Dhurandhar, Gore Economics & the New Age Bollywood Propaganda Machine

There was a time when films sparked conversations after release.
Now, trailers are enough to trigger cultural wars.

The recent uproar around Dhurandhar — starring Ranveer Singh and directed by Aditya Dhar — is not about cinema alone. It’s about intent, messaging, and the increasingly dangerous overlap between entertainment, shock value, and subtle propaganda.

When Dhruv Rathee publicly called out the film’s extreme violence, gore, and torture — comparing it to the visual brutality of extremist propaganda — the reaction was instant and vicious. Some hailed him for calling out a moral collapse. Others accused him of targeting the film for ideological reasons.

But let’s pause the shouting and ask the uncomfortable question:

What exactly is being sold here — cinema or conditioning?

Violence as a Business Model

Let’s be honest. Gore sells.

Shock sells.
Outrage sells.
Trauma sells.

Mainstream Indian cinema has discovered that violence doesn’t need depth if it has volume. Blood becomes storytelling. Torture becomes “realism”. And brutality is rebranded as artistic courage.

Dhurandhar doesn’t just depict violence — it luxuriates in it. Lingering shots. Stylised brutality. Trauma packaged as spectacle.

This isn’t accidental. This is design.

The more extreme the visuals, the louder the buzz. And buzz today equals box office.

The Convenient Silence on Censorship

Here’s where the hypocrisy gets louder than the explosions.

A brief kiss?
A consensual intimate scene?
A political joke?

Cue outrage. Cuts. Blurring. Moral policing.

But graphic torture?
Skinning?
Blood-soaked revenge fantasies?

Suddenly, silence.

The same system that panics over affection seems perfectly comfortable letting savagery pass as “cinematic necessity.” That contradiction isn’t cultural — it’s strategic.

Violence distracts.
Violence simplifies narratives.
Violence makes complex politics digestible.

When Cinema Starts Smelling Like Propaganda

This is where Rathee’s criticism hit a nerve.

The problem isn’t only gore.
The problem is direction.

When films borrow from real geopolitical conflicts, real terror events, and real national trauma — and then package them into hero-villain binaries — cinema stops being neutral storytelling.

It becomes suggestive persuasion.

Who is shown as the enemy?
Who is glorified?
Whose pain is highlighted?
Whose is ignored?

These choices are never innocent.

Patriotism is easy to sell.
Fear is even easier.
And when both are blended with spectacle, the audience rarely notices where entertainment ends and messaging begins.

The Manufactured Backlash Economy

Interestingly, the outrage itself feeds the machine.

Criticism becomes free marketing.
Debates become visibility.
Anger becomes reach.

Those defending the film scream “anti-national” at critics.
Those opposing it scream “propaganda” at the makers.

Meanwhile, ticket counters keep ringing.

In today’s attention economy, controversy is not a risk — it’s a strategy.

Dhruv Rathee: Critic, Provocateur, or Necessary Irritant?

Love him or hate him, Rathee did what few public figures dare to do — question a high-octane mainstream film when everyone else was busy celebrating its scale.

Is he perfect? No.
Is he neutral? Debatable.
But his core question remains valid:

Are we normalising brutality in the name of entertainment?

Dismissing the question by attacking the messenger is the easiest escape. Answering it honestly is far harder.

The Real Danger Isn’t the Film — It’s the Trend

Dhurandhar is not the problem.
It is a symptom.

A symptom of:
• Violence replacing writing
• Shock replacing substance
• Messaging replacing nuance
• Profit replacing responsibility

When filmmakers realise they can bypass storytelling by weaponising trauma, cinema slowly turns into psychological conditioning — loud, simplistic, and emotionally manipulative.

Final Thought: This Isn’t About Left or Right

Strip away politics and personalities, and the issue becomes clear.

This is about what kind of cinema we reward.
This is about what we normalise for the next generation.
This is about whether mainstream films challenge the mind — or merely hijack it.

Because when blood becomes background noise and cruelty becomes spectacle, society doesn’t become braver.

It becomes numb.

And numb societies are the easiest to control.

Comments

comments