In recent decades, religious nationalism has increasingly permeated popular culture, particularly in India, where it has significantly influenced the cinematic landscape. While this phenomenon was already notable in the 1990s and early 2000s, it has dramatically intensified since 2010, largely due to the ruling party’s active efforts to impose what scholars term “cultural hegemony.” This ideological dominance extends powerfully into Bollywood, India’s preeminent film industry, which has consistently aligned itself with the nationalist beliefs endorsed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Political efforts to consolidate control over Bollywood have not been subtle; rather, they are manifest in the consistent production and promotion of films that mirror BJP’s ideological agenda.
Throughout the 1990s, the attempts of the BJP to entwine its nationalist rhetoric with Bollywood narratives became discernible, reflecting a deliberate effort to harness popular cinema as a vehicle for political messaging. Studies indicate that prominent Bollywood stars openly endorse this ideology, with their social media presence amplifying politically charged narratives consistent with Hindu nationalism. Despite widespread criticism for imposing these ideological stances on the cinematic space, the trend has only grown stronger since BJP’s 2014 electoral victory. The ensuing years saw a surge of films explicitly telegraphing the party’s worldview—films like Padmaavat (2018), PM Narendra Modi (2019), and The Kashmir Files (2022), among others, have not merely entertained but sought to rewrite historical discourse in alignment with Hindu nationalist ideology.
These films broadly glorify Hindu history and culture, consistently presenting narratives that emphasize Hindu victimhood and valor while exposing or condemning Muslim figures and alternative perspectives. The cinematic stories frame BJP leaders as heroic and almost saint-like figures, fostering a collective Hindu nationalist identity amongst viewers. This fusion of religion, history, and politics within commercial cinema does more than entertain; it acts as a form of ideological indoctrination packaged as cultural narrative. The consistent commercial success of these films underscores their significant impact on public consciousness, marking a clear synergy between political power and popular media in India.
Telugu cinema’s entanglement with political narratives offers a compelling parallel and complementary context to Bollywood’s trends. The career trajectory of iconic cinema star Nandamuri Taraka Rama Rao (NTR) exemplifies this dynamic, where cinematic performances effectively galvanized mass political support, culminating in his election as Chief Minister for three terms. Following his example, contemporary stars like Chiranjeevi have ventured into politics, utilizing their cinematic fan base to further political ambitions. With a legacy of producing films close to government propaganda dating back to the 1930s, Telugu cinema’s political alignment evidences a consistent tradition of blending film and political ideology, suggesting that works like RRR are part of a broader cultural-political approach endorsing Hindu nationalism.
RRR, directed by S.S. Rajamouli, exemplifies a complex cinematic adaptation that intertwines the ancient Hindu epic Ramayana with a contemporary nationalist agenda. While Rajamouli denies explicit allegiance to RSS or BJP ideologies, his work is imbued with thematic elements closely aligned to these currents. The film’s narrative strategically invokes references to the Ramayana, including the use of key epic characters’ names, symbolic attire, and significant cultural iconography, such as Rama’s temple, thereby forging a subconscious link between the film’s heroes and the mythic narrative of Hindu valor and righteousness. This blend evokes historical Hindu military superiority against colonial powers, casting the protagonists as embodiments of ancient heroism adapted for modern resistance.
Rajamouli’s Rama is a dynamic figure who seamlessly transitions from traditional warrior strategies to employing modern weaponry to combat British colonial oppression. This cinematic choice highlights a hyperbolic, larger-than-life depiction: heroes are portrayed not as ordinary individuals but as epic avatars, inviting audiences to imagine a Hindu nation capable of military and cultural triumph. This stylized portrayal functions not only as entertainment but also as a symbolic reenactment of Hindu nationalist ideals, reinforcing a vision of historical and cultural resurgence consistent with contemporary ideological themes.
The film’s subtext owes much to Vinayak Damodar Savarkar’s conceptualization of a “Hindu Rashtra,” a nation-state founded on geographical, racial, and cultural unity under Hindu primacy. Savarkar’s vision reinterprets Rama beyond mythology, presenting him as a foundational historical figure embodying Hindu nationalism. This idea notoriously excludes Muslims and Christians as constituents of the nascent Hindu nation unless they assimilate culturally and linguistically—principles that resonate in RRR’s adaptation. Rajamouli contemporizes the Ramayana by introducing religious diversity into his story, portraying cross-cultural alliances where Muslim and Western characters support Hindu causes, symbolically allying to uphold Hindu cultural hegemony.
One telling narrative strand involves Bheem and Raju, fictional freedom fighters who embody ideals of unity and mutual aid across religious lines. Bheem’s loyalty to Rama and his quest to reunite Raju with Sita symbolize the confluence of political liberation and cultural nationalism. Jennifer, portrayed as a family member of the British governor, ultimately embraces Indian culture, representing the transformative power of Hindu nationalism even on those outside the immediate cultural milieu. These narrative choices mirror Savarkar’s belief in cultural assimilation as a prerequisite for inclusion in the Hindu nation, mapping a political ideology onto cinematic storytelling.
