Bollywood, India’s Hindi-language film industry, has a long history of remaking hit films from South India’s Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, and Kannada cinemas. In recent years (post-2010 especially), this trend has surged with official Hindi remakes of blockbuster South Indian movies. From intense dramas like Kabir Singh to thrillers like Drishyam and sports films like Jersey, Bollywood is increasingly turning to southern hits for inspiration. This phenomenon raises a debate: Are these remakes a form of cultural fusion that brings regional stories to a wider audience, or simply a commercial shortcut (a “cash grab”) that recycles proven hits without adding value?
In this deep analysis, we will examine the motivations behind Bollywood’s remake trend, compare the original films with their Hindi remakes in terms of story, cultural nuances, box office success and critical reception, and assess whether the trend represents genuine creative exchange or mere formulaic business. The goal is to provide an insightful look at how these adaptations fare and what they mean for Indian cinema as a whole.
Contents
- Bollywood’s Love for South Indian Remakes
- Why Remakes? Commercial and Creative Drivers
- Cultural Nuances: Lost in Translation or Preserved?
- Original vs Remake: Box Office and Reception
- Case Study: Arjun Reddy vs Kabir Singh
- Case Study: Drishyam – Malayalam to Hindi
- Case Study: Jersey – From Telugu to Hindi
- Ups and Downs: Successes, Failures, and Changing Trends
- The Road Ahead: Cultural Fusion or Commercial Shortcut?
Bollywood’s Love for South Indian Remakes
Remakes of South Indian films are not new in Bollywood, they’ve been around for decades. However, the 2010s saw an unprecedented wave of South-to-Hindi remakes becoming mainstream hits. Many of Bollywood’s biggest stars headlined such projects. For instance, Salman Khan delivered blockbusters like Wanted (remake of Telugu film Pokiri), Bodyguard (Malayalam Bodyguard), Ready (Telugu Ready), and Kick (Telugu Kick). Ajay Devgn found success with Singham (Tamil Singam) and later Drishyam (Malayalam Drishyam), while Akshay Kumar struck gold with Rowdy Rathore (Telugu Vikramarkudu) and Holiday (Tamil Thuppakki). These films dominated the box office, proving that a hit story in one language can find a huge audience in Hindi when packaged with Bollywood’s scale and stars.
This love for remakes stems partly from Bollywood’s desire to tap into stories that have already proven their mass appeal. South Indian cinema has been churning out fresh ideas, larger-than-life action, and gripping narratives that sometimes outshine Bollywood’s own offerings. Rather than risk investing in untested material, Hindi producers often acquire remake rights of southern hits, confident that with the right Bollywood star and marketing, the film can repeat or even amplify the success nationwide. By the late 2010s, almost every major South Indian blockbuster was promptly eyed by Bollywood, either to remake or at least to emulate its style.
Why Remakes? Commercial and Creative Drivers
Several factors drive Bollywood’s remake trend, both commercial and creative:
- Proven Success Formula: A southern hit comes with a ready blueprint of success, a story that audiences have already loved. Remaking such a film in Hindi is seen as a safer bet for producers. Instead of gambling on a completely new script, they bank on an established storyline, hoping to replicate the box office magic in the much larger Hindi market. In essence, it’s like recycling a blockbuster script with a new coat of paint for a wider audience.
- Wider Audience Reach: India’s linguistic diversity means many great Tamil, Telugu or Malayalam films don’t reach Hindi-speaking masses due to the language barrier. An official remake can serve as a bridge between regional and national audiences, packaging the narrative in a language and style that North Indian viewers are more comfortable with. This is often touted as a cultural exchange: a way to share a brilliant story with all of India (and the diaspora) by overcoming the subtitle/dubbing hesitation of some viewers.
- Star Power and Reinvention: Sometimes a Bollywood star is looking for that one strong script to reinvent their image or ensure a hit. South films provide attractive material, for example, Shahid Kapoor tapped into the angry-young-man template of Arjun Reddy to reinvent himself in Kabir Singh. For actors, a remake can be an opportunity to deliver a powerful performance in a story that’s already acclaimed, potentially earning both commercial rewards and critical notice.
