Ramayana and its adaptations

To examine the process of adapting and contextualising the epic in RRR: Rise Roar Revolt (2022) and Adipurush (2023), it is important to understand the plot and structure of the epic and its significance in the Indian subcontinent. The Ramayana is composed by the ancient poet Valmiki in 1500 B.C and it is one of the oldest epics of India (Narayan 1972, 14). It contains twenty-four thousand shlokas and it is divided into seven kandas or cantos (Debroy 2017, 2). The story revolves around the life of Rama, describes the protagonist’s journey from childhood to maturity and his vanquishing the villain to restore justice. Valmiki portrays Rama as an ideal figure: “Rama is the personification of dharma. He is virtuous. Truth is his valour. He is the king of all the worlds, like Vasava among the gods.” (Debroy, vol. 2, 2017, 77). But the later writers project him as an incarnation of Hindu god Vishnu who descends to earth during the critical times in different forms to save the human beings from the evils (Narayan 1972, 4–5). The popularity of the epic is proved through nearly three hundred rewritings of the epic in different Indian languages and English since its composition (Ramanujan 1991, 24). The story of the epic has been adapted in different regional performance traditions which either celebrate the influence of the text or revise its different episodes. V. Raghavan (1980), Paula Richman (1991, 2021) and Mandakranta Bose’s (2004) scholarship on the “Ramayana tradition” in South Asia makes the readers familiar with the practice of adapting the Ramayana since pre-modern times. Crossing the boundaries of these art forms, the Ramayana has been adapted in contemporary popular culture. The plurality of the Ramayana indicates the diversity of South Asian culture and unveils political contexts, literary traditions, representations of gender, and implied readers or target audiences (Richman 1991, 16). A. K. Ramanujan opines (1991) that each version is embroidered with the spark of creativity: “Every author, if one may hazard a metaphor, dips into it and brings out a unique crystallisation, a new text with a unique texture and a fresh context” (46).

The first film adaptation of the Ramayana was legendary film director Dadasaheb Phalke’s silent mythological film Lanka Dahan (1917). After that, the plot of the epic has been exploited repeatedly during the silent film era when mythological film was a popular genre. It has been adapted in different regional language mythological films in the sound era, for example, N.T. Rama Rao’s Sampoorna Ramayanam (1958), Vijay Bhatt’s Bharat Milap (1942) and Ram Rajya (1943) are popular adaptations of the epic. With the decline of the mythological genre, the Ramayana’s charm did not wither away. In social films it is referred as allegory (Dwyer 2006, 57). Considering the repeated film adaptations of the epic, Vidyut Aklujkar (2007) states that the vast plot of the epic nourishes Indian film industries by providing ready-made plots (42). Aklujkar’s (2007) essay, and Rachel Dwyer’s (2006) monograph attempt to give a synoptic view of adapting Ramayana on the silver screen in the last century. Arvind Rajagopal’s (2004) examination of the impact of the epic’s television adaption on Indian politics is helpful to understand the rise of Hindu nationalism and theorise its growth in the new millennium. Except Anustup Basu’s (2010) effort to analyse select post-millennial Bollywood films’ allusions to Hindu scriptures to empower religious nationalism, there is hardly any scholarly work on the film adaptations of the Ramayana made in the last two decades. Hence, there is a need to dissect the film adaptations of the epic in the new millennium to elucidate the politics of adaptations and contribute to the scholarship of the field. However, the essay intends to analyse S. S. Rajamouli’s period film RRR which loosely adapts Ramayana and Om Raut’s mythological film Adipurush which is based on ancient poet Valmiki’s epic Ramayana. Following the structure of recently emerged pan-Indian films, the essay lists the characteristics of this genre and argues that it was developed when the ship of Bollywood cinema was sinking. The essay further contends that RRR and Adipurush are pan-Indian films which adapt the epic in different ways. The former is a loose adaptation of the epic and the latter tries to stay faithful to the epic and becomes a mythological film. These two adaptations glorify the figure of Rama which echo Hindu nationalism. The essay defines Hindu nationalism referring to Bidyut Chakrabarty and Bhuwan Kumar Jha (2020) and maps how this religious nationalism becomes significant to electoral politics in the twenty-first century. It illustrates the significance of the Ramayana in Hindu nationalism and explains how the protagonist of the text gains immense popularity in contemporary Indian politics. Religious nationalism has had huge impact on present-day popular culture of the country. Following Ajay Gehlawat (2024), the essay argues that recently Bollywood has publicised Hindu nationalism and participated in right-wing politics. As pan-Indian cinema is a part of popular culture, it follows Bollywood and circulates this nationalistic spirit. The essay analyses both the film adaptations to assert that RRR circulates Hindu nationalism through lionising Rama, whereas Adipurush becomes a champion of Bharatiya Janata Party and boastfully propagates Hindu nationalism through the adaptation. The essay also argues that adapting the epic which is considered as a primary text for this religious nationalism, these pan-Indian films become instruments of the hegemony and spread Hindu nationalism among the global audiences.

Pan-Indian Cinema: development and features

The term “Pan-Indian Cinema” has become quite popular since the release of S. S. Rajamouli’s big-budget fantasy film Baahubali: The Beginning (2015). The film was originally made in Telugu and Tamil, and dubbed into Hindi and Malayalam. In his article published in The Guardian, Naman Ramachandran (2017) asserts that the film entertained audiences around the globe and earned US$100 million. In the same article, Ramachandran (2017) proclaims that Baahubali 2: The Conclusion (2017), the sequel of the same film, was again released in four languages and grossed US$200 million. In 2018 S. Shankar’s Tamil science fiction film 2.0 was released with Hindi and Telugu dubbed versions and it was again a box-office hit. The popularity of these films was giving a hint of the new experiments with the content and distribution of popular cinema which the directors of the south Indian film industries initiated and soon this strategy was followed by other film directors. In the same year, Prashanth Neel’s period piece K.G.F: Chapter 1 followed the same tactic and it was released in Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, and Hindi globally. The action-packed narrative of the struggle for survival in a gloomy coal mine successfully entertained the audiences, as a consequence, producers earned significant profit. Again, Saaho (2019) was an outcome of a similar kind of experiment and this time again this attempt proved triumphant. The films made in the first phase were buoyant and they clarified the defining features of pan-Indian cinema.

One can argue that these pan-Indian films are primarily dubbed south Indian films. Before the release of these big-budget fantasy and science fiction films, Indian audiences had developed the habit of watching dubbed south Indian films on television. As a consequence, broadcasting these films on television can be considered as a precursor of pan-Indian films and possibly preparing the audiences to experience this new film genre. Furthermore, the box-office success of south Indian film remakes in Bollywood (Ghajini 2008, Wanted 2009, Bodyguard 2011, Rowdy Rathore 2012, Holiday: A Soldier Is Never Off Duty 2014, Drishyam 2015 to name a few) which are often done by the directors of the original south Indian films, also indicated that, in the future, the multi-language pan-Indian films might be made for global audiences. These remakes are also forerunners of the pan-Indian films. However, these dubbed films and popular remakes should not be misunderstood as pan-Indian films, because pan-Indian films have several different characteristics and completely new distribution strategies.

