Business In Tragedy: Bollywood Capitalises On Operation Sindoor

Khoon Bhari Maang, a 1988 film by Rakesh Roshan starring Rekha, employs a deeply symbolic title that emerges almost unexpectedly from the film's narrative. The title underscores the history of its protagonist Aarti, who marries a man who later attempts to murder her for her wealth. The central line of her hair, where sindoor (vermillion) is traditionally applied by a married Indian woman, becomes symbolically filled with blood바카라�blood for which she ultimately seeks vengeance. Sindoor, substituted by blood, becomes a haunting symbol of attempted murder. The visual that flashed across our screens after the Pahalgam attack was that of a woman sitting beside her dead husband, who was shot by militants targeting innocent civilians. It was a visual that evoked anger, sorrow, and collective mourning among Indians.

India's response to this attack was the initiation of Operation Sindoor, a mission whose name carried a symbolic meaning. In Hindu society, when a husband dies, the wife traditionally removes the sindoor from her central hairline바카라�therefore, the name of the Army op echoed the visuals of a widowed Himanshi Narwal sitting beside Lt Vinay Narwal's body in Pahalgam. According to The New York Times, "The Indian government's choice of the name Operation Sindoor signaled its intention to avenge the widowed women." From here, Operation Sindoor took on both a personal and national urgency바카라�to protect and avenge the killing of one's fellow citizens. The name of the Army op, in a certain sense, becomes symbolically evocative of the movie Khoon Bhari Maang, leading the reel and the real from different periods to converge within a specific symbol바카라�a maang filled with blood, culminating in vengeance. In the aftermath of the operation, sindoor바카라�both as a singular material and in its affiliation with Operation Sindoor바카라�has had a rather profiteering impact on Bollywood and the recent Cannes Film Festival, where prominent Indian actresses walked the red carpet, prominently wearing sindoor in their maang. It reveals how cinema (as narrative and culture) and reality cohabit as interconnected spheres, shaped by and shaping the actions of movie stars in response to real-world events.

The Rush to Trademark and Right to Filmmaking

The aftermath of Operation Sindoor saw a rather frivolous and superficial reaction from professionals in the entertainment industry. Soon after the Indian military announced a mission named Operation Sindoor, several individuals and companies, in a classic Bollywood move, hurried to secure legal rights to the name. Among the first was Reliance Industries, owned by Mukesh Ambani, which filed a trademark application on May 7바카라�the day the operation was revealed. This was confirmed through the Ministry of Commerce's trademark search system.

Three others also submitted applications in the same trademark category, filed under Class 41, which allows the name to be used for entertainment purposes, such as making and sharing films, videos, or digital content. The trademark website claimed that Reliance planned to use the name to create and distribute various media formats. Once this news circulated across social networks and news channels, the public came out criticising these companies, terming them 바카라�insensitive and opportunistic바카라�. Amidst the furore, Reliance Industries withdrew their application, stating that it was 바카라�filed inadvertently by a junior person without authorisation.바카라�

At present, Bollywood is in a state where its innovation and creativity are being questioned or are simply not resonating with the masses. In such circumstances, Operation Sindoor becomes a profitable plot for filmmakers, who aim to make a business out of national issues. This is not a new kind of response; cinema allows such events to be archived and embedded into public memory. It is not wrong for filmmakers to express an intention to portray such a significant national event. However, their timing and immediate rush to trademark the operation reeks of opportunism바카라�their move comes across as insensitive and purely business-minded, not recognising the emotional cost people bear in the wake of such devastating events.

Most filmmakers consider such historical and national events for financial momentum, to generate national interest rather than truly capture the essence of what transpired. At the very least, the immediate rush to trademark the event has created this impression. A few weeks ago, while tensions between India and Pakistan escalated, Nicky Vicky Bhagnani Films and The Content Engineer announced a new movie titled Operation Sindoor. The movie poster showed a female soldier with her back to the camera. She was holding a rifle in one hand and using the other to apply sindoor to her forehead. The background depicted tanks, explosions, and fighter jets바카라�giving it a war-like feel. Later, Uttam Maheshwari, the filmmaker, shared an apology on Instagram. He said he didn't mean to upset or offend anyone by announcing the film. He explained that he was making the movie not for money or fame, but because he was deeply inspired by the bravery, sacrifice, and strength of India's soldiers and leaders.