- Creative Collaboration: In some cases, remakes are done with close involvement of the original creators, suggesting a creative motive beyond money. The original director might helm the Hindi version as well (e.g. Sandeep Vanga directed both Arjun Reddy and Kabir Singh; Gowtam Tinnanuri directed Jersey in Telugu and Hindi). This indicates a desire to retain the story’s soul and present it to a new demographic. Such collaborations can be a form of cultural fusion, where the filmmaker adapts their own story to a different milieu.
- Content Hunger in Bollywood: Especially in the 2010s, Bollywood was criticized for leaning on franchises, sequels, and remakes, sometimes due to a dearth of fresh original scripts making it to production. Remaking South Indian hits became a quick way to fill the content pipeline with tested material. It’s a convenient shortcut, if Bollywood writers aren’t coming up with enough novel blockbusters, why not import one from Chennai or Hyderabad?
Overall, the drive to remake is a mix of risk reduction, admiration for the original content, and the lure of profit. But the true test comes in execution, how well does Bollywood adapt these stories for its audience?
Cultural Nuances: Lost in Translation or Preserved?
One major concern in remaking regional films is whether the cultural nuances and context of the original survive the translation. South Indian movies often carry the flavor of their setting, be it the dialect, social norms, humor style, or local traditions. When these films are transplanted into Hindi, filmmakers must decide what to change for North Indian sensibilities and what to retain as-is.
In some cases, remakes strive to faithfully preserve the essence of the original. For example, Drishyam’s Hindi version kept a similar small-town setting and even maintained elements like the protagonist’s love for cinema (which was a charming aspect of the original Malayalam character). By keeping these details, the remake tries to deliver the same emotional impact and authenticity, just in a different language. When done right, a Hindi remake can make the audience feel the same thrill or joy that the regional audience felt, essentially achieving a cultural fusion, two regions connected by a common story.
However, often certain subtleties do get lost. Comedy films, for instance, suffer if the humor relies on wordplay or regional quirks. A joke that had Tamil audiences rolling with laughter might fall flat in Hindi if not adapted cleverly. We’ve seen remakes that simply translate dialogues without adapting context, leading to awkward or watered-down scenes. Cultural references might be swapped out, a festival celebration, a proverb, or a social custom in the original might be replaced with a North Indian equivalent. Despite best efforts, some of the original’s charm can be hard to reproduce. For instance, a movie rooted in the ethos of a village in Andhra Pradesh may not evoke the same feel when moved to a town in Uttar Pradesh, the milieu and lived reality of people differ.
Moreover, Bollywood’s style can creep into the remakes. South films sometimes have a different narrative rhythm, they might be more melodramatic or longer in runtime. Bollywood adaptations might tighten the pacing, add flashy song-and-dance numbers, or tone down accents and idiosyncrasies to suit Hindi audiences. In doing so, they risk diluting the original flavor. A case in point is Bholaa (2023), the Hindi remake of the Tamil hit Kaithi. The Tamil original was lauded for its gritty, no-nonsense storytelling set in one night without any songs. The Hindi version added elaborate action sequences, visual effects and a couple of item-style songs. Many viewers felt this shift in tone made Bholaa a louder, less grounded film, essentially losing the raw appeal that made Kaithi special.
You May Also Like to Read
On the flip side, a successful remake can also elevate certain elements with bigger budgets and production design. For example, a thrilling action scene from a Telugu film might be executed with more polish in Bollywood, or music composers might create a new soundtrack that becomes a chartbuster nationwide (as happened with Kabir Singh’s music). Thus, adaptation involves a balancing act: retaining the core narrative and emotions (so that the story’s identity remains intact) while tweaking settings, character backgrounds, and presentation to resonate with Hindi-speaking audiences. The end result varies, some remakes manage a seamless cultural translation, while others feel like something was “lost in translation” during the journey from South to North.
Original vs Remake: Box Office and Reception
When examining whether Bollywood remakes elevate or dilute the originals, two key metrics to consider are box office performance and critical/audience reception. A remake’s success can be quantified by its earnings compared to the original, and qualified by how viewers and critics responded to it. Often, Hindi remakes gross much more in absolute terms than the regional originals, thanks to the broader market, but bigger earnings do not always mean better reception. In some cases, a remake makes money but earns harsher critical feedback (or vice versa).