However, the world-wide pandemic started in the first quarter of 2020, changed the habit of watching films as cinema halls were closed for a long time. The only source of entertainment left for the theatre going audiences trapped inside homes was virtual platforms. Alternative infrastructures of film production and distribution and also a new film form evolved during this time, as a consequence multi-starrer and multi-lingual short films like Family (2020) and Dots (2020) were released on YouTube (Mini 2024, 85, 87, 89). These films have few characteristics which can be found in pan-Indian cinema. Like the earlier pan-Indian films, these films also signal a new strategy of film making by casting stars from different film industries. However, S. V. Srinivas and Raghav Nanduri (2024) observe that pandemic did not give new challenge to Telugu film industry, the lockdown was an “amplification” of transforming distribution and exhibition strategy that had already begun in the 1990s (100). When the threat of the deadly disease was fading away and people started visiting theatres, Sukumar’s narrative of dark underworld of sandalwood smuggling in Pushpa: The Rise (2021) successfully followed the same formula of pre-pandemic pan-Indian films and earned US$46 million according to the article titled "'Pushpa: The Rise' completes 50 days at the box office; Allu Arjun, Rashmika Mandanna's film grosses Rs. 365 crore worldwide" (2022) published in Times of India. Following this and earlier hits, a large number of films were released which became popular: RRR (2022), K.G.F: Chapter 2 (2022), Ponniyin Selvan: I (2022), Radhe Shyam (2022), Brahmastra: Part One-Shiva (2022), Kantara (2022), Pathaan (2023), Dasara (2023), Jawan (2023), Ponniyin Selvan: II (2023), Salaar: Part 1- Ceasefire (2023), Animal (2023), and Kalki 2898 AD (2024). But not all the pan-Indian films generated huge profits. Films like Sye Raa Narasimha Reddy (2019), and Laal Singh Chaddha (2022) could not win the heart of the audiences.

This new wave of post-millennial Indian film was inaugurated by Telugu film directors like Rajamouli, Sukumar and other film directors from different film industries like Ayan Mukerji, Mani Ratnam, Prashanth Neel, Atlee Kumar, Siddharth Anand followed their footprints. The secret behind the success of Telugu film industry’s rebellious approach to make pan-Indian film lies in their aim to create “fundamentally populist” cinema (Srinivas 2009, xxvi). Telugu films represent charismatic characters who touch the fantasy of the audiences (Srinivas 2009, xxvi). This aspect can be found in pan-Indian films and it hypnotises the audiences to watch them. Pan-Indian films choose a universal story which presents a critical time of an imaginary Indian community located at an imaginary place. This endangered community is saved by the heroism of a superhero. These films often exhibit toxic masculinity and extreme violence which is quite difficult to experience on screen. They also retrieve a story from the torn pages of history (Sye Raa Narasimha Reddy) or remake a western film (Laal Singh Chaddha). Literary adaptations can be also found among the successful pan-Indian films, for example Ponniyin Selvan: I and II. In a nutshell, the plot of pan-Indian film appeals to global audiences as they deal with the struggle for survival of a community or an individual. Following the western film genres, it is quite difficult to categorise these films as thriller, romance or action. These films spend huge budget for the visual effects to make the larger-than-life stories trust worthy. Moreover, these films cast stars from different film industries to reach audiences of different regions, for example, Atlee’s romantic-action-comedy Jawan casts Bollywood icons Shah Rukh Khan, Deepika Padukone and Nayanthara, Vijay Sethupathi from Tamil film industry. Casting stars from different industries breaks the boundary of Indian film industries and tries to become national cinema which the title of this new film genre reflects. This type of star-mixing lures the audiences who have watched the previous performances of these stars to expect the same with differences. This type of casting also appeals to those audiences who have never experienced the performance of these stars. These films are released in different languages all over the world during theatrical release and later they are launched in virtual platforms with dubbed versions. The IMDb page of highest-earned Indian films includes all these pan-Indian films which prove that this new genre has become extremely popular and it opens a new avenue for making high profit in Indian cinema.

Traditional hit films and pan-Indian cinema both are popular Indian films, but the latter experiments with the representation of the plot and circulation which makes the pan-Indian cinema different from the former. Pan-Indian films offer thematically similar type of plot like the earlier successful regional films, but the conscious choice to cast stars from different film industries, dependence on the spectacle of visual effects like the popular Hollywood superhero films and the strategy to release these films globally in different languages make them different from the earlier box office hits made in this millennium. Among earlier hit films few were released globally, but for pan-Indian cinema the global release is mandatory for success. Previous winners were usually made within the limited budget of US$ 7.71 million, whereas the production cost of pan-Indian films have become doubled because for their star cast, visual effects and promotionFootnote 1. Few exceptions in the list of pan-Indian films include Kantara, Dasara and K.G.F: Chapter 1 in which the production cost is less than others. Similarly, the average profit of hit films made in this century stands at around US$ 24 million with the exception of Enthiran (2010) and a few Bollywood films, but the successful pan-Indian films earn nearly US$86.59 or moreFootnote 2. In short, pan-Indian cinema becomes a competitor of Hollywood in the global market and introduces a new avenue of business through strong film distribution network and high-octane entertainment which other hit films did not have the capacity to provide using the traditional infrastructures of regional cinemas.

As the mutating virus was a threat to humankind during the pandemic, pan-Indian cinema was an updated version of Indian popular cinema which offered a kind of entertainment which had never been experienced before. These films seek to showcase pre-modern traditions and present the forgotten heroes from the mythologies and histories. They also address contemporary national problems and solve them miraculously which the government fails. The heroes of these films give priority to save the community. Presentation of charismatic heroes after the pandemic is significant. As the pre-pandemic popular cinema was “the disowned self of modern India returning in a fantastic or monstrous form” (Nandy 1998, 7), the post-pandemic pan-Indian cinema is an imagined alter ego of scared and dejected selves which merges the western visual effects with myth-based stories. The desi superheroes of pan-Indian films console and entertain the audiences traumatised during the deadly pandemic by losing the family members, intense physical and mental suffering. It replaces the anxiety of the audiences with hope, as a consequence these films are appreciated by the audiences.

The reason behind the sudden rise of pan-Indian cinema is not limited to the experiment with the content and circulation, the fall of the Bollywood paved the path of its popularity. Post-economic liberalisation (after 1991) Bollywood cinema shifts from earlier social films and traditional romance to an experimentation with different western film genres, bold articulation of intimacy, breathtaking spectacle, plots on migrated Indians in west, and global exposure which Sangita Gopal (2011) popularly calls “New Bollywood” (2–3, 18). In the new millennium, Bollywood emerges as a professional film industry with strong marketing strategy around the globe which can be compared with Hallyu or Korean Wave (Rajadhyaksha 2016, 98), and it successfully establishes its diasporic markets in western countries like North America, United Kingdom, Canada and non-western countries like Russia, Gulf countries, South Africa to name a few (Punathambekar and Kavoori 2011, 5; Virdi 2003, 2). Bollywood did not limit itself to refashioning through corporatization, it started collaborating with major Hollywood studios from 2006 onwards (Ganti 2013, 348-349). Neelam Sidhar Wright (2015) observes that appropriating, parodying, pastiching, mimicking, dismantling Hollywood and its tendency to pay homage to Bollywood during this time indeed outshine the western institution of cinema and initiate a memorable “cinematic reverse colonialism” (2–3, 191). However, from 2010 to 2016 Salman Khan, Shah Rukh Khan, Aamir Khan and Hrithik Roshan starring films used to release almost annually which were massive hits. Similarly, Ajay Devgn starring films used to appear once in these years and they successfully entertained the audiences. Akshay Kumar could not maintain continuity like them, yet his remakes were quite popular. From 2017 onwards the superstars of Bollywood were losing their appeal; Tiger and Dabangg franchises secured Salman Khan’s popularity, Shah Rukh Khan took a break after 2017 film Raees, after Kaabil (2017) Hrithik Roshan shared screen with a new star in War (2019), Ranbir Kapoor’s performances occasionally entertained audiences and Akshay Kumar continued appearing in multiple films every year with good plot lines and criticism of patriarchal society. New stars like Ayushmann Khurrana, Tiger Shroff, Ranveer Singh were trying to offer realistic and thought-provoking contents in contrast to the star-backed films with extreme musical extravaganza and loose plot lines. M. K. Raghavendra (2014) argues that Bollywood emerges as a brand, not because of the content of the films, it gains such status by the visual excess e.g. costume, choreography, spectacle and music (xiv). It seems that audiences were rejecting this type of mere exhibition of glamour without engaging plots. Moreover, the rise of global #MeToo movement encouraged women to complain about their sexual harassment which unveiled the mask of many Bollywood celebrities in 2018–19; these confessions in mass media created an environment of scepticism about the stars and ethics of the people associated with the industry (Anjaria 2021). The mysterious death of the star Sushant Singh Rajput in June, 2020 opened the volcano of hatred against Bollywood for encouraging nepotism. The grieving fans of the star appealed for “Boycott Bollywood” (Menon 2020, 1) in the background of on-going investigation. The films of superstars were not performing well at this time, for example Salman Khan’s Radhe (2021) and Kisi Ka Bhai Kisi Ki Jaan (2023), Aamir Khan’s Laal Singh Chaddha (2022), Hrithik Roshan’s Vikram Vedha (2022) did not perform well in the box office. The popularity of these stars and the madness of the fans for them were missing after the release of these films (Wright 2015, 7). Hence, it is not an exaggeration to say that pan-Indian films had begun to replace Bollywood which was rapidly losing its appeal in 2020.