The film’s conclusion further crystallizes Hindu nationalist ideology through visual and narrative symbolism. Scenes glorifying Rama in saffron attire, accompanied by low-angle camera shots, elevate him to mythic status, underscoring his projected role in founding the Hindu Rashtra through revolutionary warfare against colonial imperialism. This culmination evokes the Yuddha Kanda—the section of the Ramayana dealing with the great war—and allegorizes contemporary political movements as continuations of ancient struggles to unite and empower the Hindu nation both racially and culturally.
Rajamouli’s ideological agenda extends beyond direct Ramayana adaptation. His careful musical and dance choices foreground freedom fighters aligned with Hindu nationalist ideology, conspicuously excluding figures like Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru, historically linked with India’s secular nationalist struggle and the Indian National Congress. This selective representation parallels contemporary political efforts to revise national history and valorize Hindu nationalist icons at the expense of secular, pluralistic leaders, thereby contributing to the symbolic reorientation of India’s revolutionary heritage.
The film’s antagonistic figure, Scott Buxton, functions as a cinematic stand-in for the mythological Ravana. Though never named explicitly as Ravana, the villain’s characteristics and narrative positioning invite audiences to draw this parallel. This casting serves to reinforce a Hindu nationalist worldview, framing Western colonial ideologies and governance values as inherently antagonistic to Hindu cultural resurgence, aligning Buxton with the forces seeking to undermine the Hindu nation. This allegory strengthens Hindu nationalist critique of Western modernity, echoing assertions that Western influence is an existential threat to Hindu identity and sovereignty.
This interpretation gains further resonance when contextualized within the BJP’s broader policy agenda, which prominently includes renaming colonial-era landmarks and cities to reflect Hindu cultural heritage. Examples include the transformation of Rajpath to Kartavya Path and renaming cities such as Allahabad and Gurgaon to Prayagraj and Gurugram, respectively. These acts symbolize efforts to erase colonial and Mughal legacies and reclaim India’s Hindu cultural past, a political-ideological strategy to consolidate Hindu nationalist identity. Rajamouli’s film parallels this strategy, not attempting to erase colonial memory but reframing it within a Hindu mytho-political context.
The cinematic strategy thus promulgates a powerful narrative in which India’s freedom struggle is not only a political endeavor but also an epic, culturally rooted mission to establish a Hindu Rashtra in line with historical Hindu mythos. By weaving the Ramayana’s symbolic power into the fabric of revolutionary storytelling, Rajamouli’s film operates as a potent cultural artefact that normalizes religious nationalism through a medium with mass appeal. This integration offers a nuanced contemporary allegory of Hindu nationalist ideology that resonates with a population seeking to reconnect with a reimagined national identity after the turbulence of the pandemic era.
By disseminating these political ideals through mainstream cinema, RRR participates in a larger cultural project of Hindu nationalist revivalism that strategically harnesses popular media’s emotional and mnemonic power. This fusion of myth, history, and political ideology reflects ongoing efforts by Hindu nationalist movements to reassert themselves in India’s socio-political discourse. It illuminates how contemporary cinema operates as a vital site of ideological production, shaping public perceptions and affirming nationalist narratives through symbolic storytelling and cultural representation.
Moreover, the film’s adaptation technique—loosely drawing from an ancient epic while embedding current political ideologies—demonstrates a sophisticated use of cultural memory and myth to appeal to broad audiences. By invoking sacred texts and cultural icons, the film not only entertains but educates and persuades, contributing to the circulation and normalization of Hindu nationalism within the pan-Indian cinematic milieu. This methodological approach underscores cinema’s crucial role as a tool of cultural and political influence, especially in a nation grappling with its pluralistic identity and political future.
In conclusion, RRR exemplifies how Indian cinema, particularly under BJP’s auspices, is increasingly deployed to disseminate Hindu nationalist ideologies, creating narratives that simultaneously entertain, instruct, and politicize audiences. This trend reflects broader shifts in Indian society and governance where cultural production intertwines with nationalist agendas. Analyzing films like RRR provides critical insights into the mechanics of contemporary ideological dissemination, the dynamics of cultural hegemony, and the evolving relationship between art and politics in India’s rapidly transforming landscape.
Subject of Research:
Adaptation of the Ramayana in Indian cinema and its role in propagating Hindu nationalism.
Article Title:
RRR and Adipurush: adaptation of Ramayana in Pan-Indian Cinema and circulation of Hindu Nationalism.
Article References:
Mukherjee, A. RRR and Adipurush: adaptation of Ramayana in Pan-Indian Cinema and circulation of Hindu Nationalism. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 12, 1577 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05639-5
Image Credits:
AI Generated