Below is a comparison of a few prominent South Indian films and their Bollywood remakes, highlighting their approximate box office collections and outcomes:
| Original Film (Language, Year) | Worldwide Gross | Hindi Remake (Year) | Worldwide Gross | Verdict (Original vs Remake) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arjun Reddy (Telugu, 2017) | ₹51 crore | Kabir Singh (2019) | ₹379 crore | Hit vs Blockbuster |
| Drishyam (Malayalam, 2013) | ₹65 crore | Drishyam (2015) | ₹110 crore | Blockbuster vs Hit |
| Jersey (Telugu, 2019) | ~₹45 crore | Jersey (2022) | ~₹27 crore | Hit vs Flop |
| Vikram Vedha (Tamil, 2017) | ~₹60 crore | Vikram Vedha (2022) | ₹135 crore | Hit vs Underperformed |
| Vikramarkudu (Telugu, 2006) | ~₹50 crore | Rowdy Rathore (2012) | ₹203 crore | Hit vs Blockbuster |
| Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo (Telugu, 2020) | ~₹280 crore | Shehzada (2023) | ₹47 crore | Blockbuster vs Flop |
(Note: Gross figures are approximate and for overall context. “Worldwide Gross” indicates total collection globally. Verdicts like Blockbuster/Hit/Flop are relative to each film’s budget and industry expectations.)
Looking at the table, one pattern is clear: Bollywood remakes often vastly out-gross the originals in rupee terms. For instance, Kabir Singh turned a Telugu hit that earned ₹50 crore into a nationwide sensation grossing nearly ₹380 crore, an enormous jump. Similarly, Rowdy Rathore earned four times what the Telugu Vikramarkudu did, and Hindi Drishyam comfortably exceeded the Malayalam original’s earnings. The larger Hindi market and star power amplify the box office potential. From a financial perspective, one could argue these remakes “elevate” the reach of the story, bringing in many more viewers and revenue than the regional film could.
However, the financial success is not guaranteed for every remake. The table also highlights remakes that failed to live up to expectations: Jersey (Hindi) made only a fraction of the Telugu original’s earnings and was deemed a flop, despite the original being celebrated. Shehzada, the remake of a Telugu blockbuster, collapsed at the box office, suggesting that audiences didn’t accept it. Even Vikram Vedha (2022), though earning more rupees than the Tamil version, underperformed relative to its big budget and star cast, so it wasn’t a success in Bollywood terms. These cases show that a remake can also dilute the impact or simply not entice audiences if it’s seen as redundant or inferior.
Critical reception often mirrors these outcomes. Many remakes receive mixed or tougher reviews compared to the originals. Where the original southern film might have been lauded for originality and authenticity, the remake might be criticized as a lesser copy or for not bringing anything new. On the other hand, some remakes are praised if they manage to capture the spirit of the original or even improve certain production aspects. It’s a case-by-case scenario, which is best explored through specific examples. Below, we delve into three major remake case studies in detail to see how each fared in storytelling, cultural adaptation, audience love, and box office performance.
Case Study: Arjun Reddy vs Kabir Singh
One of the most talked-about remake pairs in recent times is Arjun Reddy (the Telugu original) and Kabir Singh (its Hindi remake). Arjun Reddy (2017) was a Telugu-language romantic drama written and directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga, starring Vijay Deverakonda as a brilliant but volatile medical student spiraling into self-destruction after a heartbreak. The film, with its raw and unfiltered portrayal of an arrogant, troubled protagonist, became a cult hit in Telugu cinema. It was praised for its bold storytelling and Deverakonda’s powerful performance, though it also sparked debate for glamorizing toxic masculinity. With a modest budget, Arjun Reddy earned around ₹50–51 crore worldwide, a big success for a regional film of that scale, and gained a devoted fan following.
