Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has become a landmark achievement for Hindi cinema, signalling a dramatic shift in Bollywood’s subject matter focus and ideological positions. The first instalment, unveiled in December 2025, turned out to be the biggest box office success in India prior to being divided into two parts during post-production. Now, with the follow-up “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” actively dominating cinemas throughout the nation, the spy saga is positioned to establish what many observers regard as a troubling shift in Indian commercial cinema: the blanket endorsement of jingoistic narratives that openly seek official support and exploit patriotic feeling. The films’ overt blending of entertainment and state propaganda 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 strategic movement from entertainment to political messaging. The first film deliberately positioned before Modi’s 2014 electoral triumph, establishes its ideological framework through protagonists who consistently express their desperation for a leader willing to take decisive action against both foreign and domestic threats. This strategic timing allows the narrative to frame Modi’s subsequent rise to power as the solution for the country’s aspirations, converting what appears to be a conventional spy thriller into an comprehensive validation of the ruling government’s approach to homeland defence and military aggression.
The sequel intensifies this ideological drive by featuring Modi himself as an near-constant supporting character through deliberately inserted news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than permitting the fictional narrative to stand independently, the filmmakers have threaded 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 positioning, elevating them from subtle ideological positioning to explicit governmental advocacy that transforms cinema into a instrument for political credibility.
- First film calls for a powerful leader before Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel features Modi in a supporting character via news clips
- Narrative blends fictional heroism with government policy endorsement
- Films blur the boundaries between entertainment and state propaganda by design
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Ideological Evolution
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology indicates a significant shift in Bollywood’s relationship with nationalist thought and government authority. Whilst the Indian cinema sector has traditionally upheld close ties with political structures, the brazen nature of these films represents a qualitative shift in how directly cinema now conveys state communications. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—with the opening film emerging as the top-earning Hindi film in India following its December launch—shows that audiences are increasingly receptive to content that smoothly incorporates state messaging. This receptiveness suggests a basic shift in what Indian audiences consider acceptable cinematic content, moving beyond the understated ideological framing of earlier films toward explicit state advocacy.
The ramifications of this change go beyond simple commercial performance. By attaining unprecedented commercial success whilst explicitly merging fictional heroism with political agenda, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively endorsed a novel framework for Bollywood production. Next-generation filmmakers now possess a established model for merging patriotic feeling with commercial success, arguably creating propagandistic cinema as a enduring and profitable category. This shift reflects broader societal transformations within India, where the boundaries between entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have become less distinct, generating important concerns about cinema’s role in shaping public awareness of politics and sense of nationhood.
A Example of Patriotic Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather represents the apotheosis of a growing trend within modern Indian film. The past few years have witnessed a surge of films employing nationalist rhetoric and anti-Muslim framing, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These productions share a common ideological framework that reinterprets Indian history through a Hindu-centric lens whilst depicting Muslims as fundamental dangers. However, what sets apart the “Dhurandhar” films from these earlier works is their superior cinematic execution and production quality, which lend their propaganda a veneer of artistic legitimacy that more artless Islamophobic films lack.
This difference shows particularly problematic because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ technical sophistication and audience engagement conceal its fundamentally propagandistic nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” serve as blunt political instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series utilises cinematic craft to present its political messaging palatable to mainstream audiences. The franchise thus represents a troubling progression: propaganda elevated through expert direction into something approaching officially-backed production. This refined method to political narrative may become increasingly impactful in influencing audience views than overtly provocative films, as audiences may embrace propagandistic material when it is presented in compelling entertainment.
Cinematic Technique Versus Political Messaging
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most insidious quality lies in its combination of cinematic mastery with ideological extremism. Director Aditya Dhar demonstrates considerable mastery of the thriller genre, assembling sequences of raw power and narrative momentum that enthrall audiences. This filmmaking skill becomes contentious precisely because it acts as a vehicle for ideological messaging, converting what might otherwise be blunt political content into something far more seductive and persuasive. The films’ glossy production values, accomplished visual composition, and powerful acting by actors like Ranveer Singh add legitimacy to their inherently polarizing narratives, turning their political content more digestible to wider audiences who might otherwise spurn overtly inflammatory material.
