No denying that there were two kinds of lobbies trying to declare this film a flop even before it reached the audience. Both failed, not because of blind, hate-filled fandoms, but because of the exceptional craft of both the actor (Ranveer) and the director.
I personally feel this is the same lobby that is hyping the terrorist Raiham Daikat (Akshay was good, but there was nothing to root for) to discredit the film’s theme of patriotism and Ranveer as the lead. The intent seems to be to push the narrative that people are watching the film not for the actor, the craft, or the nation, but for mindless bravado centred on a terrorist.
Ranveer has undeniably done the heavy lifting. As an audience, we experience the film through his lens....we feel with him. As I said earlier, if he had failed to connect with the audience, nothing could have saved the film.
Tbh, the whole Ranveer vs Ranbir debate ends with script choices. Ranbir is aligning himself with directors like Luv Ranjan and Vanga, known for their misogynistic views, to prop up an otherwise forgettable career. Ranveer, on the other hand, is taking risks by working with a director known purely for craft and a strong sense of nationalism.
I’m the last person to discredit Ranveer. Off-screen shenanigans aside, he has genuinely gained a fan in me through this performance.
Originally posted by: catchm-ifucan
I agree...Both the movies are essentially what they are because of their directors...
However, who do you think would've taken the fall if ,God forbid , the movie was a flop? Just so that you know, there were obituaries being written for Ranveer's career even before the movie was released calling it a disaster and a wannabe Animal and what not and that his career is all but finished and now he can only do the OTT content as a supporting actor...smiley5..Not the director, not the other supporting cast....
Sample this:
https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/bollywood/5378583/my-box-office-predictions-for-dhurandhar
).

6