Listen to the article
In a recent social media outburst that has divided fans and industry insiders alike, popular YouTuber Dhruv Rathee has launched a scathing critique of Ranveer Singh’s latest blockbuster “Dhurandhar,” labeling it “false propaganda” even as the film continues its impressive box office run approaching the Rs 800 crore mark globally.
Rathee, known for his political commentary and analysis videos that regularly attract millions of views, took to Twitter to express his concerns about the historical accuracy of the film. “Just watched Dhurandhar. It’s disappointing to see how historical facts have been distorted to create a narrative that serves a particular ideology,” Rathee wrote to his 5.2 million followers.
The controversy comes at a time when “Dhurandhar,” directed by acclaimed filmmaker Sanjay Leela Bhansali, has been breaking records at the box office since its release three weeks ago. Industry analysts report the film has already collected Rs 535 crore domestically and another Rs 245 crore from international markets, bringing its global tally to Rs 780 crore.
Film trade analyst Taran Adarsh notes that the movie is likely to cross the Rs 800 crore milestone by the weekend. “Despite controversies, audience response remains overwhelming. The film continues to perform exceptionally well, especially in tier-two cities where occupancy rates remain above 85 percent even in its third week,” Adarsh told reporters.
“Dhurandhar” portrays a semi-fictional account of a 17th-century warrior, with Ranveer Singh in the titular role. While the film has been praised for its technical brilliance, lavish production design, and powerful performances, historians and academics have raised questions about its historical accuracy.
Rathee’s comments have triggered an immediate backlash from the film’s supporters, including several Bollywood personalities. Director Karan Johar responded indirectly during a film event in Mumbai, stating, “Cinema sometimes requires creative license. Historical films everywhere balance facts with storytelling elements to create engaging narratives.”
Ranveer Singh, who underwent a physical transformation and spent eighteen months preparing for the role, has not directly addressed Rathee’s criticism. However, during a promotional event in Delhi last week, Singh emphasized, “We approached this character with utmost respect and extensive research. Our intention was never to misrepresent history but to celebrate our cultural heritage.”
The film’s production house, Bhansali Productions, issued a statement defending the creative choices made in “Dhurandhar,” noting that the film begins with a disclaimer acknowledging certain cinematic liberties.
Media analyst Shubhra Gupta points out that this controversy reflects a larger trend in Indian cinema. “Historical films have become lightning rods for controversy in recent years. There’s an ongoing tension between artistic expression and historical authenticity, especially when films touch upon narratives that intersect with contemporary political discourse.”
The controversy has seemingly boosted the film’s visibility, with ticket sales reportedly spiking in several regions following Rathee’s comments. According to BookMyShow data, the film saw a 22 percent increase in advance bookings for its fourth weekend compared to projections before the controversy erupted.
Film exhibitor Akshaye Rathi observes, “Controversies often translate to curiosity. People want to see for themselves what the debate is about, which ultimately benefits the film commercially.”
The debate extends beyond entertainment value, touching on questions about cinema’s responsibility when portraying historical events. Media studies professor Dr. Anjali Monteiro from TISS Mumbai explains, “Commercial cinema isn’t academic documentation, but films that claim historical basis do shape public understanding of the past. There’s a delicate balance between creative expression and social responsibility.”
As “Dhurandhar” continues its theatrical run with exports to additional international markets scheduled next month, the discussion around historical representation in commercial cinema shows no signs of abating.
Industry watchers note that regardless of the controversy, the film’s commercial success cements Ranveer Singh’s position as one of Bollywood’s most bankable stars, with this becoming his highest-grossing film to date.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
12 Comments
This controversy highlights the delicate balance between commercial success and historical integrity in the film industry. While box office performance is crucial, it shouldn’t come at the expense of factual representation, especially for movies that claim to depict real events. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I agree. Films can be powerful tools for storytelling, but they also carry a responsibility to the public when portraying historical figures and events. This debate underscores the need for thoughtful, nuanced approaches that respect both artistic vision and factual accuracy.
Interesting debate around historical accuracy in films. While artistic license is common, it’s important to balance entertainment with factual representation, especially for influential movies. Curious to see how this controversy evolves as the film’s box office success continues.
I agree, maintaining historical integrity is crucial, though creative liberties can sometimes enhance the storytelling. It will be interesting to see if the filmmakers address the concerns raised or stand by their artistic choices.
As a fan of both Ranveer Singh and Dhruv Rathee, I can appreciate the nuanced perspectives on this issue. Films can be powerful mediums, so a responsible approach to portraying history is important, even as creative license is often used. Looking forward to seeing how this dialogue unfolds.
Well said. There’s often a balance to strike between artistic vision and factual representation. Reasonable people can disagree, but an open discussion is healthy for both the film industry and the viewing public.
Box office success doesn’t necessarily equate to historical accuracy. Dhruv Rathee’s critique, while controversial, raises valid points about the potential for films to shape public perception, especially on sensitive topics. It will be interesting to see if the filmmakers respond to the concerns raised.
Agreed. While commercial performance is important, the responsible portrayal of history should be a key consideration, especially for high-profile films. Constructive dialogue between creators and critics can help find that balance.
Dhruv Rathee’s critique raises important questions about the role of creative license in historical films. While box office success is undoubtedly important, it shouldn’t come at the expense of factual representation, especially on sensitive topics. This is a complex issue worth further exploration and debate.
Absolutely. Films can have a significant impact on public perception, so it’s crucial that creators balance artistic expression with a responsible approach to history. An open dialogue between filmmakers, critics, and the public can help find the right balance and ensure accurate representation.
As someone interested in both film and history, I can understand the perspectives on both sides of this debate. Creative interpretation is common in historical dramas, but there’s a fine line between artistic license and potential misinformation. It’s a complex issue worth further discussion.
Well said. Filmmakers must weigh artistic expression against the responsibility of accurately representing history, especially on topics that carry political or social significance. Open and respectful dialogue is important to navigate these nuances.