Aditya Dhar’s “Dhurandhar” duology has emerged as a pivotal turning point for Hindi cinema, indicating a pronounced transformation in Bollywood’s narrative priorities and ideological positions. The initial chapter, launched in December 2025, proved to be the highest-grossing Hindi-language film in India prior to being divided into two parts in the post-production phase. Now, with the second instalment “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” actively dominating cinemas throughout the nation, the intelligence-based narrative is set to solidify what various commentators consider to be a troubling shift in Indian mainstream film: the comprehensive adoption of jingoistic narratives that openly seek official support and capitalise on nationalist sentiment. The films’ brazen conflation of entertainment and state propaganda has revived debates about Bollywood’s relationship with political power, particularly under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration.
From Spy Thriller to Political Manifesto
The storytelling framework of the “Dhurandhar” duology demonstrates a calculated progression from escapism to political messaging. The opening instalment deliberately positioned before Modi’s 2014 election victory, establishes its ideological framework through characters who repeatedly voice their desperation for a figure prepared to pursue decisive action against both external and internal dangers. This strategic timing enables the story to present Modi’s later ascent to leadership as the answer to the country’s aspirations, transforming what appears to be a conventional spy thriller into an elaborate endorsement of the administration’s stance on homeland defence and military aggression.
The sequel heightens this promotional agenda by showcasing Modi himself as an near-constant supporting character through carefully positioned news footage and government broadcasts. Rather than enabling 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 government messaging. This deliberate narrative choice distinguishes the “Dhurandhar” films from prior cases of Bollywood’s ideological affiliation, elevating them from muted ideological content to direct state promotion that transforms cinema into a instrument for political credibility.
- First film appeals 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 approval
- Films obscure the distinction between entertainment and also state propaganda by design
The Evolution of Bollywood’s Ideological Evolution
The box office performance of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a profound transformation in Bollywood’s connection to nationalist thought and government authority. Whilst the Indian cinema sector has historically maintained strong connections to political establishments, the explicit character of these films represents a qualitative shift in how directly cinema now conveys state communications. The franchise’s commercial supremacy—with the first instalment emerging as the top-earning Hindi film in India following its December launch—shows that viewers are growing more receptive to entertainment that seamlessly integrates state messaging. This acceptance indicates a fundamental change in what Indian viewers consider acceptable cinematic content, moving beyond the understated ideological framing of earlier films towards direct governmental promotion.
The implications of this change extend beyond mere commercial performance. By attaining extraordinary financial performance whilst explicitly merging cinematic heroics with state policy, the “Dhurandhar” films have effectively legitimised a new template for Bollywood production. Next-generation filmmakers now have access to a established model for blending nationalist sentiment with commercial success, conceivably fostering propagandistic cinema as a sustainable and profitable genre. This shift demonstrates wider social changes within India, where the boundaries between entertainment, nationalism, and state messaging have grown more blurred, prompting important concerns about cinema’s role in shaping political consciousness and sense of nationhood.
A Example of National Cinema
The “Dhurandhar” duology does not emerge in a vacuum but rather represents the culmination of a growing trend within modern Indian film. The past few years have seen a surge of films utilising nationalist rhetoric and anti-Muslim framing, including “The Kashmir Files,” “The Kerala Story,” and “The Taj Story.” These productions possess a shared ideological structure that reinterprets Indian history through a Hindu-centred perspective whilst depicting Muslims as fundamental dangers. However, what sets apart the “Dhurandhar” films from these predecessors is their better filmmaking craft and production quality, which lend their propaganda a sheen of artistic credibility that more artless Islamophobic films lack.
This difference shows particularly problematic because the “Dhurandhar” duology’s cinematic craft and popular appeal mask its fundamentally propagandistic nature. Where films like “The Kashmir Files” serve as simplistic propagandist instruments, the “Dhurandhar” series employs professional technique to present its nationalist agenda acceptable to mass audiences. The franchise thus constitutes a dangerous evolution: propaganda elevated through expert direction into material bordering on officially-backed production. This polished strategy to ideological content may become increasingly impactful in affecting popular sentiment than more obviously inflammatory films, as audiences may accept propagandistic material when it comes packaged in absorbing narrative.
Cinematic Technique Versus Political Narratives
The “Dhurandhar” duology’s most insidious quality lies in its marriage of cinematic mastery with political radicalism. Director Aditya Dhar displays considerable mastery of the action-thriller format, assembling sequences of raw power and storytelling drive that engage audiences. This filmmaking skill becomes problematic precisely because it acts as a conduit for political propaganda, converting what might otherwise be crude political messaging into something significantly compelling and influential. The films’ refined visual presentation, accomplished visual composition, and compelling performances by actors like Ranveer Singh add legitimacy to their fundamentally divisive narratives, turning their political content more digestible to wider audiences who might otherwise spurn blatantly incendiary messaging.
