Adipurush has been the subject of various controversies since its creation in 2022. In particular, the film has often been criticised by many actors and other critics for its use of modern-day language and theological inaccuracies, both in the film's scenes and its character modifications. The modification of dialogue and the misinterpreted depiction of the
Ramayana have led to a broad sense of
moral panic amongst various Hindu organisations, which have called for a ban on the film.
Allahabad High Court on Adipurush The
Allahabad High Court criticised the filmmakers for portraying religious characters (including Rama and Hanuman) in an objectionable manner and characterised the film as testing the tolerance of Hindus. The Court also noted that all the characters of the
Ramayana, who are worshipped by Hindus, are largely shown in a "pathetic way". The Court inquired as to what made the
Central Board of Film Certification pass such a film, stating that the CBFC committed a "blunder" by certifying it.
Public Interest Litigation was filed on 23 June 2023, seeking to stop broadcast of the film on streaming platforms. The petition alleges that the film hurts the religious sentiments of a "large section of society" due to the dialogue used by the characters in the film.
Reactions after the teaser release Right after the teaser was released in October 2022, the makers were criticised for its poor VFX, provided Saif Ali Khan's look as Ravana with a beard made social media users question if he was playing Ravana,
Babur or
Alauddin Khalji in the film. BJP spokesperson
Malavika Avinash criticised Om Raut for 'misrepresentation' of Ramayana, depicting Raavana with "blue eye makeup and is wearing leather jackets". Madhya Pradesh Home Minister
Narottam Mishra criticised the teaser with comments on Hanuman's look in the film and stated to write a letter to Om Raut to remove all such scenes from the film. If not removed, he will consider legal action. Actor Arun Mandola also stated his views as director (Raut) failed to understand the Indian audience and accused the makers for copying scenes from
Game of Thrones,
Planet of the Apes and
The Jungle Book.
Prem Sagar, son of director
Ramanand Sagar also criticised the teaser, stating if the project was offered, he would have rejected due to "his upbringing and culture". He further added, "How can you stop anyone from creating anything?". Actress
Dipika Chikhlia, who portrayed Sita on Doordarshan's
Ramayan also criticised the teaser, stating she did not approve the VFX and there has been altercations to the epic. Actor
Sunil Lahri, who played Lakshman in Ramanand Sagar's television adaptation of the
Ramayana, commented in lieu of the VFX and its depiction, that nonsense in the name of religion will never be tolerated. Amidst the controversy, director Om Raut defended the teaser and kept his views that he was unhappy with the reactions from audiences and other celebrities for criticising the teasers and story and stated its not made for cellphones. Actress Kriti Sanon also defended the teasers, stating, "that the film is not just about the teaser but there is a lot more to it." After the criticism, the makers asked for some time for improving the VFX and its quality, which may cost an additional 100 crore, as per reports.
Reactions on the film's posters Aftermath of the teaser controversy, it was stated that the film's poster was also copied from an animation firm Vaanar Sena Studios and they claimed that they were not given any credit for the same. Also the studio claimed that the poster of Adipurush was a direct rip-off of their animated film
Lord Shiva. In March 2023, a new poster was released, which created another controversy. The new poster was criticised for looking like an "animated film". Another poster was also criticised for hurting the religious sentiments as according to the
Ramcharitmanas, all the characters of the Ramayana wear a sacred thread called
Janeu, which is worn by those who follow the Hindu religion, however in the posters it was not worn by the characters played by
Prabhas,
Sunny Singh and
Devdatta Nage.
Dialogues of Adipurush Manoj Muntashir wrote the dialogues of Om Raut's film
Adipurush. The dialogues of the film were criticised for being too flippant or unserious and containing modern-day slang and lingo in a setting from centuries ago. Lines like "jalegī tere bāp kī", "terī buā kā baghīcā hai kyā", and "Laṅkā lagā deṁge" being uttered by gods did not go down well with a large section of the viewers as the whole story of the film has destroyed and modified every aspect of the core values of the characters, their language and each authentic event. The petition filled in the high court demanded that the film malign the image of deities by using foul language in the dialogues spoken by the actors portraying Hindu gods. "They cannot be allowed to go scot-free in the name of Freedom of Speech and Expression." His brother, Moti Sagar, too felt that the makers could have been more 'careful' in their approach towards the epic. "Certain dialogues, which I am reading on the news and on Twitter, I can say they could have been careful," he told
PTI. One of the lines in the film, which refers to Sita as "
Bhārata kī beṭī", has caused anger among the people of
Nepal. This is because Sita is believed to have been born in
Janakpur, which is located in present-day Nepal. Although the filmmakers agreed to remove that particular dialogue from the film, another inaccurate statement about the sovereignty of Nepal has further infuriated the Nepalese people. In an interview on
Aaj Tak, Manoj attempted to dismiss the claims of the Nepalese people by incorrectly stating that Nepal was a part of "Bharat" until 1904 and mentioned that it separated from "Bharat". Manoj has been accused of misrepresenting historical facts, leading to calls for a ban on all Hindi films in Nepal.