The success of Arjun Reddy caught Bollywood’s attention, and in 2019 a Hindi remake titled Kabir Singh was released. Notably, the same director (Vanga) helmed the remake, and Shahid Kapoor was cast in the lead role of Kabir, essentially the Hindi version of Arjun Reddy’s character. Kabir Singh remained extremely faithful to the source, it was almost a scene-by-scene remake, merely transposing the setting to Delhi/Mumbai instead of Hyderabad. The protagonist’s name and some local details changed, but the plot, character traits, and even much of the screenplay were nearly identical to Arjun Reddy. The remake’s soundtrack, however, was new and turned out to be a huge asset, with songs like “Bekhayali” and “Tujhe Kitna Chahne Lage” becoming nationwide hits and helping draw audiences.
In terms of box office, Kabir Singh was a phenomenal success. It grossed about ₹379 crore worldwide, making it one of the highest-grossing Bollywood films of 2019. This means Kabir Singh earned roughly seven times more than Arjun Reddy, a clear case of a remake amplifying a story’s commercial reach. From a business standpoint, the remake undeniably elevated the original’s success to another level, turning a regional hit into a pan-Indian blockbuster.
However, critical and audience reception presented a more nuanced picture. Audiences in the Hindi belt turned out in huge numbers, indicating that the story of a flawed, angst-ridden lover resonated or at least intrigued a wide demographic. Many viewers who hadn’t seen the original were gripped by the intense love story and Shahid Kapoor’s committed performance. On the other hand, Kabir Singh was met with intense critical scrutiny, even more so than the Telugu film. What was a controversy in Hyderabad became a nationwide discussion in Mumbai, numerous critics panned the film for glorifying misogyny and problematic behavior by the hero.
You May Also Like to Read
The same issues existed in Arjun Reddy, but Kabir Singh brought them to the forefront of mainstream discourse. Some reviewers praised the film’s craft and Kapoor’s acting but lamented the lack of modification in the remake, an opportunity, perhaps, to tone down or comment on the toxic aspects was missed. Instead, the Hindi version was arguably even more indulgent of its lead character’s rage and entitlement.
So, did Kabir Singh elevate or dilute Arjun Reddy? The answer can be split: commercially and in terms of exposure, it elevated it massively. Culturally, one could argue it did a bit of both – it took a regional story to a far larger audience (cultural fusion), but it did so almost verbatim, without adding new nuance or sensitivity (suggesting a cash-grab mentality of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”). The remake didn’t really offer a new interpretation; it was content to ride on the original’s shock value and drama.
For fans of Arjun Reddy, Kabir Singh was gratifyingly similar, but for critics, Bollywood missed a chance to reinvent the material in a more responsible or creative way. Nonetheless, the enormous popularity of Kabir Singh demonstrated that a compelling story from Telugu cinema, even one steeped in local college culture and attitude, could captivate the all-India market when presented with a Hindi-speaking star.
Case Study: Drishyam – Malayalam to Hindi
Drishyam is a fascinating example of a story that transcended linguistic barriers through remakes in multiple languages. The original Drishyam (2013) was a Malayalam film directed by Jeethu Joseph, starring the legendary Mohanlal as Georgekutty, an everyman cable TV operator who goes to extraordinary lengths to protect his family after a sudden crime. The film is a suspense thriller with a strong family sentiment at its core, and it was celebrated for its clever plot and emotional depth. Drishyam became a milestone in Malayalam cinema: it was the first Malayalam movie to gross over ₹50 crore, marking a huge success in Kerala and beyond. Critics lauded it as one of the best thrillers in Indian cinema, praising the screenplay’s twists and Mohanlal’s nuanced performance as a simple man hiding dark secrets.
The universal appeal of Drishyam’s story, an underdog outwitting the authorities to save his family, made it ripe for remakes. It was officially remade in multiple languages: Kannada, Telugu, Tamil, and eventually Hindi. The Bollywood version, also titled Drishyam, released in 2015, featured Ajay Devgn in the lead role (renamed Vijay Salgaonkar) and was directed by Nishikant Kamat. The setting shifted to a small town in Goa, and the protagonist’s background was tweaked slightly (for instance, Ajay’s character runs a cable TV business like in the original, but the milieu is Goan with a mix of Konkani cultural elements). Tabu played the role of the determined police inspector (a part essayed by a male actor in the Malayalam version, making the character female in Hindi added a new dynamic).
