In the lead-up to the 2019 general elections, the cinematic release of the Bollywood movie "Uri: The Surgical Strike", garnered significant attention, aligning closely with Prime Minister Narendra Modi's electoral campaign and the Bharatiya Janata Party's (BJP) nationalist stance. The film, which portrayed a military operation against Pakistan, resonated with the electorate, contributing to Modi's resounding victory.
During an interim budget session, Indian Finance Minister Piyush Goyal lauded the movie, highlighting the patriotic fervour it had evoked among viewers (what he did not say was that it may have also motivated voters).
Fast forward to 2024, Bollywood has once again tried to captivate the imagination of the electorate for Modi with the strategic release of the movie "Article 370", a thriller that dramatises the abrogation of Kashmir's special status—a move strongly endorsed by Modi himself.
The film, like the move in real life, has ignited controversy. The government has been accused of exploiting cinema for political leverage, especially as Modi personally promoted the film, suggesting it would enlighten viewers on the contentious issue of Article 370. Critics argue this endorsement serves to rally Hindu nationalist support, while many see it as an attempt to legitimise a distorted narrative.
The narrative of "Article 370" is shouldered by two powerful female characters. An intelligence officer, portrayed by Yami Gautam, who navigates the complexities of counter-terrorism in Kashmir, hindered by the region's autonomous status and Priyamani Swaminathan who plays an astute and calm senior bureaucrat at the Prime Minister's Office.
The film supports the government's rationale for revoking Article 370, claiming it is a necessary step towards eradicating terrorism and integrating Kashmir with India.
However, the film has been largely panned for presenting a skewed historical perspective, particularly in its portrayal of former Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and the history of Kashmir's accession to India.
This trend of politically charged cinema (especially with an anti-Pakistan sentiment) marks a departure from Bollywood's earlier ethos, which balanced entertainment with social commentary
The film dwells upon a series of events in Kashmir, from the Pulwama attack that killed over 40 Central Reserve Police Force men, unrest created after the encounter of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani, the fiery speech of Indian Home Minister in the Parliament and the government's action to abrogate Article 370 from Kashmir on August 5, 2019, while glorifying Modi for his conviction and for succeeding in scrapping the constitutional provision which none of his predecessors could dare touch upon.
The film even validates and justifies the controversial incident of 2017 in Kashmir, when a Major in the Indian Army had tied a person in front of his service jeep and used him as a human shield against stone pelters. In reality, an inquiry found the Major guilty for this act, but the movie glorified the incident, drawing cheers from audiences.
The movie simplifies complex historical and political nuances, appealing to nationalistic sentiments while overlooking the broader implications of its narrative. Cheers and applause from the audience on every incident shown during the movie in fully packed theatres during midweek shows is a testament to how India has wholeheartedly accepted all kinds of 'bulldozer justice'.
The movie makes no mention of the Jammu and Ladakh regions, which were also equal parties to Article 370. The Kashmiri youth are only portrayed as stone pelters and potential militants who are ready to pick up arms against the Indian administration — thereby minimising the need to hear their voice by portraying them as criminal. Moreover, the local political parties of Kashmir are blamed for all the wrongs in the disputed region.
Despite its controversial stance, "Article 370" has found an audience, reinforcing BJP's narrative on Kashmir's integration. Yet, it omits significant after-effects of the abrogation, such as human rights concerns and the ongoing military presence in Kashmir, raising questions about the film's objectivity and sensitivity.
This trend of politically charged cinema (especially with an anti-Pakistan sentiment) marks a departure from Bollywood's earlier ethos, which balanced entertainment with social commentary. Films such as "Do Bigha Zameen" and "Mother India" reflected India's post-independence challenges, while patriotic songs from the 1960s boosted national morale.
Filmmakers have learnt that upsetting the government can come with a huge cost. If not the government, they risk invoking the ire of the public
However, recent years have seen a shift towards films that serve as de facto propaganda tools that support the government's agenda. This trend underscores a broader strategy of using cinema to shape public opinion, a move that has seen Bollywood aligning more closely with current political narratives.
For the Indian audience, it is hard to differentiate between the real and the reel. The silver screen has made Indian audiences believe mythical characters can be real.
It is easy to consider facts, even when woven with fiction, as real-life events and believe in them. Today, the audience's (in)ability to distinguish between the director's or producer's imagination and real life is being exploited by politicians to meet their own ends. "The Hindi film industry has always tried to keep the government in good humour. But of late, it has been blatantly running government propaganda," explains senior journalist Yogesh Pawar, who also writes on cinema.
With huge money at stake, fearing censorship and eyeing tax waivers and other arbitrary standard operating procedures (SOPs) from the government, even Bollywood today has chosen to toe the Hindutva line. Filmmakers have learnt that upsetting the government can come with a huge cost. If not the government, they risk invoking the ire of the public.
Critics, including senior film journalist Yogesh Pawar and documentary filmmaker Rakesh Sharma, have voiced concerns over this alignment, fearing it compromises artistic integrity and freedom. The industry's apparent endorsement of the government's stance not only shapes narratives but also influences the portrayal of sensitive issues, such as the depiction of Kashmiri youth (think Vishal Bhardwaj's 2014 thriller Haider).
The intersection of politics and cinema in India raises critical questions about the role of art in society and the balance between creative expression and political influence. While films like "Article 370" resonate with many, their impact on public discourse and inter-community relations cannot be underestimated, highlighting the need for a more nuanced and responsible approach to storytelling in Bollywood.
A little over a decade ago, Bollywood produced movies such as Rang De Basanti and PK. These movies spoke about government scams and taught people how to raise their voices against the government or to question orthodox religious practices and superstitions.
"Today, can we even think of Bollywood making films that raise even an oblique doubt on the integrity of the government, its crony capitalist benefactors or seers championing Hindutva? Thought-provoking and radical cinema has increasingly given way to furtherance of blind faith, supremacism and servile, unquestioning citizenry," adds Pawar.