This convergence of creative excellence and ideological messaging creates a unique challenge for cinematic analysis and cultural commentary. Audiences frequently struggle to separate aesthetic appreciation from political analysis, especially when entertainment appeal demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films leverage this tension deliberately, relying on the notion that audiences engaged with thrilling action sequences will absorb their underlying messages without critical resistance. The danger grows because the films’ technical accomplishments bestow them credibility within critical discourse, allowing their nationalist ideals to spread more extensively and influence public consciousness more successfully 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 converts propagandistic content into mass-market content
- Sophisticated filmmaking conceals political messaging from close examination
- Filmmaking skill lifts patriotic messaging above crude inflammatory discourse
The Problematic Implications for Indian Film Industry
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology indicates a potentially troubling trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which nationalist fervour progressively shapes box office performance and cultural relevance. Where once Bollywood functioned as a forum for diverse narratives and competing viewpoints, the ascendancy of these jingoistic thrillers suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ extraordinary performance indicates that audiences are becoming more drawn to entertainment that openly champions state power and positions dissent as treachery. This shift mirrors broader societal polarisation, yet cinema’s unique capacity to shape shared cultural consciousness means its ideological stance carry considerable importance in influencing public consciousness and political attitudes.
The consequences extend beyond mere entertainment preferences. When a country’s cinema sector consistently produces narratives that lionise government authority and demonise external enemies, it runs the danger of ossifying public opinion and limiting critical engagement with intricate geopolitical realities. The “Dhurandhar” movies illustrate this threat by presenting their perspective not as one perspective among many, but as objective truth wrapped in production quality and celebrity appeal. For critics and media analysts, this marks a pivotal turning point: Indian cinema’s shift from sometimes serving government objectives to deliberately operating as a propaganda apparatus, albeit one far more sophisticated than its historical predecessors.
Propaganda Dressed up as Entertainment
The pernicious nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology rests upon its deliberate obfuscation of political messaging beneath layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar develops elaborate action sequences and character arcs that command viewer attention, deftly deflecting from the films’ relentless promotion of nationalist ideology and unquestioning faith in state institutions. The protagonist’s journey, nominally a personal quest for redemption, functions simultaneously as a glorification 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, making audiences complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst considering themselves simply entertained.
This strategy proves particularly successful because it works beneath conscious awareness. Viewers engrossed by gripping dramatic moments and intimate character scenes internalise the films’ fundamental narratives—that forceful state intervention is required, that adversaries lack redemption, that individual sacrifice for state interests is honourable—without detecting the manipulation at work. The refined visual composition, compelling performances, 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 allows the films’ polarising worldview to penetrate popular awareness far more successfully than explicitly provocative content ever would.
What This Implies for Worldwide Audiences
The international success of the “Dhurandhar” duology presents a troubling precedent for how state-aligned cinema can transcend geographical boundaries and cultural contexts. As streaming platforms like Netflix distribute these films worldwide, audiences in Western nations and elsewhere encounter sophisticated propaganda wrapped in the recognizable style of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the cultural and political literacy needed to interpret the films’ nationalist messaging, international viewers may unknowingly consume and legitimise Indian state ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic content far outside their original domestic viewership. This globalisation of politically sensitive material raises critical concerns about platform responsibility and the moral dimensions of distributing state-backed films to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films create a troubling template that other nations might attempt to emulate. If government-backed film can achieve both critical recognition and financial returns whilst furthering nationalist agendas, other governments—particularly those prone to authoritarianism—may identify cinema as a uniquely powerful tool for the spread of ideology. The films demonstrate that propaganda need not be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when paired with authentic creative talent and significant funding, it becomes nearly irresistible. For worldwide audiences and movie reviewers, the duology’s success signals a worrying prospect where entertainment and state messaging become progressively harder to distinguish.
