Listen to the article
Filmmaker Aditya Dhar Responds to YouTuber’s Criticism of “Dhurandhar”
A social media controversy has erupted between filmmaker Aditya Dhar and content creator Dhruv Rathee over the blockbuster film “Dhurandhar,” starring Ranveer Singh and Akshaye Khanna.
Rathee, a popular political commentator with millions of followers, released a video titled “Reality of Dhurandhar” on Saturday, calling the film “dangerous propaganda” that “peddles lies and falsehoods.” The YouTuber specifically criticized how the movie blends fiction with real events, making it potentially misleading for viewers.
“Well-made propaganda is more dangerous,” Rathee stated in his video. “Films like The Taj Story and The Bengal Films were not dangerous because they were bad films. But Dhurandhar is an engaging film.”
Rathee expressed particular concern about the film’s marketing as being “inspired by real events,” noting its use of actual footage from the 26/11 terrorist attacks and authentic audio recordings of conversations between terrorists and their handlers. According to Rathee, this blending of fact and fiction makes the narrative more convincing than typical spy thrillers like “Pathaan” or the “Tiger” series.
While Dhar has not directly addressed Rathee by name, the filmmaker appeared to respond indirectly by resharing a lengthy note on his Instagram Stories. The reposted message celebrated “Dhurandhar” as part of a movement where “history is being rewritten in Indian cinema” by filmmakers with “fire in their hearts & love for their country.”
The note specifically referenced a “video maker” who “tried to criticise it recently & got swept away by a wave of criticism against him,” an apparent reference to the backlash Rathee has faced from the film’s supporters. The message praised the film as “a tsunami which will sweep away any other release in its path” and credited the success to Dhar’s vision and the cast’s performances.
The controversy highlights the ongoing tensions in Indian cinema between artistic freedom and social responsibility, particularly when films touch on politically sensitive topics or historical events. It also underscores the growing influence of social media commentators like Rathee in shaping public discourse around mainstream entertainment.
Naveen Kaushik, who plays the character Donga in “Dhurandhar,” also weighed in on the controversy during an interview with SCREEN. “He is an opinionated person. I am associated with the film, but I don’t agree with him, obviously. He got some views because of us, congratulations,” Kaushik remarked dismissively.
Despite the controversy—or perhaps partly because of it—”Dhurandhar” continues to perform exceptionally well at the box office. The spy action thriller, featuring an ensemble cast that includes R. Madhavan, Sanjay Dutt, and Arjun Rampal alongside Singh and Khanna, has grossed over ₹900 crore ($108 million) worldwide since its December 5 release.
The film’s commercial success comes amid growing trends in Indian cinema toward nationalistic themes and stories based on real-life events. Several recent blockbusters have followed similar formulas, blending patriotic sentiments with action-packed narratives, often generating both critical acclaim and controversy.
Industry analysts note that such controversies often boost audience interest rather than harm a film’s prospects, as evidenced by “Dhurandhar’s” continued strong performance despite the criticism.
Fans of the film can look forward to more, as the second installment of “Dhurandhar” is already scheduled for theatrical release on March 19, 2026.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
6 Comments
This controversy over the film ‘Dhurandhar’ raises interesting questions about the blending of fact and fiction in media. While creative liberties are common in movies, the use of real events and footage could potentially be misleading if not handled carefully.
Filmmakers need to be mindful of the impact their work can have, especially when depicting sensitive real-world events. Maintaining a clear distinction between reality and dramatization is important to avoid spreading misinformation.
This seems like a complex issue without a simple answer. While Rathee’s criticisms have merit, Dhar may argue the film is a dramatized portrayal rather than a documentary. Finding the right approach to blend real events and fictional elements is an ongoing challenge for the industry.
I agree that transparency is key. Filmmakers should be upfront about where they’ve taken creative liberties to avoid misleading the audience. Open dialogue between creators and critics can help strike the right balance.
I’m curious to see how this debate plays out. Dhruv Rathee raises valid concerns about the potential for ‘Dhurandhar’ to be perceived as propaganda. At the same time, artistic freedom allows for creative interpretations of history.
Ultimately, the audience should be able to discern fact from fiction. Responsible filmmaking and clear disclaimers can help navigate this balance, but healthy discussions like this are important to hold creators accountable.