India’s Bollywood bets big on ‘event cinema’

This photograph taken on July 21, 2020, shows a wall mural with images of Bollywood actors under a road bridge in Mumbai. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 25 January 2026
Follow

India’s Bollywood bets big on ‘event cinema’

  • Films centered on geopolitical conflict, internal enemies, masculinity now dominate mainstream Hindi cinema
  • Critics argue Bollywood is using cinema’s unrivalled mass reach to shape the public sentiment in India 

MUMBAI: India’s Bollywood is moving decisively toward a cinema of scale and confrontation — where patriotism, spectacle, and ideological clarity increasingly trump nuance and narrative risk, industry insiders say.

The shift has fueled what experts describe as “event cinema,” as studios rely on big-budget spectacles and top-tier stars to lure audiences — especially smartphone-loving Gen Z viewers — back into theaters.

That strategy appears to be working. Akshaye Rathi, a prominent film exhibitor, predicted a 45-50 percent rise in net Hindi box-office collections and a 25 percent increase in young theater-goers this year.

“The year looks poised for historic numbers,” Rathi told AFP.

The industry’s financial model was shaken during the Covid-19 pandemic, which coincided with the rapid rise of streaming platforms and a shift to home viewing.

But its 2026 upcoming slate, packed with patriotic war dramas, spy thrillers, mythological epics and nationalist narratives — reflects not just a commercial recalibration, analysts say, but a broader change in creative priorities.

‘PROPAGANDA’

Critics argue Bollywood is increasingly producing polarizing films aligned with the ideology of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu-nationalist government, using cinema’s unrivalled mass reach to shape public sentiment.

“These days film themes also depend upon who is ruling at the center — Hindu wave, propaganda... all these are big factors that filmmakers cash in on,” said movie business analyst Atul Mohan, editor of film trade magazine Complete Cinema. “But only one or two films work, not all 10 or 15.”

He cited the success of 2022 blockbuster “The Kashmir Files,” depicting in harrowing detail how several hundred thousand Hindus fled Muslim militants in Indian-administered Kashmir in 1989-90.

And he compared that with the 2025 film “The Bengal Files,” on alleged political violence in eastern India, which he described as a commercial “disaster.”

Films centered on geopolitical conflict, internal enemies, and heroic masculinity now dominate mainstream Hindi cinema, reflecting both the political mood and the economics of theatrical survival.

Last year’s gory action thriller “Dhurandhar,” meaning “formidable,” leaned heavily on hyper-nationalist tropes of Indian agents confronting Pakistan-linked foes, and became one of 2025’s highest-grossing films — following a real-life four-day border clash with Pakistan.

Its sequel, “Dhurandhar 2,” again starring Ranveer Singh, is set for release in March.

‘GRATUITIOUS VIOLENCE’

Veteran Delhi-based film critic Arnab Banerjee said political messaging now outweighs craftsmanship.

“It is not the quality of the film that matters today, it is propaganda films that are working,” said Banerjee.

“The mood of the nation is such that people are lapping up these subjects. Pakistan-bashing and references to enemy countries are being accepted without questioning.”

Banerjee also criticized what he called an excess of “gratuitous violence,” arguing that “it is social media hype that is deciding the film’s fate.”

He pointed to “Ikkis,” a film on the 1971 India-Pakistan war released in January, which struggled commercially despite positive reviews.

“It is a well-made film, but it didn’t work,” he said. “Perhaps because Pakistan is not shown as the enemy.”

Director Ahmed Khan, however, said quality still ultimately determines success, citing his upcoming action-comedy “Welcome to the Jungle,” starring Akshay Kumar.

“Whatever the genre — action, drama, comedy or horror — it depends on how well you’ve made it,” Khan said.

He pointed to the 2025 successes of the contrasting romantic drama “Saiyaara” as well as high-octane “Dhurandhar.”

“Both, poles apart in genre, did great business,” he said. “People’s mood can change any time.”


