Overview: A Notable Endorsement Despite Controversy
Filmmaker Anurag Kashyap has stirred conversation by calling the film Dhurandhar “brilliant” in his recent Letterboxd review, even as he acknowledges its political contours. The director, known for his candid takes on cinema and society, highlights a tension at the heart of Dhurandhar: a work that thrills with its craft while provoking with its politics.
In a social-media era where political messaging can swamp technical prowess, Kashyap separates the two strands—praise for filmmaking technique and critique or acceptance of the ideological undercurrents. His stance underscores a nuanced approach to contemporary cinema: admire the storytelling artistry while interrogating the agenda behind it.
What Kashyap Found Brilliant
The heart of Kashyap’s praise centers on the film’s craftsmanship. He lauds the direction, pacing, and mood that keep viewers engaged even when the political context becomes a talking point outside the theater. This kind of compliment is meaningful in a landscape where dialogue can polarize audiences and cloud the cinematic experience.
Specifically, Kashyap notes that the film succeeds in engaging audiences through its tightly wound narrative, striking performances, and a cinematic language that communicates as effectively as any propaganda dialogue—without surrendering to orchestration or heavy-handed messaging. In other words, Dhurandhar, for Kashyap, demonstrates how strong filmmaking can transcend divisive rhetoric and offer a visceral, cinematic journey.
Politics as a Theme, Not a Sole Identity
One of the recurring debates around Dhurandhar is its treatment of political material. Kashyap’s reaction—calling the film brilliant despite its politics—suggests a perspective common among discerning cinephiles: a work can be politically charged without becoming reducible to propaganda. He implies that the film’s artistic merits—sound design, cinematography, character arcs, and narrative momentum—are not entirely subsumed by its ideological stance.
From a viewing standpoint, this approach invites audiences to separate form from function, at least long enough to appreciate the film’s technical achievements. It also serves as a reminder that political cinema can be equally transformative when it respects storytelling discipline, even as it challenges viewers’ beliefs.
Craft Over Propaganda: A Deliberate Choice
The review signals a broader conversation about how films communicate with audiences in politically fraught environments. When a film engages with contentious themes, it risks becoming didactic. Kashyap’s take suggests that Dhurandhar navigates this risk with a confidence in craft that allows the political thread to exist without dominating every frame.
For aspiring filmmakers, the takeaway is clear: political material can coexist with high-grade filmmaking. Strong performances, precise editing, and a confident directorial voice can carry a film through rough political terrain, and Kashyap’s praise underscores the value of such balance.
Impact on Viewers and the Industry
Public reactions to Kashyap’s endorsement are likely to be mixed, reflecting the polarized nature of political cinema. Yet, the conversation itself may benefit the industry by highlighting the importance of auteur-level craft even in politically charged projects. When respected voices publicly celebrate craftsmanship, it encourages a more nuanced discourse about what cinema can and should do in society.
Ultimately, Kashyap’s message is twofold: admire the filmmaking rigor of Dhurandhar and engage with the politics it presents as part of a broader conversation about representation, state power, and individual conscience in modern cinema. This dual reading enriches the viewing experience and invites audiences to re-examine how they evaluate political films.
Conclusion: A Letterboxd Moment Worth Noting
In sum, Anurag Kashyap’s Letterboxd review positions Dhurandhar as a film of substantial cinematic merit, even if its political stance sparks debate. The dialogue it opens around craft versus propaganda remains timely in an era of rapid information and factional divides. For readers and viewers, the takeaway is clear: there is value in recognizing technical excellence while remaining critically engaged with the ideas that a film foregrounds.