Shiv Sena (UBT) MP
Priyanka Chaturvedi criticised the makers for allegedly using "pedestrian dialogues" in the film. She also demanded an apology from the film's makers and said that the dialogues were disrespectful to the characters of the Hindu epic
Ramayana. Similarly,
Chhattisgarh Chief Minister
Bhupesh Baghel alleged that dialogues in the film are "objectionable and indecent" and questioned the "silence" of political parties which call themselves the custodian of religion, an apparent jibe at the
BJP. When asked by reporters whether the state government will ban this film, Baghel said, "The government will think about it (ban) if people will raise a demand in this direction". Responding to the criticism, Manoj Muntashir defended his work. In an interview with
Republic World, he said, "It is not an error. It is a very meticulous thought process that has gone into writing the dialogues for
Bajrangabali and for all the characters. We have made it simple because we have to understand one thing if there are multiple characters in a film, all cannot speak the same language. There has to be a kind of diversion, a kind of division." Muntashir also mentioned, "When our grandmothers narrated the tales of Ramayana, they used this language. The dialogue that you mentioned, priests and narrators used to say that in the same way I have written. I'm not the first one to write this dialogue, it's already there." However, later he announced that it had been decided that some lines of the dialogue in the film would be altered. In a statement on Twitter, he concluded, "I can give countless arguments in favour of my dialogues, but this will not reduce your pain. Me and the producer-director of the film have decided that some of the dialogues which are hurting you, We'll revise them, and they'll be added to the film this week. May Shri Ram bless you all!"
Backtracking and making contradictory statements In a video, which went viral on social media, Muntashir said: "If people think we are trying to modernise the Ramayan, I want to tell them that not at all. We have presented the Ramayan just like how people heard in stories during their childhood." In a more recent interview, he said, "The film's name is Adipurush. We have not made the Ramayan; we are just inspired by it," he said.
Claiming that Hanuman is 'not a god' In another interview with Aaj Tak, Muntashir said, "Lord Hanuman is not God but a mere devotee. We made him God because his devotion had that power." This statement led to a political slugfest, where the
AAP and
Congress attacked the governing
BJP for "blessing" the film whose makers don't consider Bajrangbali as God. While the
Shiva Purana specifically refers to Hanuman as an 'incarnation' of
Shiva, other Puranas and scriptures provide alternative perspectives. According to these sources, Bajrangbali is commonly regarded as the spiritual son of
Vayu, the deity of wind, or as an incarnation of Vayu himself. In some instances, Hanuman is also identified as an avatar of
Rudra, another name associated with Shiva.
Ban in Nepal After the release of the film, a dialogue in the film referring to Sita as the "daughter of India" created a controversy in
Nepal. The Mayor of Kathmandu,
Balen Shah banned the film, stating that the birthplace of Sita was shown in the film as being in India rather than Nepal. After the film was banned in Kathmandu, the film was also banned in
Pokhara. Police personnel were deployed across 17 halls in Kathmandu to ensure that no Hindi film was screened, as the dialogues in the film remained unchanged. However, a court in Nepal lifted the ban on Hindi films in various regions of the country. The court asked the authorities to not halt the screening of Hindi films including
Adipurush in the cinemas of Nepal. The judgment was not taken well by Kathmandu Mayor Balendra Shah, who first imposed the ban. He said that he is ready to face any punishment but will not allow the screening of the film.
FIR On 18 June 2023,
Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha lodged an
FIR with the
Hazratganj police against the producers and cast. In his complaint, Hindu Mahasabha national spokesperson Chaturvedi said that the film was a deliberate attempt to insult Hindu sentiments by distorting the images of Hindu gods with offensive dialogues, and costumes. ==See also==