Even as Dhurandhar: The Revenge continues its record-breaking run and garners praise across the industry, the film has also ignited a parallel conversation around its perceived political messaging. Amid this growing debate, YouTuber Dhruv Rathee has stepped in with a detailed critique, intensifying the discourse.
Rathee, who had earlier voiced concerns about the franchise, has now analysed the sequel in depth. According to him, the issues he previously pointed out appear more pronounced this time, prompting him to question the film’s intent and narrative approach.
In his video breakdown, Rathee firmly argued that the film operates beyond conventional storytelling. He stated, “Dhurandhar 2 is not a film made for entertainment… it is the BJP’s most expensive election advertisement, for which you pay Rs 500 to watch,” while also criticising director Aditya Dhar.
His remarks position the film as a tool designed to influence perception rather than purely entertain, a claim that has further fuelled online discussions among viewers and critics alike.
Rathee also raised concerns about the film’s portrayal of real-world elements. He questioned its framing as a fictional story inspired by true events, especially when it incorporates recognisable faces, names and archival visuals.
He remarked, “You show Narendra Modi’s real face and real footage… use real names like Dawood Ibrahim… and then say it’s all coincidental?” He went on to describe such disclaimers as “a legal cheat code used to manipulate the audience so they cannot tell where truth ends and imagination begins.”
A significant part of Rathee’s critique focused on what he described as emotional manipulation within the film. He suggested that certain sequences are crafted specifically to provoke strong reactions, shaping how audiences interpret the story.
Calling this technique “emotional priming”, he explained, “First generate emotion, then build your narrative on top of it.” He further illustrated his point with a striking analogy: “It’s like feeding someone an extremely spicy chili so their tongue burns, and then they are forced to buy sweets. Aditya Dhar burns the audience emotionally so they easily consume whatever propaganda is served afterward.”
Another aspect highlighted in the video was the strategic use of antagonists to reinforce certain ideas. Rathee pointed to scenes where villains appear to praise leadership, calling it a calculated narrative device.
He said, “If the hero praises someone, it has less impact. But if the biggest villain does it, the audience gets convinced at another level.” According to him, such storytelling choices subtly influence audience perception in powerful ways.
Rathee also examined how the film references real incidents. He argued that events like the 2016 demonetisation are presented through a selective lens, portraying them as focused national security measures while minimising broader consequences.
He further noted that a character portrayed by Arjun Rampal is based on a real individual who passed away in 2011. Additionally, he referenced a sequence inspired by the killing of Atiq Ahmed, suggesting that its depiction differs from actual events.
Summing up his analysis, Rathee described the film’s overall approach as “gaslighting” on a large scale. He warned about the impact of such storytelling when consumed widely.
He said, “When this kind of gaslighting happens on a massive scale… it stops being just a film. It becomes a weapon.”
Concluding his critique, he labelled Dhurandhar 2 as “peak advertising” rather than “peak cinema”, reinforcing his stance that the film’s influence extends far beyond entertainment.