The Hindi Drishyam stayed remarkably true to the original’s narrative, including many signature moments and the overall resolution. Dialogues were in Hindi (with a bit of Konkani flavor in Goa), but the screenplay didn’t stray far, a wise choice, as the mystery was already perfectly constructed. Culturally, the film adjusted small details: for example, in Malayalam the family’s religion and context were Christian (common in Kerala’s story setting) whereas in Goa the Salgaonkar family is also Catholic, this parity meant the remake carried over subtle elements like the feast of a church or phrases like “Papa” for father, which fit both locales. Such details helped preserve authenticity. In essence, Drishyam in Hindi achieved a tightrope balance, it transplanted the story in a new soil without losing its roots.
Reception and box office: The Hindi Drishyam (2015) performed well, though not explosively, in theaters. It grossed around ₹110 crore worldwide, which is higher than the Malayalam original’s approximate ₹65 crore, but within the range of a modest hit by Bollywood standards. It wasn’t a blockbuster in 2015, but it was considered a success (especially since it was more content-driven than a typical song-and-dance Bollywood fare). Critically, the remake got positive reviews for being a faithful, engaging thriller. Many noted that Ajay Devgn delivered a restrained and effective performance, and Tabu’s portrayal of the steely cop won much acclaim.
For audiences who had never seen the Malayalam film, the plot was a revelation and the movie became quite beloved over time (it gained even more popularity in later television and digital viewings, turning somewhat cult). Those who had seen Mohanlal’s Drishyam inevitably compared the two, some felt Mohanlal’s version had a slight edge in terms of the protagonist’s lovable everyman charm, but others appreciated the Hindi version for its high production quality and strong acting across the board.
Importantly, Drishyam’s story continued beyond one film, and so did the remake trend. In 2021, a Malayalam sequel Drishyam 2 came out, continuing the original story years later. The sequel was again brilliant and well-received (released directly on streaming due to the pandemic). Bollywood picked it up promptly, and Drishyam 2 in Hindi hit theaters in 2022 with the same Ajay Devgn and cast reprising their roles. This time, the Hindi sequel became a blockbuster, grossing over ₹300 crore worldwide, far exceeding even the first installment. This success underlines that the Drishyam narrative truly struck a chord with Hindi audiences, so much so that even a sequel (essentially a remake of the Malayalam sequel) drew huge crowds.
In a way, this represents a very genuine cultural fusion: a Malayalam story and its continuation have now been absorbed into mainstream Hindi cinema’s fabric. Audiences discuss Vijay Salgaonkar’s tactics as eagerly as Malayali fans did Georgekutty’s, showing that the remake managed to recreate the original’s magic and perhaps even amplify it in popularity.
Drishyam is a case where the Bollywood remake elevated the original story’s reach without diluting its essence. It respected the source material and delivered it effectively to a new audience. If one views the remake as a form of homage and cultural exchange, Drishyam fits the bill, it wasn’t a lazy cash grab; it was a well-crafted adaptation of a great story that deserved to be told widely.
Case Study: Jersey – From Telugu to Hindi
Not all remakes strike gold, as illustrated by the heartfelt sports drama Jersey and its Hindi version. The original Jersey (2019) is a Telugu film directed by Gowtam Tinnanuri, featuring Nani in the lead role. It tells the emotional story of a failed cricketer, Arjun, who decides to make a comeback in his mid-30s to fulfill his young son’s wish and in the process redeem his own life. Jersey is as much an underdog sports tale as it is a poignant father-son drama, and it was widely praised for its realistic portrayal of cricket, nuanced storytelling, and an incredibly moving climax.
Critically, it was one of the best Telugu films of 2019, and it won awards (including a National Film Award for Best Feature Film in Telugu). At the box office, Jersey performed well, though it wasn’t a mega-blockbuster by commercial standards, it grossed roughly ₹45–50 crore worldwide, which qualified as a super-hit in the Telugu market given its moderate budget and genre.
