How ‘Dhurandhar’ is a prime example of government-embedded filmmaking

The Hindi film *Dhurandhar*, featuring Ranveer Singh as an Indian spy infiltrating a Pakistani terror network, has ignited both excitement and controversy. While the movie, centered around "Operation Dhurandhar," entertains, it also exemplifies a trend of "government-embedded filmmaking," a term coined by American writer Peter Maas. This concept, in this context, describes how a government's ideological narrative is faithfully reproduced in film. This is achieved, according to Maas, by providing special access to military or intelligence documents to encourage positive portrayals of security operations.

*Dhurandhar* stands apart from other films in this genre through its effective combination of commercial appeal with technical skill in areas such as direction, screenplay, cinematography, art direction, and acting. Director Aditya Dhar incorporates a degree of realism, a departure from the melodrama found in the works of Sudipto Sen (*Kerala Story*) and Vivek Agnihotri (*The Kashmir Files*; *The Bengal Files*).

Responses to the film have been varied. Critics and even actors like Hrithik Roshan, who have voiced dissenting opinions, have been subjected to online harassment. Supporters of *Dhurandhar* fall into two camps. The first openly embraces the film, regardless of whether it is propaganda, viewing it as a depiction of real terror events perpetrated by Pakistan. They argue that patriotism in film is justified and that Bollywood has historically suppressed the "real truths" of Pakistani terrorism, advocating instead for peace. *Dhurandhar*, therefore, is seen as a "cinematic correction" and a "cultural counterstrike." One response to Hrithik Roshan criticized him for glorifying Akbar in *Jodhaa Akbar* (2008) and accusing *Dhurandhar* of being propaganda. These sentiments reflect nationalism and a sense of Hindu victimhood, extending beyond the Hindu far-right.

The second group of supporters denies that the film is propaganda, characterizing it as a nationalist-perspective espionage drama akin to those regularly produced in Hollywood. They argue that even if the film selectively dramatizes events, it remains within the bounds of legitimate genre conventions. This view, however, overlooks the fact that the most effective propaganda is often subtle. *Dhurandhar* avoids overt ideological sloganeering, yet it aligns with Hindu nationalism and the policies of the current government.

Reinforcing an Official Narrative

Several scenes in *Dhurandhar* contribute to this narrative. One scene depicts a Kandahar plane hijacker saying, "Hindus are cowards" (a statement with no historical basis). The film also incorporates real audio footage from the 26/11 attacks, highlighting the terrorists' brutality, while conspirators celebrate killings with chants of "Allah uh Akbar." By omitting any depiction of Pakistani Muslims opposed to terrorism or friendly towards India, the film encourages viewers to adopt a view of "Muslim Pakistan" versus "Hindu India."

The film also dramatizes the frustrations of intelligence chief Ajay Sanyal (played by R. Madhavan), a character resembling National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, with the Indian State's perceived weak responses to Pakistani terror attacks in the 1990s and 2000s. Sanyal advocates for proactive anti-terror policies like Operation Dhurandhar, rejecting dovish initiatives such as Aman ki Asha, an India-Pakistan peace project.

While *Dhurandhar* offers mild criticism of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government during the Kandahar hijack and 2001 Parliament attacks, it directs more pointed criticism at Congress/non-BJP governments at the center and in Uttar Pradesh. The film implies a connection between a Union Minister and a Pakistani fake currency racket in 2005, also linking slaughterhouses in U.P. to the racket, suggesting that any action against them would lead to riots. This reinforces the Hindu nationalist trope that India's real enemies are internal, not external. Another stereotype involves Pakistani conspirators mocking India's perceived cowardice in its response to the 26/11 attacks.

The film contains a recurring reference to diligent intelligence work, with the hope that a future "nationalist CM" of U.P. (a clear reference to Yogi Adityanath) can utilize it. The film concludes with the slogan "Yeh Naya Bharat Hain, Ghar Mein Ghuske Maarta Hain" (this is new India, it will enter your [enemy's] home and attack you), echoing a popular slogan of Prime Minister Modi. The film's lionization of a powerful security figure from the current government and its partisan endorsement of the government's muscular military and counterterrorism strategies firmly place it within the realm of government-embedded filmmaking.

Furthermore, despite attempts to humanize gangsters and break some stereotypes by showing modern nightlife, *Dhurandhar* reinforces negative stereotypes about Pakistan. A character states that Pakistan is the source of all terrorism in the world, and the film primarily depicts gangsters, ISI agents, politicians, and army officials united in their desire to inflict harm on India. Even a gangster from the dissident Baloch community echoes this sentiment. *Dhurandhar* fails to acknowledge Pakistani voices critical of terrorism, such as newspaper articles published after 26/11 urging Pakistanis to recognize the horrors perpetrated in the name of Islam, or even those apologizing to Indians. The film also ignores the fact that the Lyari neighborhood in Karachi, portrayed as a hub of crime and terror, is also known as "Mini Brazil" for its vibrant hip hop scene and passion for football.

Selective Memory

The success of *Dhurandhar* also reflects the current state of Bollywood filmmaking, particularly the often cartoonish and comic military and spy thrillers, such as the Yash Raj Films Spy Universe. For its admirers, *Dhurandhar*, with its male-centric focus and aestheticized violence, feels more relatable than thrillers that depict Indian intelligence operatives either romancing Pakistani counterparts or betraying their country to aid the enemy.

The debate surrounding *Dhurandhar* highlights the selective nature of public memory. While some claim it represents a cultural reclaiming of Bollywood, they overlook the surge of jingoistic films centered on Pakistani terrorism, Kashmir Islamist militancy, Pakistan wars, and Indian agents infiltrating Pakistan that began in the 1990s (e.g., *Roja*, *Border*, *Sarfarosh*, *Mission Kashmir*, *Maa Tujhe Salaam*, *Gadar*, *The Hero*, *LOC-Kargil*, *Ab Tumhare Hawale Hai Watan Saathiyon*, *Attacks of 26/11*, *D-Day*, *Baby*, *Phantom*). Many of these films demonized the Pakistani people, not just the Pakistani state and terrorists. *Dhurandhar* doesn't break new ground, but its deep and partisan alignment with the present government's narratives, even when subtle, solidifies its place as another example of government-embedded filmmaking.