Even as Dhurandhar 2: The Revenge, directed by Aditya Dhar continues its strong run in theatres, the film has become the centre of a fresh online debate. This time popular YouTuber Dhruv Rathee has openly criticised the film, calling it “an expensive advertisement” rather than pure entertainment.
In a detailed video analysis, Rathee claimed that Dhurandhar 2 goes beyond storytelling and works as a political tool. According to him the film promotes a specific narrative while presenting itself as fiction inspired by real events. He even described it as “the BJP’s most expensive election advertisement” a statement that has quickly gained attention across social media.
One of his main concerns is how the film mixes real life elements with fictional storytelling. Rathee pointed out that the use of real figures like Narendra Modi and references to figures such as Dawood Ibrahim make it difficult for viewers to separate fact from fiction. He argued that disclaimers claiming the story is fictional may not be enough when actual footage and names are used.
Rathee also spoke about how certain scenes are designed to create strong emotional reactions. He described this as “emotional priming,” where viewers are first made to feel intense emotions and are then more likely to accept the film’s message. According to him, some of these moments are not necessary for the story but play a big role in shaping audience perception.
Another point he raised was about how characters are written especially the villains. Rathee noted that when antagonists praise India’s leadership, it leaves a stronger psychological impact on the audience. He believes this is a deliberate storytelling choice meant to influence how viewers think.
The YouTuber also questioned how the film handles real world events. He claimed that the portrayal of demonetisation focuses only on a national security angle while ignoring the difficulties faced by common people. He also mentioned scenes inspired by recent incidents, like the killing of gangster turned politician Atiq Ahmed, saying the film presents them differently from reality.
Rathee further criticised what he called selective storytelling. He pointed out that certain real events such as diplomatic moments involving India and Pakistan are missing from the narrative. According to him, these omissions help maintain a particular version of the story.
Calling the film’s approach “gaslighting”, Rathee argued that retelling recent events in a different way can change how people remember them. He said that when audiences are shown a new version of something they have already witnessed it can blur their understanding of what actually happened.
He concluded his analysis by saying that Dhurandhar 2 feels more like “peak advertising” than “peak cinema.”
Despite the criticism the film continues to perform well at the box office and has received praise from several sections of the audience. The debate around it highlights a larger question where should the line be drawn between cinema, creative freedom and political messaging?