The rise of pan-Indian cinema challenges Bollywood which emerges as a national cinema in the post-liberal India (Virdi 2003, 11; Dwyer 2006, 19). It has tremendous impact on the regional film industries. Ashish Rajadhyaksha in his essay “The ‘Bollywoodization’ of the Indian Cinema: Cultural Nationalism in a Global Arena” published in 2010 asserts that all the regional cinemas tend to mimic Bollywood and become “other” Bollywood (Rajadhyaksha 2016, Indian Cinema, 102, 114) to reach the non-resident Indian audiences (Rajadhyaksha 2011, “The ‘Bollywoodization’ of the Indian Cinema”, p. 34). Before adopting the journalistic term “Bollywood” (Kishore, Sarwal, and Patra 2016, 1; Vasudevan 2011, 7), in the previous century Hindi films had nation-wide audiences and unofficially it used to enjoy the status of national cinema. Chidananda Das Gupta, acclaimed film scholar and pioneer of film society movement, in 1969 argued that contemporary Hindi films, produced primarily by the people with illegal gains, had emerged as all-India film without finding any other competitor, and their plots used to reject Nehruvian idealism, establish the triumph of tradition and defeat of boastful westernisation (30, 32). However, the pan-Indian cinema follows the formula of popular Indian cinema and resists to become Bollywood by consciously rejecting its aesthetics, because it is born from the womb of mythology-influenced Telugu film industry and follows the rhetoric of Telugu cinema. The ambitious pan-Indian cinema’s confident footprints in the uncertain post-pandemic popular culture of the nation and steadily snatching control over the national and international markets from unproductive Bollywood is a significant event in the history of Indian cinema which is not experienced to see this type of revolutionary incident.

Following Homi K. Bhabha’s idea of the nation, Sumita S. Chakravatry (1993) states that a narrative of the nation should portray the internal differences, tension between the centre and the margin, idea of citizenship, and the duties of individuals for the nation which keep the diverse communities of the nation united. As an art form cinema has the freedom to visualise a nation with its diversities and debates, possessions and progress. Cinema has to depend on the nation for its production and distribution. Cinema has a knotty relationship with nation since its birth and nation is associated with cinema’s state of ambivalence (12–13). Ashish Rajadhyaksha (2016) argues that Dadasaheb Phalke’s attempt of making the mythological film Raja Harishchandra in 1913 did not merely open a new avenue of public entertainment in colonial India, it also shouldered the great responsibility of nation building (Indian Cinema, 4). Representing the nation with its complexities and changing circumstances, Chakravarty (1993) adds, Indian cinema makes impersonation, which is one of its primary characteristics (4). Jyotika Virdi (2003) aptly says that popular Indian cinema is a national cinema and it gains this status by its production and consumption within the national boundary. Circulating the idea of nationalism, interceding to resolve wrangles experienced by imagined community, creating the collective consciousness of nationhood, popular cinema of India proves that it becomes a mirror of the nation and considering it national cinema is an ideal title for its tireless endeavour (7). Procession of scholarship on the portrayal of nation in Indian cinema (Vamsee Juluri, 2013; Rachel Dwyer, 2014) indicates that theorising pan-Indian cinema remains incomplete without dissecting the narration of nation and nationalism in these films. From 2015 onwards pan-Indian films impersonate a nation which is connected through the web of internet, becomes more violent, and offers greater freedom to women in a patriarchal society. But it continues to encounter similar kinds of problems which are seen in earlier films, for example terrorist attacks and subsequent strengthening national security, healthcare hazards, climate change, crimes and corruptions. Pan-Indian films mirror the contemporary state of the nation and remind the duty of the citizen to stay united when the nation or national identity is under threat. Hence, as popular cinema pan-Indian films also become national cinema and they reflect the soul of the nation in their melodramatic narratives and musical extravaganzas. Unlike the earlier popular films which remained determined champions of Indian tradition (Wright 2015, 7) and embraced globalisation, pan-Indian films move one step forward and become eager to search the idea of India which make them refer to pre-modern traditions, epics, myths, and forgotten histories. These films avoid the nation’s existing histories and try to establish the national identity as an exotic oriental country that made considerable progress in science, medicine, and the art of war and remained spiritually strong before the Muslim invasion. This quest for national identity is an allegory of contemporary right-wing politics of the country. As conventional popular cinema sells Indian tradition to the global market, pan-Indian cinema sells mytho-fictional Indian history to cement the identity of the Indian popular cinema among its competitors in the global market.

Ranjani Mazumdar and Neepa Majumdar (2022) argue that transnational network emerges as a global framework to examine, understand, elucidate different aspects of cinema (3–4). It is important to place pan-Indian cinema in a transnational framework to recognise the national and global contexts in which it has been emerged. From the first decade of the millennium, theatrical exhibition in India undergoes rapid change with the closing of single screens and spreading multiplex culture in cities and towns. In south Indian film industries single screens have huge importance to the success of films, because they are controlled by different syndicates. In Telangana and Andhra Pradesh single screens are controlled by family-owned groups of companies who renovate theatres and upgrade their infrastructures very often (Srinivas and Nanduri 2024, 99-100). Still, S.V. Srinivas and Raghav Nanduri (2024) cannot predict any bright future of these single screens and they conclude that these old theatres are destined to have silent death (113). Moreover, piracy and television release of the films are threats to the theatrical release of films from the last few decades. Digital distribution of films through popular over-the-top (OTT) media services by the globally and nationally popular platforms from 2010 onwards in India is a new threat to the theatrical exhibition of films. The short duration between the theatrical screening and OTT and television release reduces the profit of the producers considerably (Srinivas and Nanduri 2024, 108). The closure of cinema halls during the pandemic was catastrophic for producers when they were trying to adjust with the changing scenario, because it made the virtual platforms more popular than before and OTT-owning corporate houses started offering steep charges for digital rights of films to expand their content libraries (Mini 2024, 86). Furthermore, unlike Tamil and Bollywood films, Telugu films have limited loyal audiences in those regions where non-resident Telugu speaking people settle, for example Canada, USA and the UK (Gupta 2013, 336). Hollywood films are releasing in India from the mid-1990s, but the popularity of dubbed versions of Hollywood superhero films, fantasy and action franchise films in the Indian market was increasing from 2012 onwards using the infrastructure of Bollywood. The Jungle Book (2016), Avengers: Infinity War (2018), The Lion King (2019), Avengers: Endgame (2019), Spider-Man: Far from Home (2019), Captain Marvel (2019) and Fast & Furious: Hobbs & Shaw (2019) are the most successful Hindi films from 2016 to 2019 (Ganti 2024, 44–45). All these trends in the national and global level in the last decade were creating an unfavourable situation for a regional film industry like Telugu by reducing the market which could not establish a dependable national and international market. Successfully setting up the market of pan-Indian film was a response of this film industry to these challenges. However, Indian popular cinema is always indebted to Hollywood for teaching the style of presentation, but it never adopts the technique of hiding the efforts of artifice and artificiality of narrative (Dissanayake 2003, 209–210). Pan-Indian cinema also borrows the grandeur of visual effects from the recent Hollywood hits which helps them to fascinate the nationwide fans of Hollywood movies and promise the global audiences that they match the standard of Hollywood. Thus, transnational framework reflects that pan-Indian films are a product of transition in the global and national film distribution strategy and they laudably bring the audiences back to theatres, gain enough profit by selling digital rights to OTT platforms and establish national and overseas market.

