Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has established itself as a pivotal turning point for Hindi cinema, signalling a pronounced transformation in Bollywood’s thematic preoccupations and political leanings. The first instalment, unveiled in December 2025, became the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India before being split into two parts throughout the editing process. Now, with the sequel “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” presently commanding cinemas throughout the nation, the espionage thriller is set to solidify what many observers view as a concerning transformation in Indian commercial cinema: the comprehensive adoption of nationalist-leaning stories that deliberately pursue state approval and leverage patriotic feeling. The films’ overt blending of commercial entertainment and state narratives has rekindled discussions concerning Bollywood’s ties to political authority, particularly under Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Intelligence Thriller to Political Manifesto
The storytelling framework of the “Dhurandhar” duology reveals a strategic movement from entertainment to political messaging. The first film strategically set before Modi’s 2014 election victory, establishes its political foundation through protagonists who consistently express their desperation for a leader willing to take forceful measures against both foreign and domestic threats. This temporal positioning allows the narrative to present Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the answer to the nation’s prayers, transforming what seems like a standard espionage film into an comprehensive validation of the ruling government’s approach to national security and armed action.
The sequel intensifies this propagandistic impulse by showcasing 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 interwoven the Prime Minister’s real likeness and rhetoric throughout the story, substantially obscuring the boundaries between entertainment and official discourse. This calculated narrative approach distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from prior cases of Bollywood’s ideological affiliation, elevating them from subtle ideological positioning to direct state promotion that transforms cinema into a instrument for political credibility.
- First film prays for a strong leader ahead of Modi’s electoral triumph
- Sequel features Modi in a supporting character through news clips
- Narrative blends fictional heroism alongside government policy endorsement
- Films blur the boundaries between entertainment and state propaganda intentionally
The Transformation of Bollywood’s Philosophical Change
The commercial success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a profound transformation in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist ideology and state power. Whilst the Indian cinema sector has traditionally upheld close ties with political structures, the explicit character of these films represents a meaningful change in how directly cinema now channels state communications. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—with the opening film becoming the top-earning Hindi film in India following its December launch—shows that viewers are growing more receptive to content that smoothly incorporates state messaging. This acceptance indicates a fundamental change in what Indian audiences regard as acceptable film content, moving beyond the understated ideological framing of earlier films towards explicit state advocacy.
The consequences of this transition go beyond mere commercial performance. By achieving extraordinary financial performance whilst explicitly merging cinematic heroics with political agenda, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively endorsed a novel framework for Indian film production. Next-generation filmmakers now have access to a tested formula for blending patriotic feeling with commercial success, potentially establishing state-aligned filmmaking as a sustainable and profitable category. This shift demonstrates wider social changes within India, where the dividing lines separating entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have grown more blurred, raising critical questions about the cinema’s influence 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 modern Indian film. Recent years have witnessed a proliferation of films utilising nationalist messaging and anti-Muslim narratives, 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-centred perspective whilst depicting Muslims as existential threats. However, what distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from these predecessors is their superior cinematic execution and production values, which lend their propaganda a veneer of artistic legitimacy that more artless Islamophobic films do not possess.
This differentiation shows especially troubling because the “Dhurandhar” two-film series’ technical sophistication and entertainment value mask its fundamentally propagandistic nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” serve as crude ideological instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series employs filmmaking expertise to present its political messaging acceptable to mainstream audiences. The franchise thus represents a concerning development: propaganda elevated through professional filmmaking into what resembles government-endorsed filmmaking. This polished strategy to nationalist messaging may become increasingly impactful in shaping public opinion than more obviously inflammatory films, as audiences may accept propagandistic material when it is presented in engaging storytelling.
Cinematic Technique Versus Political Narratives
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most troubling quality lies in its combination of production sophistication with ideological extremism. Director Aditya Dhar exhibits impressive command of the action thriller genre, assembling sequences of raw power and narrative momentum that enthrall audiences. This filmmaking skill becomes problematic precisely because it acts as a conduit for nationalist propaganda, reshaping what might otherwise be blunt political content into something considerably alluring and convincing. The films’ glossy production values, accomplished visual composition, and powerful acting by actors like Ranveer Singh lend credibility to their deeply divisive narratives, turning their ideological messaging more acceptable to mainstream viewers who might otherwise spurn overtly inflammatory material.