Recently, actor and author Twinkle Khanna wrote about rumors she read concerning Akshay Kumar's interest in making a film on Operation Sindoor. In her column for The Times of India (TOI), Twinkle Khanna shared that she saw several tweets claiming her husband, Akshay Kumar, was fighting with actor Vicky Kaushal over who would make a film on Operation Sindoor. Curious and slightly annoyed, she asked Akshay about it: "I can test paneer with an iodine solution바카라�but what is the litmus test for the truth?" she wrote. After seeing all the tweets, she called Akshay and said, "I just read that you are fighting with Vicky Kaushal over who gets to make a movie on Operation Sindoor." Akshay responded, "It's fake news, and my leg is on fire, so I will call you later." Twinkle joked that he could have devised a better excuse if he wanted to end the call. But later, when Akshay came home with a bandage on his leg, Twinkle realized he wasn't making it up바카라�he had gotten injured during a scene. She said how hard it is to tell what's true: "Nowadays, it is so difficult to figure out what is true that I look at every piece of information suspiciously."

Through such speculation, a national catastrophe becomes a topic of business, opportunities, and rumors바카라�while innocent people get killed in the conflict. Such eyeball-grabbing headlines create a whole spectrum of conjecture, where, even before the conflict is fully comprehended or absorbed, film professionals rush to make the most of a tragedy. No event in India is ever completely spared from ludicrous, insensitive, and frivolous reactions바카라�both from the entertainment industry and those on social media platforms, tarnishing the larger image of those who practice filmmaking.

Operation Sindoor at the 78th Cannes Film Festival

At the latter phase of this controversy surrounding Operation Sindoor is the recently concluded 78th Cannes Film Festival. Though the festival has no organic connection with Operation Sindoor, two prominent Indian actresses attending the festival echoed its symbolism in their red-carpet appearances. Both Aditi Rao Hydari and Aishwarya Rai Bachchan conspicuously wore sindoor as they faced the cameras. It was assumed to be a continuation of the support already being shown by the movie stars to the Army op. While Aditi paired it with a red saree, Rai wore it alongside Manish Malhotra's masterpiece saree. Though it is not uncommon for Indian actresses to wear sindoor on the red carpet, the timing of this gesture has led many to speculate whether it was a conscious signifier.  The move comes across not just as a cultural or traditional act, but as a conscious political statement on an international platform.

The internet has been overwhelmed with debate and analysis over the presence of sindoor at Cannes. Many Indian actors and actresses strongly supported and appreciated Operation Sindoor when the conflict was at its peak. This reaction from celebrities was met with criticism, and fans from the neighboring country even threatened to unfollow them. However, the Indo-Pak conflict stirred strong emotions among citizens on both sides of the border, and public figures were unapologetically articulating theirs on social media.

In the case of Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, some even speculated that she had worn sindoor as a response to long-standing rumors of her separation from her actor husband, Abhishek Bachchan. Whether or not the sindoor worn by these movie stars is a subtle or direct expression of solidarity with Operation Sindoor is debatable. Yet, their decision to wear it on an international platform amplifies awareness around the Indo-Pak conflict. It establishes how movie stars can act as catalysts in spreading an issue into various spaces바카라�social media platforms, cinema, newspapers, and film festivals.

Another Indian influencer, Sonam Chhabra바카라�a social media influencer and actress바카라�also walked the Cannes 2025 red carpet this year and garnered considerable attention, though not all of it was positive. Her outfit was meant to honour the Indian Army, but many online did not receive it. She wore a white cape with the names of major terror attacks in India, like "Mumbai 2008, Uri 2016, Pulwama 2019, and Pahalgam 2025." The cape also featured the word "Unbroken," symbolising India's strength and resilience. In a post, she wrote: "Returned to the Cannes Red Carpet for the second time wearing this outfit I'd call 'Phoenix Rising'바카라�a symbol of strength and rising from the ashes!" But after pictures of her look went viral, many on social media criticised the outfit. Users called it "shameful, not tribute," "not respectful at all" with "naam pairo mein aa rahe hain", "an insult to our brave soldiers," and even described it as a "hideous outfit."

Bollywood has created a new layer of discourse around Operation Sindoor바카라�with or without criticism, subtly or directly, in language or visually through art. It has circulated through the mouths, texts, and actions of Indian movie stars and filmmakers. These reactions and actions sometimes help elevate the seriousness of such events, but the same responses can also dilute their gravity. Regardless of the consequences, filmmakers and movie stars continue to act in ways that benefit their business image바카라�though many do so also as responsible citizens, minus the imprudent rush to trademark Operation Sindoor.

 Akishe L. Jakha is a Film and Media scholar from Nagaland, specializing in popular cinema and regional cinematic culture.