Kamal Ghorui
Vikas Divyakirti, ex-IPS and founder of Drishti IAS, has shared a nuanced take on the ongoing conversation around Aditya Dhar‘s Dhurandhar franchise, starring Ranveer Singh, addressing questions around propaganda, creative liberty and the social impact of cinema.During a recent conversation with Teen Taal, when asked whether the film’s use of facts and media reports in an exaggerated, engaging manner amounts to propaganda—like in Dhurandhar or Rang De Basanti—Divyakirti responded, “I don’t have a problem with that.”
‘Creative freedom exists, but consequences matter’
While supporting cinematic liberty, Divyakirti stressed that filmmakers cannot ignore the impact of their work.“I see cinema as cinema, but I also value its social impact,” he explained. “If a film shows a method of committing a crime and people start copying it, that is a concern. You can’t just say it’s creative freedom and walk away.”He clarified that he is not advocating strict control. “I’m not saying everything should be restricted, but literature and cinema do have responsibilities. That cannot be ignored.”
‘Political stance is the director’s choice’
On whether films should avoid political messaging, Divyakirti was clear that it is ultimately up to the filmmaker.“If a film benefits a political party, so be it. Others are free to make their own films. As long as censorship guidelines are followed, what’s the issue?” he said.
History vs fiction
Delving into the debate around historical accuracy, Divyakirti invoked a famous idea attributed to Munshi Premchand.“In history, names, dates and events are correct—everything else may not be. In literature, names, dates and events may be false—but the essence is true,” he said.He added, “If you expect a film to follow history exactly, then it’s not fiction anymore. Of course, completely distorting history is a concern, but blending imagination with real events is part of storytelling.”
‘India vs Pakistan is fine—but internal division is not’
On the film’s reported nationalist undertones, Divyakirti said he has no issue with narratives critical of Pakistan.“If Pakistan is criticised, that’s fine. If they make films criticising India, that’s also fine. What’s the problem?” he remarked.However, he flagged a more sensitive concern—how audiences interpret such narratives.“Sometimes, audiences replace India vs Pakistan with Hindu vs Muslim in their minds. That’s where the real issue begins,” he said.
‘The real question is what emotion the filmmaker creates’
Referencing literary theory by Dr. Nagendra, Divyakirti explained how cinema influences audiences at a deeper level.“What ultimately reaches the audience is the creator’s emotional intent. If a filmmaker wants to create love for India and hatred for Pakistan, they can. But if that subtly turns into hatred toward a community, that is also possible.”Summing up his stance, Divyakirti emphasised that the problem isn’t creative liberty, but its consequences.“Using history with imagination is fine. There’s no issue with that. But the result should not create problems within the country,” he said.“External conflict is one thing—but internal harm is where the real concern lies.”
