The recent backlash against critics of the film Dhurandhar underscores tensions in Indian cinema between commercial success and artistic critique. Opinion pieces argue that while box office hits like Dhurandhar thrive, good-faith reviews face harassment, raising questions about narrative control and selective labeling of films as political.
The controversy surrounding Dhurandhar, a 2025 film embracing themes of hyper-nationalism, violence, and machismo, has sparked a broader debate on film criticism in India. Directed amid a wave of similar movies, Dhurandhar is on track to earn Rs 400 crore at the box office, following successes like The Kashmir Files (2022), which grossed over Rs 250 crore, and The Kerala Story (2023), which earned Rs 240 crore and ranked as the seventh-highest-grossing film of its year. Films such as Section 370 (2024), Chhaava (2025), and The Sabarmati Report (2024) have also received government support, including tax-free status in some states.
Critics like Anupama Chopra and Sucharita Tyagi faced harassment for their less-than-effusive reviews of Dhurandhar. Actor Saba Azad endured Islamophobic and sexist trolling linked to her partner Hrithik Roshan's tweet, which praised the film but expressed mild political disagreement. In an opinion piece, Pooja Pillai questions the sense of victimhood among proponents of these films, noting, "The power of the box office, public opinion and government backing all but overrode those who sought to draw attention to these films’ shortcuts, plotholes and disquieting ideologies. So who exactly is being persecuted here?" She contrasts this with films like Padmaavat and Phule, which faced title changes or cuts due to offending sentiments.
Filmmaker Vivek Ranjan Agnihotri counters that the label 'political' is applied selectively to unsettle established narratives. He describes the reaction as "Narrative Monopoly Syndrome," where traditional gatekeepers panic over losing control. Agnihotri argues cinema has always been ideological, from 1950s nationalist films to 1970s parallel cinema, and that audience democratization via social media challenges elite consensus.
This clash reveals a shrinking space for good-faith criticism, as propaganda demands not just approval but moral submission, per Pillai. Yet Agnihotri insists great storytelling inherently unsettles, urging consistent standards in critique rather than boundary-marking accusations.
