Dhurandhar The Revenge: Record pre-sales meet censorship cuts—and a deeper fight over what Hindi cinema is becoming
Dhurandhar The Revenge is entering release week under two clashing spotlights: a commercial surge built on advance bookings and pre-sales, and a regulatory and cultural debate sharpened by an ‘A’ certificate, 21 Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) modifications, and renewed criticism of ultra-nationalist storytelling.
What do the CBFC’s 21 modifications reveal about Dhurandhar The Revenge?
Verified fact: The sequel titled dhurandhar the revenge received an ‘A’ certificate from the CBFC and underwent over 21 cuts and modifications following scrutiny by the Examining Committee (EC). The changes total over 94 seconds, bringing the runtime to 229 minutes; the first part ran over 214 minutes.
Verified fact: The EC-directed edits included muting and replacing certain abusive words, while shortening violent visuals across the film. Specific reductions included: a hammer hitting a head shortened by 2 seconds; a cement block hitting a head shortened by 4 seconds; an eye getting smashed shortened by 4 seconds; and visuals of beheading and kicking shortened by 24 seconds.
Verified fact: The EC also required two corrections—one involving a historical event referenced in subtitles and another involving the name of a city. The makers were instructed to add a drug disclaimer and a separate violence disclaimer stating: “This film includes disturbing content, and viewer discretion is strongly recommended”. The film is again divided into chapters and the makers were asked to write the chapter names in Hindi.
Verified fact: For scenes portraying animals, an Animal Welfare Board certificate was submitted. Because the film references the Prime Minister and uses news footage, an official permission letter was submitted as well.
Informed analysis (clearly labeled): Taken together, the documented changes point to an unusually granular intervention focused on two areas: graphic violence and the handling of real-world referents (subtitled history, city naming, Prime Minister references, and news footage). That combination matters because it suggests the film’s risk profile is not only about intensity but also about how it anchors fiction to recognizably public facts and institutions—an issue that has already surrounded the franchise.
Can box-office momentum outpace the controversy around dhurandhar the revenge?
Verified fact: The film has been described in trade rhetoric as a “tsunami, ” with predictions that it could “shatter records” and “eye” a Rs 1000 crore milestone. Separately, advance-booking and pre-sales figures cited from the industry tracker Sacnilk put the film’s paid previews scheduled for March 18 (ET) after it had grossed around Rs 38 crore. Day 1 domestic sales were stated as crossing Rs 24. 50 crore, with over 6. 25 lakh tickets sold across the country.
Verified fact: Overseas pre-sales for the opening weekend were expected to reach Rs 60 crore. Combining domestic and overseas advance booking collections, the opening weekend pre-sales figure was stated as Rs 124 crore with block seats.
Verified fact: The film is written and directed by Aditya Dhar and stars Ranveer Singh, Sanjay Dutt, R Madhavan, Sara Arjun, and Arjun Rampal. It is produced by JioStudios and B62 Studios.
Informed analysis (clearly labeled): The sharpest contradiction in this release is that the commercial indicators are moving in one direction—stronger demand signals, a long runtime, and major pre-sales—while the film’s regulatory path is moving in another: mandated trims to extreme violence, formal warnings about disturbing content, and documentation around political and news references. That tension can amplify attention rather than dampen it, but it also raises the stakes for how the film’s content is interpreted once audiences see the final cut.
What is not being told about the franchise’s nationalist narrative—and who is implicated?
Verified fact: The first film, Dhurandhar, released in theatres on December 5 and was described as a blockbuster success. It was noted for a stylised blend of action and pumped-up music, while also being criticised for mixing real-life events with fiction to push an ultra-nationalist narrative.
Verified fact: In a critique authored by Raza Rumi (Distinguished Lecturer, City University of New York), the film is framed as part of what he describes as a broader turn in contemporary Indian cinema. The critique characterises Dhurandhar as a blockbuster that ignites nationalist sentiment and argues that a sequel releasing this week—named as Dhurandhar: The Revenge—promises more of the same, describing it as a further step into cinematic propaganda.
Verified fact: The critique describes the plot as celebrating an incursion of Indian intelligence operatives into Pakistani territory, specifically in Lyari, Karachi. It states that an agent from the Research & Analysis Wing (RAW) infiltrates a gang led by Rehman Dakait, a character described as loosely based on a real-life Lyari gangster of the same name. The operative’s mission is described as aiming to destroy “terror infrastructure within Karachi’s underworld, ” with narrative links to the 2008 Islamist attacks on Mumbai. The critique notes the film does not conclusively establish whether the spy halts the attacks, suggesting that may be left for the sequel.
Stakeholder positions (grounded in the provided facts): The CBFC and its Examining Committee are directly implicated through the certification and modification list. The filmmakers—writer-director Aditya Dhar and the production entities JioStudios and B62 Studios—are implicated through compliance steps such as submitting an Animal Welfare Board certificate and an official permission letter tied to references to the Prime Minister and the use of news footage. Trade commentary and tracking entities are implicated through the framing of commercial expectations and the circulation of pre-sales metrics.
Informed analysis (clearly labeled): The missing public-facing piece is not whether the film is popular—pre-sales suggest it is—but how the final, certified cut handles the franchise’s already-criticised blend of real events and fiction. The EC-mandated corrections to subtitles referencing a historical event and the name of a city indicate sensitivity to factual anchoring. At the same time, the franchise’s narrative—spies, cross-border operations, and references to a major terror event—places it at the intersection of entertainment and political meaning. That intersection becomes harder to ignore when the film includes references to the Prime Minister and uses news footage, requiring official paperwork.
For audiences heading into release week, the core demand is simple: transparency about what was changed, and why. For regulators, it is consistency in how violent imagery and real-world references are handled. For the industry, it is clarity on whether blockbuster momentum can coexist with rigorous standards when a film blends high-intensity action with recognisable political and historical touchpoints. Until those questions are answered in the open, dhurandhar the revenge will be judged not only by its box-office totals but also by what its final cut chooses to amplify—and what it chooses to mute.