This intersection of creative excellence and propagandistic intent establishes a distinctive difficulty for cinematic analysis and cultural analysis. Audiences frequently struggle to distinguish between aesthetic appreciation from political analysis, especially when entertainment appeal demonstrates genuine appeal. The “Dhurandhar” films leverage this tension intentionally, banking on the idea that viewers absorbed in thrilling action sequences will internalise their underlying messages without critical resistance. The danger intensifies because the films’ technical accomplishments bestow them legitimacy within critical conversation, allowing their nationalist ideals to spread more extensively and shape public opinion 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 |
- Skilled craftsmanship turns ideological material into popular media
- Polished production techniques masks ideological messaging from critical scrutiny
- Cinematic craft elevates nationalist rhetoric above raw inflammatory speech
The Concerning Implications for Indian Cinema
The commercial and critical success of the “Dhurandhar” duology signals a potentially troubling trajectory for Indian cinema, one in which nationalist fervour grows to influence box office performance and cultural significance. Where once Bollywood served as a forum for diverse narratives and competing viewpoints, the emergence of these nationalist action films suggests a contraction in acceptable discourse. The films’ extraordinary performance indicates that audiences are increasingly receptive to entertainment that openly champions state power and frames disagreement as treachery. This shift reflects wider social division, yet cinema’s unique capacity to shape public imagination means its ideological stance carry particular weight in shaping popular opinion and political attitudes.
The consequences go further than simple viewing habits. When a country’s cinema sector regularly generates stories that celebrate government authority and portray negatively foreign adversaries, it risks hardening collective views and restricting critical engagement with intricate geopolitical realities. The “Dhurandhar” movies demonstrate this threat by portraying their perspective not as a single viewpoint amongst others, but as objective truth combined with production quality and star power. For commentators and cultural observers, this constitutes a watershed moment: Indian film industry’s shift from occasionally accommodating state interests to actively functioning as a propaganda machine, albeit one considerably more refined than its earlier incarnations.
Propaganda Disguised as Entertainment
The pernicious nature of the “Dhurandhar” duology lies in its intentional concealment of political messaging under layers of cinematic craft. Director Aditya Dhar develops intricate action set-pieces and character arcs that command viewer 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 exaltation of governmental power and military might. By incorporating propagandistic content throughout engaging narratives, the films accomplish what cruder political messaging cannot: they reshape ideology into spectacle, rendering viewers complicit in their own ideological conditioning whilst considering themselves simply entertained.
This strategy proves particularly compelling because it works beneath deliberate notice. Viewers captivated by thrilling set pieces and emotional character moments internalise the films’ core themes—that strong-handed government action is necessary, that adversaries lack redemption, that individual sacrifice for state interests is honourable—without detecting the manipulation taking place. The refined visual composition, powerful acting, and genuine technical accomplishment provide authenticity to these accounts, making them appear less like persuasive messaging and more like authentic storytelling. This appearance of authenticity permits the films’ contentious beliefs to infiltrate mainstream consciousness far more effectively than overtly inflammatory material ever would.
What This Signifies for International Viewers
The global popularity of the “Dhurandhar” duology presents a concerning pattern for how state-backed cinema can transcend geographic borders and cultural differences. As streaming services like Netflix release these films worldwide, audiences in Western countries and beyond encounter sophisticated propaganda wrapped in the recognizable style of espionage thrillers and action cinema. Without the understanding of cultural and political contexts needed to interpret the films’ nationalist rhetoric, international viewers may inadvertently absorb and validate Indian state ideology, effectively extending the reach of propagandistic narratives far outside their original domestic viewership. This worldwide distribution of politically sensitive material raises urgent questions about platform accountability and the ethical implications of distributing state-backed films to unsuspecting international audiences.
Furthermore, the “Dhurandhar” films create a troubling template that other nations might attempt to emulate. If government-backed film can achieve both critical praise and commercial success whilst promoting nationalist agendas, other states—particularly those prone to authoritarianism—may acknowledge cinema as a distinctly potent tool for the spread of ideology. The films illustrate that propaganda doesn’t need to be crude or obvious to be effective; rather, when paired with genuine artistic talent and significant funding, it becomes nearly irresistible. For global audiences and cinema critics, the duology’s success suggests a worrying prospect where entertainment and government messaging become progressively harder to distinguish.