Given the film’s acclaim, Bollywood was quick to adapt Jersey. Uniquely, the same director Gowtam Tinnanuri was brought on to direct the Hindi remake, an indication that the producers wanted to retain the original vision. Released in 2022, the Hindi Jersey starred Shahid Kapoor (in the role analogous to Nani’s) and Mrunal Thakur, with veteran actor Pankaj Kapur in a key supporting role. The remake stayed very true to the source, much like Kabir Singh did with Arjun Reddy.
The storyline, scenes, and even many dialogues followed the Telugu version closely. The setting was shifted to Chandigarh (with the cricket context being Indian domestic cricket rather than specifically Hyderabad cricket, which is a minor change since the structure of cricket tournaments is similar nationwide).
Despite the pedigree and good intentions, Jersey (Hindi) unfortunately flopped at the box office. It managed around ₹20–27 crore in lifetime collections, which was far below expectations and not even break-even for its production budget. This was particularly striking because Shahid Kapoor was coming off the massive success of Kabir Singh; many assumed Jersey would ride that wave. Instead, a combination of factors hurt the remake’s prospects. Timing was one, it released in April 2022, just as theaters were recovering from the pandemic lull, and crucially it was sandwiched around the release of KGF: Chapter 2, a Kannada-origin pan-India film that was dominating cinemas at that moment.
Jersey got postponed a couple of times (it was originally slated for late 2021, then delayed), which dampened the marketing momentum. By the time it arrived, the target audience perhaps had either seen the Telugu original (available on streaming platforms) or were simply not in the mood for a slow-burn emotional film, preferring the high-octane entertainment of KGF 2.
Critically, the Hindi Jersey actually received decent reviews, many critics appreciated the touching story and Shahid Kapoor’s earnest performance as a retired cricketer struggling against odds. However, there was also a sentiment that the remake offered nothing significantly new to those who knew the original. It was almost too faithful and therefore predictable. Unlike Kabir Singh, which had the advantage of a sensational, controversial hero to pique curiosity, Jersey is a gentle film, its strength lies in surprise emotional punches.
You May Also Like to Read
For viewers who already knew the twist or climax from the Telugu version, the Hindi remake inevitably felt less impactful. In essence, while the original Jersey left audiences teary-eyed and inspired, the remake, though well-made, couldn’t recreate the same magic at the box office.
This case suggests that a remake can dilute the aura of the original by its mere redundancy. Jersey was a beloved film in Telugu, and by the time the Hindi version came, that love had percolated to many non-Telugu cinephiles through word-of-mouth and streaming. The Hindi film didn’t do anything markedly different, so for a chunk of the potential audience, it was a story they either already experienced or heard about in detail. Without the novelty, and absent any big “Bollywoodized” changes to create new buzz, Jersey (Hindi) struggled. It serves as a cautionary tale: even with the original director and a committed cast, a remake must justify its existence to the audience, either by reaching those completely unfamiliar with the story or by adding a fresh spin. Otherwise, it may come off as a commercial attempt to capitalize on an existing hit’s reputation, and today’s viewers are quick to dismiss such efforts.
Ups and Downs: Successes, Failures, and Changing Trends
The experiences of Kabir Singh, Drishyam, and Jersey illustrate that Bollywood remakes of South Indian films can be both triumphant and underwhelming. This pattern is echoed by numerous other examples in the past decade:
- Big Successes: In addition to those already discussed, films like Singham (2011, adapted from Tamil) became cultural phenomena in Hindi, spawning an entire cop-franchise. Rowdy Rathore (2012, from Telugu) was a roaring success, proving that mass masala action from the South could wow Hindi audiences if delivered with charisma (Akshay Kumar’s swagger in this case). Salman Khan’s series of remakes in the early 2010s (Wanted, Ready, Bodyguard, Kick) all turned out to be box office bonanzas, effectively establishing a template: a larger-than-life hero, catchy music, and crowd-pleasing action, often lifted straight from the Southern original. These successes likely encouraged Bollywood to continue looking southwards for ready-made hits. They demonstrated that a well-made remake could boost a story’s scale and even sometimes improve on technical aspects due to bigger budgets.