Hindu nationalism and its influence

As Hindu nationalism encourages reading and appreciating ancient Hindu scriptures like the Ramayana, it is important to elaborate this ideology to probe the process of adaptation in RRR and Adipurush and their strategies to spread Hindu nationalism. However, the ideology of Hindu nationalism is not a recent phenomenon, its roots lie in the writings of nineteenth century social reformers like Dayananda Saraswati, Swami Vivekananda and Sri Aurobindo who endeavoured to develop collective Hindu identity by reminding their rich cultural inheritance. They tried to remind the ancient scriptures like Upanishads, Vedas, Puranas and Smritis which had lost their appeal among the Hindus during the colonial period. The same ideology was followed by nineteenth century politicians like Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, M.S. Golwalkar and Deendayal Upadhyaya and they mobilised the Hindus to unite against the Muslims who proved themselves opponents by their stance in contemporary politics. The leaders realised the need to establish organisation to strengthen their voice and participate in electoral politics. This urge gave birth to organisations like Hindu Mahasabha, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) (Chakrabarty and Jha 2020, 2, 9). Spreading Hindu nationalism became an important agenda of BJP, and their success to mobilise the people reflected in the election of 1996, 1998, and 1999. Their victory in 2014 and return in 2020 with increasing number of seats in election indicate the faith of the people in Hindu nationalism.

Among other Hindu scriptures, BJP has a special connection with the Ramayana because of its association with the dispute of the birthplace of Rama and the demolition of Babri mosque in Ayodhya in 1992. Savarkar’s proposal for establishing the “Hindu Rashtra” considers the mythological character Rama as an idol of the imagined Hindu nation and the epic becomes a part of the history of that nation, blurring the difference between history and myth (Sarkar 2020, 131). However, the controversy surrounding the birthplace of Rama makes them more important to Indian politics than ever before (Rajagopal 2004, 1). They claimed Rama as a symbol of the nation (Rajagopal 2004, 12). Roshan Kishore (2019) in his article published in Hindustan Times argues that building the temple of Rama in Ayodhya has been an integral part of BJP’s election manifestoes from 1991 onwards and it has helped the party to increase votes significantly. The dispute over the birthplace of Rama reached Allahabad High Court in 2010 and finally in 2019 the Supreme Court of India delivered the verdict that the disputed land should be given to a trust to build temple for Rama. Thus, the debate on Rama’s birthplace was continuing in India from a long time through mass media. When the television adaptation was broadcasted in 1987, the television served as a medium of political campaign by spreading the awareness of a forgotten golden age which is ahead of the contemporary time in warfare and statecraft to people across different social strata and regions (Rajagopal 2004, 11, 15). Arvind Rajagopal (2004) observes, “…Hindu nationalists in recent times represented an attempt to create a populist language of politics appealing to authoritarian rather than democratic values” (1). The government did not lose the golden opportunity to re-telecast the Ramayana. On 28th March, 2020 when people around the globe confined themselves within their homes with the fear and uncertainty during the Covid-19 pandemic, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting announced to re-telecast Ramanand Sagar’s famous television adaptation. The television adaptation with dated visual effects successfully charmed the audiences again. As a consequence, Doordarshan increased 650% viewership within a week of broadcasting the serial (Pant 2021, 3). Through the re-telecast of the television adaptation the government consciously circulated Hindu nationalism using the medium of television again to the new generation of audiences. The global pandemic, judicial discourse, mass media, and the ideology of BJP make the epic more popular than earlier. In a different way it can be said that possibly all these discourses make Rama a national hero which the political party always dreamed. The tremendous popularity of the television adaptation indicates that film adaptations of the epic might be appreciated by the audiences. This anticipation was proved true when on 18th August, 2020 the poster and the star cast of the film Adipurush were revealed. The declaration of Adipurush is a conscious participation in the tide of Hindu nationalism. RRR also joins this wave following the tradition of Telugu mythological films.

Adaptation of Ramayana in RRR

The plot of RRR (2022) presents two Indian freedom fighters, namely Alluri Sitarama Raju and Komaram Bheem, and weaves a fictional story. It is loosely based on the Indian epic Ramayana. As the complete plot is not based on the epic, it does not acknowledge the literary influence. RRR’s hiding the influence of the Ramayana may be seen as another example of Indian popular cinema’s tendency of borrowing plots without acknowledgement and representing them as original. It might also be a strategy of Rajamouli to avoid direct comparison with the epic as it is known to all the Indian audiences. However, the intertexual layer of Valmiki’s creation has been added with the faith that the audiences would understand those references without much effort. The story is set during 1920 when India was governed by the British Empire. The nationalist movement at that time was protesting against British imperialism and domination on the colonised subjects. The story of the film describes the friendship between Bheem and Ramaraju (hereafter addressed as Rama) in this restless time. Each of them has a secret ambition, for example, Bheem starts his expedition to free the child Malli who is kidnapped by British officials and Rama, on the other hand, is determined to steal British armoury to fuel the anti-empire movement. Rama leaves his fiancé Seetha and his village to become a police officer and complete his mission. Eventually, Bheem and Rama unite to resist the attack of the British army which is led by Governor Scott Buxton. The name “Bheem” refers to the Pandava brother from another Indian epic the Mahabharata, but Rajamouli does not give emphasis on this connection. The reference to the characters of the Ramayana, for example Rama and Sita and Rama’s transformation from a police officer to a warrior provoke the audiences to compare Buxton with the villain of the epic unconsciously. The scene where Rama is metamorphosed into the main protagonist of the epic wearing the saffron dhoti and takes the bow and arrows, reminds the episode of Yuddha Kanda of the epic where Rama and his army fight against Ravana to defeat him. At the end of the film Rama returns home with Bheem to reunite with his fiancée and villagers which follows the narrative of the epic. The scene of reunion reminds the Uttara Kanda of Ramayana, though the entire episode of this part of the epic is not followed.

The features of pan-Indian films which Rajamouli establishes in his Baahubali series, adopts in this film confidently. The main plot of the film chooses the known subject of domination of the British rulers on the innocent colonised subjects and the efforts of revolutionaries to uproot the colonisers. In the subplot the names like Rama, Seetha and the account of their sacrifice remind the audiences of the Ramayana and encourage to compare the film with the epic. At the end of the film both plots merge and the influence of the epic becomes explicit. In his depiction of the protagonist of the pan-Indian film, Rajamouli presents a powerful, courageous and aggressive hero like Rama who can be easily compared with the epic’s counterpart. Moreover, the scene of punishing Bheem in public by the British rulers is quite long and it is extremely violent. It presents severe scourging of Bheem who denies to apologise to British governor and his blood soaks the dry soil. Audiences do not find this extreme brutality unusual, as they have experienced this type of suffering during the pandemic. Furthermore, RRR casts Telugu stars like N. T. Rama Rao Jr. and Ram Charan, simultaneously it casts popular Bollywood stars like Ajay Devgn and Alia Bhatt and Tamil actor Samuthirakani who is also popular among Tamil and Telugu audiences. Thus, Rajamouli shapes the plot adding the larger-than-life elements of pan-Indian films to entertain the national and global audiences. In the article "Srinivas M: We wanted the VFX in RRR to be invisible" (2024) published in The New Indian Express, Srinivas Mohan who shouldered the responsibility of visual effects in this film, states that eighty per cent of the film includes visual effects. Primarily this Telugu language film, according to Skyler Caruso (2023), has been subtitled in fifteen different languages including Hindi, Tamil and Kannada. Rajamouli’s mastery to tell an engaging story was appreciated by audiences, as a consequence the film earned US$166 million according to the website Box Office Mojo.

