The film broke decades of silence
‘Dhurandhar’ is no ordinary film; It is an ideological intervention on the cinema, media and narrative ecosystem – one that dares to ask in whose hands India’s story lies. In the history of Indian cinema, some films are not just entertainment, they become documents of time. ‘Dhurandhar’ is a work of the same category. This film does not tell the story of a single incident, but questions the ideological framework built over decades, through which the audience has been told what to see, what to understand and what to forget.
Cinema vs Narrative
Over the past seven decades, Bollywood has often presented subjects like history, terror and national security in a romantic haze. The Mughal era was reduced to love stories and grand courts, while cross-border sponsored terrorism was wrapped in the syrup of ‘misunderstanding’, ‘human emotions’ and ‘brotherhood’. It was narrative projection, in which uncomfortable truths were either beautified or made invisible. ‘Dhurandhar’ breaks this tradition. The film does not ask for consent from the viewer, but presents evidence.
Without taking the name of religion, the biggest feature of the film ‘Face of Terror’ is that it does not put religion or common citizens in the dock anywhere. Its focus is clear – the structure of the terrorist state, the nexus of underworld terror politics, the invisible front of intelligence war and the strategy of weaponizing information. This is why the allegations being leveled on it do not seem to be a review of ‘anti-so-and-so’ or ‘structural bias’, but rather a reaction to inconvenience.
performances that become statements
Akshaye Khanna’s acting doesn’t make noise, it rips. A cold, analytical and deadly restraint, which comes off the screen and into the consciousness of the viewer. R. Madhavan’s acting also appears to be a similarly strategic presentation. Ranveer Singh stepped out of his established ‘star safe zone’ to prove that the dharma of an actor is not just popularity but also the courage to take risks towards the truth.
Director’s vision: not entertainment, intervention
Here Aditya Dhar appears less as a director and more as a thinker. The disciplined narrative structure of ‘Uri’, the factual honesty of a documentary and the outrage of a citizen—every frame suggests that this film has come to intervene in the intellectual and cultural space more than the box office.
Why is the narrative ecosystem nervous?
The real challenge of ‘Dhurandhar’ is not its story, but its getting out of control. The film breaks the set ideological monopoly, empowers the viewer to reach his own conclusions and reminds that the nation is safe not just on borders but in stories too. The reactions are uncomfortable and the imbalance is evident on social media.
One film, one moment: ‘Dhurandhar’ can be agreed or disagreed with, but it cannot be ignored. This film reminds that India is not only fighting a war on the borders, but the second war is also going on in its own narrative space. If cinema is the mirror of the society, then ‘Dhurandhar’ is the mirror in which the face is visible without filter for the first time. And perhaps this is its biggest achievement.
Comments are closed.