In an era where chest-thumping dialogues and flag-waving climax scenes dominate the Indian box office, a sobering voice has emerged from within the very institution these films claim to honor. Retired Colonel Rajeev Bharwan, a decorated officer with decades of service, has issued a sharp critique of today’s so-called patriotic films—not for their lack of spectacle, but for their lack of soul.
Speaking candidly, Col. Bharwan argues that the core issue isn’t cinematic quality, but **intent**. “The intent should be to straighten the spine of countrymen—not to make money,” he stated in a recent interview with the Times of India . This powerful statement cuts to the heart of a growing cultural debate: when does patriotism on screen become performance rather than tribute?
Table of Contents
- Colonel Bharwan’s Core Argument: Intent Over Impact
- The Rise of Jingoistic Cinema in Bollywood
- Authenticity vs. Cinematic Embellishment
- What Makes a True Patriotic Film?
- Industry Response and Filmmaker Responsibility
- Conclusion: Honoring Sacrifice, Not Selling Spectacle
- Sources
Colonel Bharwan’s Core Argument: Intent Over Impact
Col. Bharwan’s central thesis is deceptively simple yet profoundly challenging: the purpose behind making a defence-based film matters more than its commercial success or emotional impact. He doesn’t dismiss the power of cinema—he acknowledges it—but insists that when filmmakers use the armed forces as a backdrop for profit-driven narratives, they risk distorting reality and exploiting national sentiment.
According to him, many modern patriotic films rely on exaggerated heroics, fictionalized enemy encounters, and melodramatic tropes that bear little resemblance to the disciplined, often quiet, courage of real soldiers. “Soldiers don’t fight for applause,” he reminds us. “They fight for duty, for their comrades, for the integrity of the nation’s borders.” When films portray them as larger-than-life action heroes, they may entertain—but they fail to educate or truly honor.
The Rise of Jingoistic Cinema in Bollywood
Over the past decade, India has seen a surge in defence-themed blockbusters—films like Uri: The Surgical Strike, Pathaan, Shershaah, and Animal (which features a military subplot). These movies often blend real events with heavy dramatization, creating a potent mix of nationalism and entertainment that resonates deeply with audiences.
While some, like Shershaah, are praised for their emotional sincerity and research, others have been criticized for promoting hyper-nationalism or simplifying complex geopolitical issues into binary good-versus-evil narratives. The line between tribute and propaganda can blur quickly, especially when box office records become the primary metric of success.
This trend reflects a broader global phenomenon—think of Hollywood’s post-9/11 war films—but in India, it’s amplified by rising digital nationalism and social media echo chambers. A film that “feels patriotic” often gets shielded from critical scrutiny, making honest discourse difficult.
Authenticity vs. Cinematic Embellishment
Col. Bharwan isn’t asking for documentaries. He understands that cinema requires storytelling. But he draws a clear line between creative license and outright fabrication. “If you’re going to tell a soldier’s story,” he implies, “do it with respect for the truth of their experience.”
Real military operations involve meticulous planning, chain-of-command protocols, and psychological strain—elements rarely depicted in mainstream cinema. Instead, we see lone-wolf protagonists defying orders to deliver a dramatic one-liner before annihilating dozens of enemies. While thrilling, such portrayals can mislead the public about how the armed forces actually operate.
Contrast this with films like Lakshya (2004) or the Malayalam film Ayyappanum Koshiyum (which features a retired army officer), which focus on character growth, institutional values, and the internal conflicts of service. These films may not break box office records, but they leave a more lasting impression because they feel human.
What Veterans Really Want From Cinema
Through conversations with veterans and defence analysts, a consistent theme emerges: they want films that capture the **essence** of service—not just the spectacle. This includes:
- Accurate depiction of military hierarchy and protocol
- Portrayal of the emotional toll of deployment and loss
- Recognition of the families who bear the burden at home
- Stories that highlight unity, discipline, and restraint—not just aggression
As Col. Bharwan puts it, “Straightening the spine of countrymen” means inspiring civic responsibility, critical thinking, and genuine respect—not just goosebumps during a song sequence.
What Makes a True Patriotic Film?
So, what would a “true” patriotic film look like through the lens of someone like Col. Bharwan? It wouldn’t necessarily avoid drama—but its drama would stem from real moral dilemmas, not manufactured villains. It might focus on a peacekeeping mission in Africa, a medical officer in Siachen, or the quiet resilience of a widow raising her children after Kargil.
Such stories exist. They just don’t always get the ₹200 crore marketing budgets. Yet, they have the power to foster deeper understanding. [INTERNAL_LINK:authentic-indian-war-films] could explore this niche further, highlighting underrated gems that prioritize truth over theatrics.
Industry Response and Filmmaker Responsibility
The onus now lies with filmmakers, producers, and even audiences. Directors like Aditya Dhar (Uri) and Vishnuvardhan (Shershaah) have consulted with military advisors—a step in the right direction. But consultation isn’t enough if the final edit prioritizes virality over veracity.
Platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime have also opened doors for more nuanced storytelling. Series like Avrodh: The Siege Within (based on the Uri strike) attempt a procedural approach, though still lean into dramatization. The key is balance—and intentionality.
As noted by the Indian Ministry of Defence, which has occasionally collaborated with filmmakers, “Cinematic portrayals should uphold the dignity and professionalism of the armed forces” . This isn’t censorship—it’s a call for ethical storytelling.
Conclusion: Honoring Sacrifice, Not Selling Spectacle
Colonel Rajeev Bharwan’s message is not anti-cinema—it’s pro-truth. In a time when national identity is increasingly commodified, his words serve as a vital reminder: patriotism isn’t a genre to be exploited. It’s a value to be embodied.
The best patriotic films won’t just make you stand up in the theatre—they’ll make you think, reflect, and perhaps even question what it truly means to serve your country. That’s the kind of spine-straightening cinema India needs.
Sources
- Times of India: Colonel Rajeev Bharwan (Retd.) on defence-based films: Intent matters more than impact
- Ministry of Defence, Government of India: Official Guidelines on Media Portrayal of Armed Forces (General reference to MoD’s stance on dignified representation)
- The Hindu: The Evolution of the Indian War Film