In this pan-Indian film the Ramayana is absent in the main plot, it is present as an intertextual layer. As a consequence, the film does not become a mythological film. Rajamouli’s subtle references to the epic help the audiences to connect and compare the plot with the epic. The director sports with the memory of the audiences and the film’s intertextual references establish dialogue with the audiences’ knowledge of the epic. Rajamouli tries to glorify the figure of Rama and also suggests that a freedom fighter like Rama can be compared with him. In his portrayal he follows Valmiki’s rendering of Rama and his uniqueness lies in valorising humanism. The character of Sita in this film is merely a namesake and reminder of the epic, yet her characterisation does not have similarity with the epic’s counterpart. Similarly, Rajamouli’s trick can provoke an audience to think that Buxton commits similar type of crime like Ravana when he abducts the child. It also persuades an audience to compare Bheem with Hanuman when he enters into Buxton’s palace to rescue the child, as Hanuman entered into Lanka to meet with Sita. Rajamouli uses limited references to Ramayana in RRR and hardly bothers to stay faithful to the epic, he concentrates more on adhering to the features of pan-Indian film. The Ramayana exists in this film to offer additional pleasure of remembering the similarities and differences with the epic. The story of the epic is added in the film as an allegory which signifies contemporary socio-political context that will be discussed later in detail.

The intertextual reference to the Ramayana in RRR is a surprise to the audiences. It is not a whim of the director to adapt the epic, it has a connection with the history of Telugu cinema. Considering the history of Telugu cinema and its reception, S. V. Srinivas (2009) and Elavarthi Sathya Prakash (2017) argue that mythology and folklore define Telugu cinema (Srinivas xx, Prakash 208, 217). Following the popular tradition of adapting mythology through performances in temples, theatres, novels and radio plays, Telugu cinema always tries to play a pivotal role to shape religious and secular traditions (Bhrugubanda 2018, 2, 7, 25-35) by adapting Hindu mythology. The mythological films of N. T. Rama Rao are admired by audiences and this popularity paves the path for the actor’s success in politics. RRR’s adaptation of the myth follows the old heritage of Telugu cinema which adapted mythology to entertain the audiences. In one of the newspaper articles published in Hindustan Times (dated 28th September, 2015) and in his interview with The New Yorker, Rajamouli admits that his films are influenced by Indian myths. His fascination for Telugu mythological films is proved when in Yamadonga (2007) he includes archival footage of N. T. Rama Rao’s mythological film Mayabazar (1997). In the same interview he professes the influence of the mythic-fantasy narrative of Mayabazar on his oeuvre especially on RRR. His fantasy duology Baahubali: The Beginning and Baahubali 2: The Conclusion which use the theme of unethical seize of the kingdom uprooting the righteous heir and its reclamation, is an influence of Mahabharata. Though these two films hesitate to admit the influence, the article titled "For Baahubali, I Turned to Mahabharata for Inspiration: S S Rajamouli" (accessed on 2025) published in Hindustan Times on 2nd June 2015 it is stated that Rajamouli does not hide this influence during the promotion of Baahubali 2: The Conclusion. The popularity of these films might encourage him to refer to the epic directly in RRR. Telugu film Sita Ramam which is released in the same year, also loosely adapt and contemporise the Ramayana. Success of this film also indicates that this type of reference to myth is appreciated by the national audiences. Thus, the intertextual layer of the Ramayana in RRR is not merely an influence of mythological films on Rajamouli, but also a celebration of the history of Telugu cinema which is shaped by mythology. When the new millennium encounters the decline of Telugu mythological films that are now considered poorly made B-grade films (Bhrugubanda 2018, 221, 222, 223), RRR makes the audiences nostalgic about the aura of Telugu mythological films, especially the mythological films of NTR. Adapting the epic Rajamouli does not aim to produce the religious public like the Telugu mythological films (Bhrugubanda 2018, 214). Rajamouli tries to connect the plot with mythology to establish the contemporary relevance of the myth. In his film myth is not stories of sacred scriptures isolated from ordinary life, rather those are allegories with which struggles of everyday life can be compared and new lessons can be learned. This attempt to connect the divine with mortal human life makes his film different from the earlier mythological films.

Adapting the Ramayana in RRR reminds a tendency of Indian film history: the social and family dramas’ tendency to allude to and loosely adapt the Ramayana without acknowledgement. In social films mythologies are not presented with grandeur like the mythological films, they are connected with ordinary life and prove their relevance in contemporary time. Rachel Dwyer (2006) cites the example of Awaara (1951) which uses the motif of Rama’s disowning the pregnant Sita, Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham (2001) that uses the theme of family feud presented in Ayodhya Kanda, and the film Khal Nayak (1993) which uses the name of Rama to indicate that the hero of the film is an embodiment of righteousness (Dwyer 145–147). Similarly Hum Saath-Saath Hain (1999) and Lajja (2001) try to remake and rewrite the incidents of the epic setting the plot in contemporary time (Aklujkar 2007, 43). The list is quite long. However, RRR loosely adapts the Ramayana without acknowledgement like these films and leaves hints for the audiences to compare the plot with the epic. Its uniqueness lies in connecting the period film with the Ramayana and using it as an allegory of contemporary politics-something that has rarely been attempted. RRR chooses a middle road where the epic is linked with a realistic story like the socials and concurrently glorifies the epic like the mythological films. The use of visual effects to present Yuddha Kanda and distribution strategy make RRR different from the earlier loose adaptations of Ramayana.

Adaptation of Ramayana in Adipurush

In the opening credits Adipurush acknowledges that it is based on Valmiki’s version of the epic. It also reminds that the same story has been adapted by different literary authors at different times. Thus, it prepares the audiences for the possible infidelities to the Valmiki’s version of the story and new interpretations in the film adaptation. However, the title of the film “Adipurush” can be translated into English as the first man. In this film, the mythological character Rama has been presented as the first man echoing the Christian myth. To be more precise, the narrative style indicates that the director projects Rama as the first ideal man on the earth. However, Adipurush does not adapt the complete story of the Ramayana. The film adaptation presents Rama’s exile with Sita and Lakshmana and the rescue of Sita punishing Ravana. In a different way it can be said that the story follows the Aranya Kanda, Kishkindha Kanda, Sundara Kanda, and Yuddha Kanda of the epic. The film adaptation does not follow the entire story of the four kandas, it adds few incidents to make the story appealing and eliminates many chapters to accommodate the story within three hours. As the epic is transformed into a film, following the rhetoric of Indian popular cinema, musical extravaganza is added. The previous parts like Bala Kanda and Ayodhya Kanda are quickly described in the opening credits to remind the backstory to the audiences. Watching those episodes remind the childhood experience of reading graphic novels and this nostalgic trip tries to remind the childhood admiration for the epic. The adaptation quickly refers to Uttara Kanda, the last episode of the epic, to avoid the possible controversy on Rama’s decisions which can create an antipathy to the protagonist. This episode includes the separation of Rama and Sita which discourages to think Rama as an ideal husband. Excluding this episode, the film adaptation offers a happy ending and fragmented version of the epic.

The story of Adipurush might have a magnetic effect to all the Indians because of the known story’s appeal over the ages. This acquaintance might allure the audiences of the whole nation to watch its screen-version. Thus, Raut offers the pleasure of watching the familiar story with differences. Moreover, the director tries to present the protagonist as an ideal figure like Valmiki’s epic. Rama has been presented as an obedient son, a great warrior, an egalitarian and an uxorious husband which indicates that Om Raut stays loyal to the hypotext. Following the popular belief, Rama has been presented here as an incarnation of god Vishnu several times. In the opening credits the lyrics of the hymn “Ram Siya Ram” eulogises the protagonist and the echo of the same is repeated several times. In the characterisation of Rama, Raut proves himself a conservative and does not take any risk to experiment. In the representation of the main protagonist of pan-Indian films also Raut follows the existing formula to cast a spell on the audiences. He tries to make the mythological hero trustworthy with the visual effects. According to the article titled "'Adipurush' Director Om Raut: Extra Time Helped in Making Visual Effects Better" published in 2023 in Outlook, Rout claims to use visual effects which are used in superhero films of Hollywood.

