Emraan Hashmi, fresh off the success of 'The Ba**ds of Bollywood' and gearing up for his new Netflix series 'Taskaree: The Smuggler’s Web,' has ignited a firestorm of debate. His bold defense of the film 'Dhurandhar,' a movie he openly admits he *hasn't even seen, is making headlines. Is box office success enough to silence critics, even when the film sparks political and cultural controversy? That's the question Hashmi's comments bring to the forefront.
Speaking to India Today about his move to OTT platforms, Hashmi was asked if the immense success of a film like 'Dhurandhar' ever causes a pang of envy. His response was blunt: "There is a crap mentality in our industry." He argued that instead of tearing films down, people should celebrate their success. According to Hashmi, when a film thrives, it benefits the entire industry, keeping the money flowing and creating opportunities for everyone. He also lauded the film's marketing prowess, highlighting the impressive audience turnout for a lengthy, nearly three-and-a-half-hour film, even at unconventional screening times like midnight and early morning. This demonstrates a strong marketing strategy that resonates with the audience, and that is something to be celebrated, according to Hashmi.
But here's where it gets controversial... Hashmi's unwavering support comes despite his confession that he hasn't actually watched 'Dhurandhar.' He still calls it "a great film," marveling at the audacity of releasing such a long, two-part production and achieving blockbuster status. His argument hinges on the idea that commercial success is the ultimate vindication. If audiences are buying tickets, he implies, critics' opinions become irrelevant. Is he right? Is the customer always right, even when art imitates life in potentially problematic ways?
This perspective aligns with a long-held belief in Bollywood that high box office numbers can drown out dissenting voices. And 'Dhurandhar' certainly has the numbers. It has shattered records in India, becoming the highest-grossing Hindi film domestically and catapulting Akshaye Khanna to a Shah Rukh Khan-level of success. Ranveer Singh's dependable star power has also been reaffirmed. There's no denying the film's financial impact.
However, the story takes a sharp turn when we consider the political and cultural implications. From its release, 'Dhurandhar' has faced intense criticism for its perceived ideological slant. Many viewers and commentators have described it as thinly disguised propaganda masquerading as an action-packed spy thriller. The film's portrayal of regional politics, nationalism, and historical events has sparked unease among audiences in both Pakistan and India. And this is the part most people miss: it's not just a matter of taste; it's about the potential impact of the film's message on real-world perceptions and relationships.
Even Hrithik Roshan, an actor who has profited from patriotic blockbusters like 'Fighter,' publicly distanced himself from 'Dhurandhar's' politics, stating that he might disagree with its messaging despite appreciating the filmmaking craft. This seemingly small statement became a major news item, a rare instance of someone within the industry questioning the ideology of a successful film. His comment highlights the complexity of separating artistic merit from potentially harmful messaging.
Online, the film has deeply divided viewers, with heated debates unfolding across social media. Reports suggest that it even faced a ban in the Middle East due to its perceived "anti-Pakistan messaging." Furthermore, the filmmakers reportedly muted the word "Baloch" after backlash from the Baloch community in Junagadh, who accused the film of hate speech. These incidents underscore the real-world consequences of the film's narrative choices.
Some celebrate 'Dhurandhar' as captivating and unapologetic entertainment. Others view it as a disturbing example of how commercial cinema can oversimplify complex political realities into jingoistic spectacles. For example, some might argue that the film's portrayal of a specific historical event is biased and lacks nuance, potentially fueling further division and misunderstanding. Is it the responsibility of filmmakers to be historically accurate, or is it their right to take creative liberties, even if it means potentially distorting the truth?
Therefore, Hashmi's defense feels less like a championing of artistic freedom and more like a knee-jerk reaction within Bollywood: if it makes money, don't question it. Moreover, there's a considerable irony in dismissing criticism as "crap mentality" while admitting he hasn't even watched the film in question. It also conveniently avoids addressing the core of the criticism, which isn't about the film's technical aspects or marketability, but rather its message, omissions, and amplifications.
What do you think? Does commercial success justify a film's message, even if that message is seen as divisive or problematic? Is Emraan Hashmi right to defend 'Dhurandhar,' even without having seen it? And what responsibility do filmmakers have to consider the potential impact of their work on society? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
