Aditya Dhar’s film ‘Dhurandhar’ challenges traditional narratives in Indian cinema, exploring themes of national identity, agency, and patriotism while achieving significant commercial success.
New Delhi, India – The recent release of ‘Dhurandhar,’ a two-part spy thriller directed by Aditya Dhar, has sparked extensive discussions about the representation of national identity in Indian cinema. The film, which follows a fictional agent from India’s Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) as he infiltrates the criminal underworld of Karachi, has achieved remarkable box office success, grossing over thirteen hundred crore rupees and earning a 96% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes. This conversation reflects broader issues regarding how India narrates its own stories of agency and heroism.
For much of its post-independence history, India has often refrained from creating its own national myths, unlike countries such as the United States and Britain, which have developed extensive narratives that bolster national pride and identity. In the U.S., films have perpetuated the legend of the frontier, frequently glossing over the historical realities of colonization and violence. British cinema has framed events like Dunkirk in a way that emphasizes resilience rather than catastrophe. Similarly, French narratives surrounding World War II often omit the complexities of collaboration with Nazi forces. These constructed legends form the ‘psychic infrastructure’ that supports national confidence and identity.
In contrast, the prevailing cinematic narratives in India have predominantly focused on themes of suffering and victimhood, often appealing to Western audiences. As Gautam Adani recently noted, Indian cinema has sometimes portrayed poverty through a lens seeking external validation rather than fostering a sense of internal pride. This tendency raises concerns about national self-perception, suggesting that India has internalized a narrative that limits its storytelling to themes of adversity.
‘Dhurandhar’ represents a shift from this narrative, presenting a story rooted in action and agency. The film references significant events in India-Pakistan history, including the hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight IC-814, the attack on the Indian Parliament, and the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Critics have labeled the film as ‘jingoistic’ and ‘propaganda masquerading as cinema.’ However, such critiques invite a broader examination of how national narratives are framed in Indian cinema, raising questions about whether the term ‘propaganda’ is applied inconsistently across cultural contexts.
The film’s commercial success, with its second installment grossing over one hundred crore rupees on its opening day, suggests a robust audience appetite for narratives that emphasize national pride and agency. This response indicates a possible shift in audience expectations, favoring stories that celebrate resilience and action over those that dwell solely on hardship.
Critics of ‘Dhurandhar’ argue that it fails to meet the standards of kitchen-sink realism, a genre characterized by its unflinching portrayal of everyday life. However, this perspective overlooks the rich tapestry of Indian cinema, which encompasses a wide range of genres and styles. While films such as ‘Masaan’ and ‘Court’ exemplify the tradition of realistic storytelling, ‘Dhurandhar’ operates within the established genre of masala films, blending elements of drama, action, and humor.
In this context, it is essential to recognize that Indian cinema is not monolithic. The works of directors like Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, and Adoor Gopalakrishnan stand alongside contemporary filmmakers such as Chaitanya Tamhane and Neeraj Ghaywan, showcasing the diversity of storytelling approaches. The emergence of ‘Dhurandhar’ does not threaten this tradition; instead, it adds a new layer to the cinematic landscape, inviting audiences to engage with narratives that reflect both national challenges and triumphs.
As ‘Dhurandhar’ continues to resonate with audiences, it prompts a reevaluation of how India constructs its national identity through film. The film’s success may indicate a growing desire among viewers for stories that empower and inspire, rather than solely focusing on victimhood. This shift could have profound implications for the future of Indian cinema, potentially leading to a richer array of narratives that encompass both struggle and resilience.
Ultimately, the conversation surrounding ‘Dhurandhar’ is emblematic of a larger debate about the role of cinema in shaping national identity. As India grapples with its past and navigates its future, films like ‘Dhurandhar’ may play a pivotal role in redefining how the nation sees itself and its place in the world, according to GlobalNetNews.