Casting of Prabhas helps Raut to represent a charismatic hero of the pan-Indian film, as he has already essayed the role of the protagonist in successful pan-Indian films, such as Baahubali: The Beginning, Baahubali 2: The Conclusion, Saaho, Radhe Shyam and Salar: Part 1- Ceasefire. The reason behind casting Prabhas in the role of Rama is not limited to reach Telugu audiences, it aims to reach the national and the global audiences, as the success of his earlier pan-Indian films has earned him fans across the globe. Moreover, the film casts stars from different film industries like other pan-Indian films. It casts Kriti Sanon and Saif Ali Khan from Bollywood. Unlike any other pan-Indian film, here exhibition of extreme violence is missing. It seems that avoiding excess violence, blood and gore Raut tries to spread the magic of mythological films among audiences. The graphic accounts of Rama’s confrontation with the rakshasas in the epic could easily have been adapted to exhibit violence following the narrative style of pan-Indian cinema, yet Raut deliberately avoids that path. The known narrative style of pan-Indian film has to negotiate with the epic and exclude violence and toxic masculinity. Furthermore, the film was released in different languages following the trend of the other pan-Indian films to reach a large number of audiences. Not merely in theatrical releases, but in virtual platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime also the film is available in different languages.

Adapting the epic Raut makes a mythological film which is not a popular film genre in the new millennium in Indian film industries. The adaptation unambiguously reflects addition of few intertextual layers in the film. Adipurush could not escape the influence of nineteenth century Indian art, especially Ravi Varma’s paintings which had influenced earlier mythological films (Dwyer 2006, 19). When Raut trims Valmiki’s large epic for the film, he follows the popular graphic novel series Amar Chitra Katha’s version of the epic presented in Rama (1997). When he revises the vulgar dialogues of the epic, he replaces them with the dialogues of the same graphic novel. The final scene of the film and the graphic novel are same which is another evidence of its influence on the director. Thus, he presents a popular version of the epic and does not try to experiment with it. Moreover, Adipurush’s visual effects remind the western fantasy films and it makes the adaptation more alluring than the old mythological films. Casting stars from different industries, especially selecting a star like Prabhas, Raut makes the film more glamorous compared to earlier mythological films. Furthermore, distributing the film adaptation in dubbed versions in theatrical release and virtual release makes it more entertaining to the audiences, whereas the earlier mythological films did not experiment with this type of distribution style and remained accessible to the audiences of a region.

Spreading Hindu nationalism through RRR

Religious nationalism tries to influence the popular culture by making the people hysterical in the 1990s and in the first decade of the new millennium (Puniyani 2009, 106), but the scenario has become exacerbated 2010 onwards because of the ruling party’s tendency to impose the “cultural hegemony” (Memon 2020, 1). There is a huge impact of this dominating ideology on the film industries. Bollywood always tries to stay close to the BJP government and champion their nationalist beliefs. Indeed, BJP had given enormous effort to establish their control on Bollywood film industry which has been reflected in the films released in 1990s (Sen 2010, 147) and their tendency to translate the ideals of the political party (Bollypolotics 2024, 17–18, 20–21). Ajay Gehlawat (2024) observes that different stars from Bollywood are seen upholding this ideology which is reflected on social media. Criticism against imposing this ideology has been bombarded (Bollypolotics 2, 4–6). Moreover, after BJP returns to power in 2014, a large number of Bollywood films were released which broadcast the ideology of the ruling government: Padmaavat (2018), PM Narendra Modi (2019), The Accidental Prime Minister (2019), Kesari (2019), Panipat (2019), Uri: The Surgical Strike (2019), Manikarnika: The Queen of Jhansi (2019), The Kashmir Files (2022), Samrat Prithviraj (2022), Ram Setu (2022), The Kerala Story (2023), Bastar: The Naxal Story (2024), Swatantrya Veer Savarkar (2024), Emergency (2025), and The Bengal Files (2025). These films glorify the history of Hindus and unveil the atrocities committed against them by Muslims. They also criticise the policies of the opposition party and venerate the leaders of BJP as saints. In a nutshell, these films hypnotise the audiences suffering from amnesia with a dose of Hindu nationalism and the box office success of some of them carries evidence of this claim. When BJP takes its control over the globally popular film industry, it is quite certain that it will encourage adaptation of the Ramayana to spread religious nationalism.

The history of Telugu cinema cannot be studied isolating it from the politics of the state. The career of Telugu star NTR proves that his cinematic performance significantly influenced political career which successfully galvanised the mass to select him as the Chief Minister of the state for three terms (Srinivas 2013, Politics as Performance 7). Following the footprints of NTR, Chiranjeevi also sought political support from his fans and established his political party (Srinivas 2009, Megastar xvii). Considering the history of Telugu cinema which has produced films close to government propaganda since 1930s (Srinivas 2009, Megastar xxii), it can be assumed that RRR follows the same trend and endorses Hindu nationalism. In his interview published in The New Yorker Rajamouli (2023) denies claims of his allegiance to the ideals of RSS and BJP, yet he admits that he was carried away reading his father’s scripted drama on RSS which aims to make India a Hindu nation, disapproves secular democracy and has a notable influence on BJP (Puniyani 2009, 95–96). Examining the adaptation of the Ramayana in RRR might help to understand Rajamouli’s stance which he could not unveil in the interview.

The thin veil of the epic spread throughout the film by the loose adaptation reminds the ancient brave heroes and their excellence in the war. The mention of the names of the main protagonists of the epic throughout the film, sudden reference to Yuddha Kanda at the end, Rama’s fascination for epic’s counterpart’s saffron attire, the presence of Rama’s temple several times as part of mise en scène provoke one to understand that Rajamouli’s fascination is not limited to the Hindu epic. The setting of the film and its reference to the great war of the Ramayana reminds the superiority of the Hindus in military tactics which are portrayed as capable of vanquishing the military strategy of the British rulers. Moreover, Rajamouli’s Rama is a dynamic warrior who can change his strategy like the epic’s counterpart, as a consequence he picks up a rifle to kill the torturous British rulers. The representation of the ancient strategies of the war adapted in the film seems hyperbolic, and the heroes never seem like ordinary persons, but these aspects persuade the audiences to imagine a nation of the Hindus which is described in the epic.

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar expresses his dream to institute a “Hindu Rashtra” through geographical, racial, and cultural unity. He projected Rama as the founder of Hindu nation and transformed the mythological leader into a historical figure (Sarkar 2020, 131). This imagined Hindu state considers Muslims and Christians as enemies and promotes Sanskrit or the close vernacular language as the medium of communication (Jaffrelot 2007, 86). In the film Sarvarkar’s dream is translated by Rajamouli through the language of cinema and loose adaptation of the Ramayana. The Ramayana presents a shudra or lower caste figure, except Hindus it does not present Muslims or any other community. Adding religious diversity in his adaptation, Rajamouli distances his film from the epic and contemporises it. He does not limit himself to presenting the unity between Hindu and Muslim, the narrative also describes that Jennifer, a family member of Governor Buxton, helps Bheem to design the strategy of rescuing Rama. Thus, people from different communities become part of nationalist movement in the film and they pay “allegiance to Hindu culture” (Jaffrelot 2007, 86). Bheem risks his life to free Raju from the British imprisonment to unite him with Sita. Tanika Sarkar (2020) observes that referring to the history of the medieval period, partition and contemporary times, Muslims are always blamed by Hindu nationalists for raping and abducting Hindu women (109). Bheem cannot be blamed for such heinous crimes, he chooses the noble mission of uniting Rama and Sita. Uneducated Bheem earnestly requests Raju to educate him which can help him to understand the world better and Jennifer embraces the Indian culture by leaving behind the traditions of her own community. Savarkar states that Muslims and Christians can become part of Hindu society when they accept the Hindu culture and follow its tradition (Jaffrelot 2007, 86). Moreover, at the end of the film it is found that the freedom fighter Rama succeeds in his aim to steal weaponry and distributes those artilleries to the revolutionaries of his village. The low-angle shots glorify Rama wearing saffron attire which incite the audiences to think that the freedom fighter metamorphoses into the mythological Rama who prepares for the great battle described in the Yuddha Kanda of the epic. These scenes can be interpreted as the mythological hero’s odyssey to establish the Hindu Rashtra by liberating India from the colonial imperialism and establishing racial as well as cultural unity.

