbed in exciting action scenes will absorb their embedded messaging without critical scrutiny. The risk intensifies because the films’ technical achievements bestow 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 |
- Professional quality converts ideological material into popular media
- Advanced cinematography obscures ideological undertones from close examination
- Film technique elevates nationalist rhetoric past raw inflammatory speech
The Problematic Implications for Indian Cinema
The box office and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology suggests a worrying trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor progressively shapes box office performance and cultural importance. Where once Bollywood functioned as a forum for multiple perspectives and alternative standpoints, the ascendancy of these jingoistic thrillers suggests a narrowing of acceptable discourse. The films’ unprecedented success indicates that audiences are becoming more drawn to entertainment that directly endorses state power and frames disagreement as treachery. This shift demonstrates wider social division, yet cinema’s distinctive ability to shape public imagination means its ideological stance carry particular weight in influencing public consciousness and political attitudes.
The implications go further than mere viewing habits. When a country’s cinema sector regularly generates stories that glorify state power and portray negatively external enemies, it risks calcifying collective views and limiting critical engagement with complex international political dynamics. The “Dhurandhar” movies exemplify this risk by portraying their worldview not as a single viewpoint amongst others, but as objective truth wrapped in production quality and celebrity appeal. For critics and media analysts, this marks a watershed moment: Indian film industry’s shift from occasionally accommodating state interests to deliberately operating as a propaganda machine, albeit one considerably more refined than its earlier incarnations.
Propaganda Disguised as Entertainment
The pernicious nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology stems from its calculated obscuring of political messaging beneath layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar develops intricate action set-pieces and character arcs that command viewer attention, successfully diverting from the films’ relentless promotion of nationalist ideology and blind faith in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, nominally a personal quest for redemption, functions simultaneously as a exaltation of governmental power and military might. By incorporating propagandistic content within entertaining narratives, the films accomplish what cruder political messaging cannot: they transform ideology into spectacle, rendering viewers complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst believing themselves merely entertained.
This strategy shows particularly successful because it operates beneath active perception. Viewers engrossed by exhilarating action sequences and intimate character scenes internalise the films’ core themes—that strong-handed government action is necessary, that adversaries lack redemption, that individual sacrifice for governmental objectives is honourable—without recognising the manipulation taking place. The refined visual composition, powerful acting, and genuine technical accomplishment lend credibility to these accounts, causing them to seem less like persuasive messaging and more like authentic storytelling. This surface credibility enables the films’ contentious beliefs to penetrate popular awareness far more effectively than openly divisive messaging ever could.
What This Implies for International Viewers
The global popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a concerning pattern for how state-aligned cinema can cross geographic borders and cultural contexts. As streaming platforms like Netflix release these films worldwide, audiences in Western countries and beyond 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 rhetoric, overseas audiences may inadvertently consume and legitimise Indian state ideology, effectively extending the reach of propagandistic narratives far outside their intended domestic audience. This worldwide distribution of politically charged content raises critical concerns about platform responsibility and the moral dimensions of distributing state-backed films to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films set a concerning template that other nations could try to emulate. If state-sponsored filmmaking can achieve both critical praise and financial returns whilst furthering nationalist agendas, other governments—particularly those prone to authoritarianism—may identify cinema as a exceptionally influential tool for ideological dissemination. The films demonstrate that propaganda need not be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when coupled with genuine artistic talent and significant funding, it becomes virtually unavoidable. For worldwide audiences and cinema critics, the duology’s success indicates a worrying prospect where popular entertainment and state communication become progressively harder to distinguish.
