Listen to the article
Anupam Kher Defends ‘Dhurandhar: The Revenge’ Against Propaganda Claims
Veteran actor Anupam Kher has emerged as a vocal advocate for Aditya Dhar’s latest film “Dhurandhar: The Revenge,” publicly praising its artistic merit while dismissing critics who have labeled it as propaganda.
Speaking at the International Film Festival Delhi 2026, Kher addressed the controversy surrounding the film with characteristic directness. “I think we should ignore people who are calling cinema propaganda films. We are putting too much energy onto them, they are redundant people, they are irrelevant people,” Kher stated, defending both “Dhurandhar” and his previous controversial hit “The Kashmir Files.”
The acclaimed actor emphasized audience sovereignty in determining a film’s worth. “People are not idiots that they are going to see a 12 o’clock show, housefull. People go to see a film because they like it,” Kher remarked, suggesting that commercial success reflects genuine audience appreciation rather than manipulation.
Last week, Kher revealed on Instagram that he had personally called filmmaker Aditya Dhar to express his admiration for the project. Drawing on his credentials as an acting instructor, Kher offered substantial praise for the film’s emotional depth. “I’m a teacher of acting. For me to really salute somebody, it takes a lot of time and conviction,” he said, before commending the filmmaker’s performance. “Your body language, your simmering anger, understanding your pain… In one or two scenes, your pain is so visible and made me sad. My heart went out to you.”
“Dhurandhar: The Revenge” stars Ranveer Singh and Arjun Rampal in leading roles and has generated significant attention in India’s polarized media landscape. The film joins a growing category of nationalist-themed Bollywood productions that have proven commercially successful while drawing criticism from some quarters for their political messaging.
Kher’s comments reflect the ongoing tension in Indian cinema between artistic expression, commercial imperatives, and political interpretation. When discussing cinema’s potential influence, he offered a nuanced perspective: “Whether cinema can change people, yes, it can. It depends on individuals sitting in the dark auditorium, but it’s also a business. It’s like any other business.”
The actor’s defense comes at a time when Indian cinema is experiencing a surge in films addressing nationalist themes, historical narratives, and contemporary political issues. Critics have questioned whether some productions serve as vehicles for political messaging rather than storytelling, while defenders argue they simply reflect audience preferences and legitimate perspectives.
Industry analysts note that films like “Dhurandhar” and “The Kashmir Files” represent a significant commercial trend in Bollywood, with nationalist narratives demonstrating strong box office potential, particularly in India’s heartland markets. This commercial success has emboldened filmmakers to continue exploring controversial subject matter despite criticism from certain media quarters.
Aditya Dhar previously directed the nationalist action film “Uri: The Surgical Strike,” which became one of 2019’s biggest commercial successes and established him as a prominent voice in the industry’s patriotic film movement.
With “Dhurandhar: The Revenge” continuing to draw audiences despite polarized critical reception, Kher’s endorsement carries particular weight given his stature in Indian cinema and his outspoken political positions. His comments ultimately frame the debate as one about audience choice rather than propaganda effectiveness, suggesting that viewers themselves are the ultimate arbiters of a film’s legitimacy and value.
The controversy surrounding “Dhurandhar” highlights the evolving relationship between India’s entertainment industry and its complex political landscape, where cinema increasingly serves as both reflection of and participant in broader cultural conversations.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
15 Comments
Interesting to see Anupam Kher’s strong defense of the film ‘Dhurandhar.’ While the ‘propaganda’ claims are concerning, his point about audience reception is valid – commercial success often reflects genuine public interest rather than just manipulation. I’ll have to look into this film further.
It will be interesting to see how this debate evolves as the film gains more exposure. Anupam Kher’s support lends credibility, but the ‘propaganda’ claims are also not to be dismissed lightly.
Kher’s robust defense of ‘Dhurandhar’ against ‘propaganda’ allegations is noteworthy. While he makes a valid point about audience discretion, the political overtones of the film warrant close examination. I’ll be interested to see how this controversy develops and whether the film can stand on its artistic merits.
Kher’s comments raise an interesting point about the line between art and propaganda in film. While ‘Dhurandhar’ may have a political agenda, does that automatically make it propaganda? The public should have the freedom to decide for themselves. I’m curious to see how this debate unfolds.
Films can be a powerful medium for storytelling, but the debate around ‘propaganda’ is a tricky one. I’m curious to see how this plays out and whether the film can overcome the criticism to find success with viewers.
Kher’s defense of the film based on its commercial performance makes sense. At the end of the day, if people are willingly paying to see it, that suggests there is genuine interest and demand, not just manipulation.
That’s a fair point. Audience reception is a key indicator, beyond just critical reviews or political allegations.
Kher raises a valid argument about audience sovereignty in determining a film’s worth. While the ‘propaganda’ label may stick, if the moviegoing public continues to embrace the film, that speaks volumes about its genuine appeal.
As an acclaimed actor, Kher’s endorsement of ‘Dhurandhar’ carries weight. The ‘propaganda’ claims are worth investigating, but I agree we shouldn’t write off films just because they’re politically charged. The audience is discerning – if the movie resonates, that’s what matters most.
Kher makes a fair argument that we shouldn’t dismiss films as ‘propaganda’ just because they’re controversial. The public should ultimately decide what movies they want to watch. That said, I hope ‘Dhurandhar’ is evaluated objectively for its artistic merits beyond just its box office performance.
It’s understandable that a film touching on potentially sensitive topics would face some criticism. However, Kher makes a fair point – if audiences are genuinely drawn to the film, that speaks volumes about its appeal beyond any ‘propaganda’ claims.
Exactly, the audience’s reaction is often the best gauge of a film’s worth, regardless of any controversy surrounding it.
I appreciate Kher’s perspective on ‘Dhurandhar’ and the ‘propaganda’ claims. He makes a fair point about audience sovereignty in deciding a film’s worth. However, the political nature of the film means the ‘propaganda’ concerns shouldn’t be dismissed outright. This is a nuanced debate worth following.
Kher’s defense of ‘Dhurandhar’ against ‘propaganda’ claims is thought-provoking. He’s right that commercial success often reflects genuine public interest, not just manipulation. But the ‘propaganda’ concerns are valid too. It will be interesting to see how this film is received and discussed.
Interesting to see Anupam Kher defending this film. As a veteran actor, his perspective carries weight. While there may be differing views on the film’s content, I agree that audience demand is ultimately what matters most for a movie’s success.