House votes to slap back Trump’s tariffs on Canada in rare bipartisan rebuke

Updated 12 February 2026
Follow

House votes to slap back Trump’s tariffs on Canada in rare bipartisan rebuke

WASHINGTON: The House voted Wednesday to slap back President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Canada, a rare if largely symbolic rebuke of the White House agenda as Republicans joined Democrats over the objections of GOP leadership.
The tally, 219-211, was among the first times the House, controlled by Republicans, has confronted the president over a signature policy, and drew instant recrimination from Trump himself. The resolution seeks to end the national emergency Trump declared to impose the tariffs, though actually undoing the policy would require support from the president, which is highly unlikely. It next goes to the Senate.
Trump believes in the power of tariffs to force US trade partners to the negotiating table. But lawmakers are facing unrest back home from businesses caught in the trade wars and constituents navigating pocketbook issues and high prices.
“Today’s vote is simple, very simple: Will you vote to lower the cost of living for the American family or will you keep prices high out of loyalty to one person — Donald J. Trump?” said Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, who authored the resolution.
Within minutes, as the gavel struck, Trump fired off a stern warning to those in the Republican Party who would dare to cross him.
“Any Republican, in the House or the Senate, that votes against TARIFFS will seriously suffer the consequences come Election time, and that includes Primaries!” the president posted on social media.
The high-stakes moment provides a snapshot of the House’s unease with the president’s direction, especially ahead of the midterm elections as economic issues resonate among voters. The Senate has already voted to reject Trump’s tariffs on Canada and other countries in a show of displeasure. But both chambers would have to approve the tariff rollbacks, and send the resolution to Trump for the president’s signature — or veto.
Six House Republicans voted for the resolution, and one Democrat voted against it.
From Canada, Ontario, Premier Doug Ford on social media called the vote “an important victory with more work ahead.” He thanked lawmakers from both parties “who stood up in support of free trade and economic growth between our two great countries. Let’s end the tariffs and together build a more prosperous and secure future.”
Trump recently threatened to impose a 100 percent tariff on goods imported from Canada over that country’s proposed China trade deal, intensifying a feud with the longtime US ally and Prime Minister Mark Carney.
GOP defections forced the vote
House Speaker Mike Johnson tried to prevent this showdown.
Johnson insisted lawmakers wait for a pending Supreme Court ruling in a lawsuit about the tariffs. He engineered a complicated rules change to prevent floor action. But Johnson’s strategy collapsed late Tuesday, as Republicans peeled off during a procedural vote to ensure the Democratic measure was able to advance.
“The president’s trade policies have been of great benefit,” Johnson, R-Louisiana, had said. “And I think the sentiment is that we allow a little more runway for this to be worked out between the executive branch and the judicial branch.”
Late Tuesday evening, Johnson could be seen speaking to holdout Republican lawmakers as the GOP leadership team struggled to shore up support during a lengthy procedural vote, but the numbers lined up against him.
“We’re disappointed,” Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House’s National Economic Council, told reporters at the White House on Wednesday morning. “The president will make sure they don’t repeal his tariffs.”
Terminating Trump’s emergency
The resolution put forward by Meeks would terminate the national emergency that Trump declared a year ago as one of his executive orders.
The administration claimed illicit drug flow from Canada constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat that allows the president to slap tariffs on imported goods outside the terms of the US-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.
The Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, said the flow of fentanyl into the US is a dire national emergency and the policy must be left in place.
“Let’s be clear again about what this resolution is and what it’s not. It’s not a debate about tariffs. You can talk about those, but that’s not really what it is,” Mast said. “This is Democrats trying to ignore that there is a fentanyl crisis.”
Experts say fentanyl produced by cartels in Mexico is largely smuggled into the US from land crossings in California and Arizona. Fentanyl is also made in Canada and smuggled into the US, but to a much lesser extent.
Torn between Trump and tariffs
Ahead of voting, some rank-and-file Republican lawmakers expressed unease over the choices ahead as Democrats — and a few renegade Republicans — impressed on their colleagues the need to flex their power as the legislative branch rather than ceding so much power to the president to take authority over trade and tariff policy.
Rep. Don Bacon, R-Nebraska, said he was unpersuaded by Johnson’s call to wait until the Supreme Court makes its decision about the legality of Trump’s tariffs. He voted for passage.
“Why doesn’t the Congress stand on its own two feet and say that we’re an independent branch?” Bacon said. “We should defend our authorities. I hope the Supreme Court does, but if we don’t do it, shame on us.”
Bacon, who is retiring rather than facing reelection, also argued that tariffs are bad economic policy.
Other Republicans had to swiftly make up their minds after Johnson’s gambit — which would have paused the calendar days to prevent the measure from coming forward — was turned back.
“At the end of the day, we’re going to have to support our president,” said Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas.
Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said he doesn’t want to tie the president’s hands on trade and would support the tariffs on Canada “at this time.”