Furthermore, Rajamouli does not limit articulating his faith in Hindu nationalism in his brief adaptation of the Ramayana, he spreads evidence throughout the screenplay which makes his political stance unambiguous. At the end of the film, he adds an extravaganza of music and dance in front of the idols of renowned Indian freedom fighters. The absence of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru is an indication of Rajamouli’s preference for Hindu nationalism and BJP, and rejecting the leaders who were associated with Indian National Congress. Similar type of choice can be found in contemporary political scenario where the same freedom fighters’ ideologies are not followed and their contributions to Indian freedom struggle are not valued by the BJP leaders (Jaffrelot 2007, 300).

Persuading the audiences to consider Scott Buxton as Ravana is an attempt to remind the old Hindu epic to empower Hindu nationalism. The character is not addressed with the name of the epic’s villain, the audiences understand the hint the narrative carries and compare him with Ravana. Tanika Sarkar (2020) reminds that Hindu nationalists believe “…Western ideas are evil” (115). According to the philosophy of Hindu nationalism, the rebirth of a Hindu nation demands redefining of the idea of India and rejecting the west and Muslims. It is quite impossible to restore the lost glory of ancient India without this ostracism. As a consequence, the western ideas and ideals which arrived India during the colonial period, have always been targets of Hindu nationalists (Nanda 2025, 2). Buxton becomes a symbol of those values and beliefs of the west which Hindu nationalists prohibit, as a consequence he becomes the villain Ravana who tries to dishonour and vanquish the icon of the Hindu nation. However, this loose adaptation is a reflection of the contemporary politics and it reminds BJP supported government’s recent attempts to rename places with references from Puranas to erase the memory of the Mughal and colonial period, for example formerly known Rajpath (King’s way) which was designed by the famous British architect Sir Edwin Lutyens in 1911, has become Kartavya Path as part of the Prime Minister’s plan of Central Vista that again tries to erase colonial memory of the old Parliament House. Similarly, renaming cities like Allahabad and Gurgaon are additions to this plan and the new names Prayagraj and Gurugram invokes Hindu scriptures. These steps try to establish a connection with the Hindu culture suppressed under different reigns, but they cannot entirely erase the long history of colonialism and Mughal reign. The politics of renaming to sow the seed of Hinduism justify Rajamouli’s audacious attempt to compare the story of freedom movement with the Ramayana. He does not try to erase the colonial memory, rather he glorifies the revolutionaries in a distinct way referring to the epic. Rajamouli does not confine himself to persuading the audiences to imagine the Hindu nation and its past, his film also reminds the audiences that the Ramayana is an integral part of Hindu identity. His adaptation discloses his strong faith in Hindu nationalism and the film also spreads this ideology among the audiences who had become numb and apprehensive after the pandemic. This loose adaptation becomes an allegory of the contemporary politics which tries to remind the buried past of Hindus to spread religious nationalism.

Spreading Hindu nationalism through Adipurush

Om Raut, on the other hand, tries to unite with BJP’s agenda of spreading Hindu nationalism which is unambiguously reflected in his adaptation of the Ramayana. In the opening credits of the film adaptation, the producers and director express their gratitude to Hindu gurus and ministers of different BJP-ruling states for their patronage. Thus, the film tries to become a mouthpiece of political and spiritual leaders who promote Hindu nationalism. It might be an attempt to please the state governments to secure entertainment tax waivers which was implemented in case of The Kashmir Files (2022), The Kerala Story (2023) and Raut’s previous film Tanhaji: The Unsung Warrior (2020). Unfortunately, Raut’s mythological adaptation did not receive such benefits. But the acknowledgement unveils Raut’s intention to promote the right-wing politics and he is a comrade of Bollywood directors who initiate the crusade of spreading Hindu nationalism through "based on true story" films like The Kashmir Files, The Kerala Story, to name a few.

At the beginning of the film, the narrator asserts that the best period of Indian history is the time of Rama which is chronicled by Valmiki. This declaration implicitly tries to claim Valmiki’s composition is a history, not a fictitious story of myth. With this assertion Raut tries to establish a glorious past of the Hindu nation which cannot be found in conventional history books. The past is portrayed as a utopia which Ravana tries to destroy and he has been punished to restore the order. Raut expects his audiences to trust the voiceover at the beginning of the film on this thesis, even though his declaration is not supported by evidence. Representation of the Ramayana as a history is fallacious. The term “history” indicates the discipline which has been developed based on verifiable proofs. The Ramayana is considered as “itihasa” in the collective consciousness of India and the word means “it was indeed like that” (Debroy 2017, 2: xi). The word “itihasa” is translated as “history”, but an epic cannot become a history as it is burdened with the poetic imagination of the author. By declaring the Ramayana to be the history of the nation, the director presents an imaginary history and spreads Hindu nationalist ideology.

The portrayal of the characters also helps the director to articulate Hindu nationalism by re-introducing the characters and values of the ancient Hindu state and persuading to follow those ideals in the present time. Series of eulogising of Rama through bhajans in the adaptation aims to establish his eminence which remind Hindu nationalists’ tendency to imagine Rama as a national hero. Raut’s portrayal is not exaggerated, he remains faithful to Valmiki’s epic where each chapter adulates Rama. Similarly, when Raut presents Lakshmana as an obeying brother and Sita as exemplary wife, he stays loyal to the same version of the epic. But his depiction of Ravana is anomalous. At the beginning, the film introduces the villain Ravana with kohl-rimmed eyes and beard which are popular stereotypes associated with Muslims. Valmiki’s Ramayana does not mention the rakshasa king’s beard and his habit of applying kohl (Debroy, 2nd vol., 2017, 67-69, 337-338). Ravana’s appearance in the film does not match with the graphic novel which also influences the adaptation. In the film Ravana practices Hindu rituals, but it does not solve the doubt of audiences created by his strange appearance. The portrayal of the villain with a hint of different religion revises Valmiki’s epic by adding an utterly unlike conflict between the protagonist and the antagonist. Adipurush becomes a Hindu warrior’s struggle to defeat the Muslim villain who tries to destroy his home. This alteration resonates with the core of Hindu nationalism which considers Muslims as a threat to the community. It seems to suggest that Hindus have been under threat since ancient times. Thus, the mythological film has become an allegory of the contemporary politics of Hinduism.

Adipurush endeavours to sow the seed of insecurity of Hindu nationalists in the minds of the audiences by representing Ravana as a Muslim character. Mythological films are not merely sources of pure entertainment, they defamiliarise the known myth and cultivate faith in the minds of the audiences. Rachel Dwyer (2006) argues, “The mythological has a more important role in nationalism: to create sacred myths for the new nation, to incorporate mythological and ancient time as well as non-modern worldviews into this new nation, and to define the culture and the cultural heritage of India…” (60). When the genre of mythology is dead in film industries, the release of a big-budget film like Adipurush is surprising. The adaptation is made depending on contemporary rise of Hindu nationalism and the discourse surrounding Rama which is created by the dispute on birth place of the mythological character. The producers and director assumed that in this restless post-pandemic time of rising intolerance when debates on Hinduism does not seem to end, anxious people might watch a mythological film like Adipurush to find solace. This film adaptation ties to convert a secular state into a Hindu nation by constructing a false history of Hindus and beguile audiences to feel proud of the glorious past. Thus, it tries to make us forget that at present we live in a secular state and this dangerous erasure of knowledge is precisely what religious nationalism intends. Raut employs a rhetorical strategy to make his lessons of nationalism trustworthy to audiences. The film adaptation forcefully tries to establish itself a loyal adaptation of the hypotext by claiming it “true to the essence and spirit” in the opening credits. It encourages audiences to re-read Valmiki’s epic to understand the effort to reflect the true spirit of the epic. Using this ploy, Raut tries to prove that Adipurush is a faithful adaptation of the epic, because he knows very few audiences would undertake the exercise of re-reading Valmiki’s Ramayana, which is originally written in Sanskrit -a classical language known by very few in contemporary India.