This combination of artistic merit and ideological messaging creates a unique challenge for film criticism 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 intentionally, relying on the idea that audiences engaged with thrilling action sequences will absorb their embedded messaging without critical scrutiny. The risk grows because the films’ technical accomplishments bestow them legitimacy within critical discourse, enabling their nationalist ideals to circulate more widely and influence public opinion 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 propagandistic content into mass-market content
- Sophisticated filmmaking conceals ideological messaging from critical scrutiny
- Film technique raises patriotic messaging beyond raw inflammatory speech
The Concerning Ramifications for Indian Film Industry
The box office and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology suggests a worrying trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which patriotic fervor grows to influence box office performance and cultural significance. Where once Bollywood functioned as a forum for diverse narratives and differing opinions, the ascendancy of these patriotic suspense films suggests a reduction of acceptable discourse. The films’ unprecedented success indicates that audiences are increasingly receptive to entertainment that openly champions state power and positions dissent as treachery. This shift mirrors wider social division, yet cinema’s particular power to shape public imagination means its political orientation carry considerable importance in influencing public consciousness and political attitudes.
The implications go further than mere entertainment preferences. When a nation’s cinema sector regularly generates stories that lionise state power and vilify external enemies, it runs the danger of calcifying public opinion and restricting critical engagement with complex geopolitical realities. The “Dhurandhar” films demonstrate this danger by presenting their worldview not as one perspective among many, but as factual reality packaged with production quality and celebrity appeal. For critics and media analysts, this constitutes a pivotal turning point: Indian film industry’s transition from sometimes serving state interests to actively functioning as a propaganda apparatus, albeit one considerably more refined than its earlier incarnations.
Propaganda Dressed up as Entertainment
The troubling nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology stems from its intentional concealment of political messaging within layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar crafts 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, ostensibly a personal quest for redemption, functions simultaneously as a celebration of governmental power and military might. By weaving propagandistic content inside compelling stories, the films accomplish what cruder political messaging cannot: they convert ideology into spectacle, making audiences complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst regarding themselves as merely entertained.
This strategy shows particularly compelling because it operates beneath active perception. Viewers engrossed by thrilling set pieces and emotional character moments internalise the films’ fundamental narratives—that decisive governmental control is necessary, that enemies are irredeemable, that self-sacrifice for governmental objectives is noble—without detecting the manipulation at work. The sophisticated cinematography, compelling performances, and authentic craftsmanship add legitimacy to these narratives, making them appear less like ideological material and more like genuine narrative. This appearance of authenticity allows the films’ contentious beliefs to infiltrate popular awareness far more successfully than openly divisive messaging ever would.
What This Signifies for Global Audiences
The global popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology raises a troubling pattern for how state-aligned cinema can cross geographic borders and cultural differences. As streaming services like Netflix distribute these films globally, audiences in Western nations and elsewhere encounter advanced propagandistic content wrapped in the recognizable style of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the cultural and political literacy required to decode the films’ nationalist messaging, international viewers may inadvertently consume and legitimise Indian state-sponsored ideology, substantially broadening the reach of propagandistic narratives far beyond their intended domestic audience. This worldwide distribution of politically charged content poses urgent questions about platform responsibility and the moral dimensions of distributing state-sponsored cinema to unaware overseas viewers.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films establish a concerning template that other nations might attempt to emulate. If government-backed film can attain both critical praise and financial returns whilst advancing nationalist agendas, other states—particularly those with authoritarian leanings—may acknowledge cinema as a exceptionally influential tool for ideological dissemination. The films demonstrate that propaganda doesn’t need to be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when paired with genuine artistic talent and substantial budgets, it becomes nearly irresistible. For worldwide audiences and cinema critics, the duology’s success signals a worrying prospect where entertainment and government messaging become progressively harder to distinguish.