By adapting the Ramayana, RRR and Adipurush laud the excellence of the art of war in prehistoric India and revise the history of the nation. Both of them are important strategies of BJP’s politics which have been implemented during its tenure in the government (Flåten 2017, 2; Jaffrelot 2007, 300). In 1977–79 Hindu nationalists criticised the books authored by the left-inclined historians like Romila Thapar’s Ancient India, Bipan Chandra’s Modern India, A. Tripathi, Barun De and Bipan Chandra’s Freedom Struggle, and R.S. Sharma’s Ancient India for their failure to lambaste the Muslim invasion in India and for neglecting to extol the nationalists like Aurobindo, Tilak whom they admire. As a consequence, they claimed to withdraw these books from the curriculum. When BJP formed the government in 1998, officials close to RSS were appointed as the heads of different government bodies such as Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR), Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), and National Council for Educational Research and Training (NCERT) to keep control on the research and school curricula, thereby instilling the idea of religious nationalism in the minds of citizens (Jaffrelot 2007, 270). Lars Tore Flåten (2017) observes that the school textbooks published by NCERT in 2002 glorified the Hindu cultural traditions, unity and revived the indigenous knowledge to strengthen Hindu identity in the cultural imagination of the country (1-2, 9). Moreover, defence has been an integral part of the philosophy of Hindu nationalism as its proponents believe that Indian history carries several evidences of betrayals by Muslims and Christians. When BJP formed the government in 1998 national security was one of their most important preferences, as a result they encouraged nuclear testing, winning Kargil War and increasing the share of defence expenditure by 28% in the budget of 2000 (Jaffrelot 2007, 300-302). The tradition has continued when Narendra Modi becomes the Prime Minister in 2014 through measures such as surgical strike in 2016, Balakot Air Strikes in 2019, revocation of Article 370 in 2019, modernising armed forces, strictly handling Galwan clash, and India’s air strike on Pakistan in 2025. Thus, these film adaptations try to empower Hindu nationalism by disseminating this ideology to both national and global audiences. In the new millennium, populist politics becomes wiser to seize the popular culture and spread the idealism through the timeless popular culture of Ramayana adaptations and the emerging pan-Indian new wave.

Hindu nationalist movement, especially RSS, is always eager to influence the people of the nation and it persistently ignores the overseas Hindus till 1990s. Still, the branches of RSS, Sangh Parivar, Vishva Hindu Parishad, even BJP supported organisations have been established in different parts of the globe by the non-resident Indians (Jaffrelot 2007, 361-362). As a consequence, it is quite obvious that these film adaptations which sound like propaganda of the political party, will please the members of these organisations. The framework of pan-Indian cinema which the adaptations use, helps to disseminate Hindu nationalism among common audiences in the national and global marketplace. The universal story of Rama adapted in these pan-Indian films is popular in the Southeast Asian countries among different religious groups and it is not surprising that it is known in the western countries as well because of performance traditions (Bose 2004, 6-8). Other techniques of representation of pan-Indian films which are used in these two adaptations also become catalyst to circulate Hindu nationalism. Casting stars from different film industries, the use of enhanced visual effects, and the multi-lingual release of these film adaptations reach a large number of national and global audiences. They are intrigued by the quality of visual effects like the western films and easily understand the epic narrated nation’s excellence in the art of war and critique of existing history effortlessly. The features of pan-Indian cinema make the idea of the Hindu nation more powerful than in earlier Ramayana adaptations and reach a large number of audiences that even spokespersons of Hindu nationalism cannot always reach. The box-office collections of RRR, as available on the website of bollywoodhungama.com and boxofficemojo.com, indicate that along with the national release, the film was released in different Southeast Asian countries like Singapore, Malaysia and as well as in Australia, Germany, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Japan, Russia, UAE, Portugal and United States. The same sources inform that Adipurush was released in India and simultaneously in different foreign countries like Singapore, Malaysia, New Zealand, UAE, United Kingdom, Australia, and United States. The former adaptation collects huge profit from the global market, whereas the profit the latter adaptation gathers is a minuscule fragment of the former. This evidence proves that the layout of pan-Indian film assist to spread the ideology of Hindu nationalism globally.

The circulation of Hindu nationalism through film adaptations of the epic participates in the Hindu popular culture of practicing yoga, following renowned Hindu gurus, pieties, Vastu, herbal medicine, astrology which has become a new normal of urban life and carefully excludes Islam during the time of internet and digital revolution. Anustup Basu (2020) asserts that this cultural trend is Hindutva 2.0 which delinks Hindu nationalism from earlier practices of referring to scriptures and history, and instead advertises modernity by practicing Hindu traditions (8–9). This habit of advertising modernity by following the tradition will keep reminding the audiences of the traditions of Hindu nation as depicted in both the film adaptations: Rama’s accepting saffron attire to celebrate the valour of the epic’s hero in RRR and Rama’s punishing the Muslim Ravana in Adipurush. Many viewers might not have the patience to read Ramayana to evaluate the film adaptations which make them blindly believe Hindu nationalism.

Conclusion

Pan-Indian cinema which is an updated version of Indian popular cinema with a different type of casting and a new distribution style before the pandemic, earns global popularity in the post-pandemic period. When Bollywood film industry was failing to entertain the audiences and was burdened with numerous scandals, while other regional film industries and single screens were striving to survive, pan-Indian cinema appeared in the scenario with a solution to all these problems. The screenplays of these films are often inspired by Hindu mythologies which help to weave larger-than-life stories. As this new wave emerges from Telugu cinema and these films are made primarily by renowned Telugu film directors, pan-Indian films celebrate the golden period of Telugu mythological films by blending fantasy and myths with contemporary or dystopic narratives.

RRR and Adipurush free the long tradition of adapting the Ramayana in different Indian languages and present it on the silver screen for global audiences. These two films present two different ways of adapting the epic which have been practiced in the history of Indian cinema repeatedly: loose adaptations of the epic in social and family dramas, and adaptations intended to reflect the true spirit of the epic or the mythological genre. Enhanced visual effects and distribution style of these films make them different from previous loose adaptations and mythological films. Taking the liberty to re-narrate the epic, these films merely aim to glorify Rama and carefully avoid those sections which might question the fame of the protagonist. Thus, the puritanical attitude of both the directors intends to please the right-wing politics and earn profit in a post-pandemic time of ceaseless religious debates, insecurities, and fear.

Pan-Indian cinema emerges as a representative of India to global audiences after the pandemic and represents the country as a Hindu nation. RRR and Adipurush challenge the known history of the nation by claiming the epic as history, and they remind that the epic is quintessential to Hindu identity. They encourage gasconade of the ancient military tactics and learning different lessons of life from Rama and other characters of the epic. The characterisation of Rama in both films follow Valmiki’s version of the epic and they persuade the audiences to consider him as a symbol of the Hindu nation. Constructing a brief history of Hindu military strategy through the adaptation of the Ramayana, RRR mirrors Savarkar’s idea of the Hindu nation and its cultural unity, whereas Adipurush spreads Islamophobia by misrepresenting the hypotext. Along with the series of recent Bollywood films made after 2014, these adaptations of the Ramayana represent inauthentic history of the Hindu nation and challenge Indian Constitution, which considers the country secular. These adaptations do not exist as creativity of the artists in a democratic social scenario, rather they have become instruments of the hegemony to disseminate Hindu nationalism.

Moreover, these two films prove that the Ramayana dominates the cultural imagination of Indians and this attachment encourages the artists to adapt the epic again and again. Valmiki predicts that as long as the sun and the moon reign the sky, the story of Rama will rule on the earth (Bose 2004, 15). The history of Indian cinema proves that the prophecy is not wrong, and in the future, both loose and faithful adaptations of the Ramayana will keep reminding the significance of the epic in India. RRR’s success will inspire more loose adaptations of the epic which might choose their political stance wisely, whereas Adipurush’s failure at the box-office teaches that mythology is a dead film genre and it can survive in television soap operas. Pan-Indian cinema’s eagerness to adapt Hindu epics and participation in the politics to circulate Hindu nationalism encourages re-reading the myths and the history of the nation which can help to understand the politics of adaptation.