- Notable Failures: On the other hand, not every remake struck gold. Himmatwala (2013), a remake of a 1980s Telugu hit, flopped badly, critics and audiences panned it for outdated storytelling, suggesting that what worked in the 80s wouldn’t necessarily work in 2013, remake or not. More recently, Laxmii (2020), adapted from the Tamil horror-comedy Kanchana, faced a similar fate: it released on streaming during the pandemic and was critically slammed for its loud, unfunny treatment (the original was no masterpiece either, but it had a certain local charm which the remake couldn’t emulate). In 2022, Bachchhan Paandey (a remake of Tamil dark comedy Jigarthanda) fizzled out despite Akshay Kumar’s star power, many felt the remake missed the quirky essence that made the original a cult favorite.
- Mixed or Unexpected Outcomes: Vikram Vedha (2022) is an interesting case, directed by the same duo who made the original and starring big names Hrithik Roshan and Saif Ali Khan, it earned decent reviews and had all the ingredients of a hit. Yet, it underperformed commercially. The Tamil original Vikram Vedha (2017) was widely acclaimed and known for its twisty narrative of a cop and a gangster in a moral duel. By 2022, a lot of the urban Indian audience had already seen or at least heard in detail about the original (thanks to streaming and subtitles). The Hindi version, while well-made, held little surprise for those viewers, and for the rest, perhaps the promotions didn’t excite enough beyond the notion of “remake of a great film”. This showed that even quality remakes can struggle if the novelty factor is missing.
- Audience Evolution: The mixed fortunes of remakes in the past few years point to a broader trend, the Hindi film audience is evolving. With the rise of OTT platforms, language barriers are crumbling. It’s now common for Hindi-speaking viewers to directly watch Telugu or Kannada hits on Netflix, Amazon, or in dubbed satellite TV showings. Blockbusters like Baahubali, KGF, Pushpa, and RRR were consumed widely across India in their original or dubbed form, without needing a Hindi remake. In fact, these films’ massive success in Hindi (dubbed) theatrical releases delivered a message: audiences are open to non-Hindi films if they are entertaining and accessible. This naturally reduces the appeal of a remake, why wait years for a Hindi version when you can enjoy the original with subtitles a few months after its release?
- Recent Flops and Industry Rethink: Post-2020, we’ve witnessed a string of high-profile South remakes flopping in Bollywood, triggering much introspection in the industry. Examples include Shehzada (2023, remake of the Telugu Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo) which barely crossed ₹30 crore net in India despite the original being a blockbuster, audiences found it redundant and less charming than Allu Arjun’s original. Selfiee (2023, from Malayalam Driving Licence) was another disaster, showing that even a popular star like Akshay Kumar couldn’t draw people to a story they felt they had effectively already seen. Ajay Devgn’s Bholaa (2023, from Kaithi) performed only moderately, far below Ajay’s previous remake success with Drishyam 2. Trade analysts have pointed out that since the pandemic, out of all the remakes Bollywood has released, an overwhelming majority have underperformed or outright failed. The old formula of “remake a hit, get a hit” seems to be breaking down.
This changing fate of remakes suggests that Bollywood’s reliance on this strategy might be nearing a crossroads. What once was a surefire formula is now uncertain. Audiences send a clear signal when they reject a remake: they crave either original content or a truly fresh take on existing content, not a scene-by-scene replay. That said, when a remake does click (like Drishyam 2 did), it shows there is still space for them, but perhaps with caveats.
The Road Ahead: Cultural Fusion or Commercial Shortcut?
So, do Bollywood’s South Indian remakes represent cultural fusion or are they merely cash grabs? The truth lies somewhere in between, and it is shifting with time. In the earlier part of the 2010s, one could argue these remakes were a win-win: Bollywood got successful films to please its audience and make money, while stories born in regional cinemas got pan-Indian exposure, a form of cultural exchange through cinema. Many Hindi film viewers discovered the richness of South Indian storytelling thanks to remakes (some even went back and watched the originals out of curiosity). There was genuine appreciation involved, evidenced by the fact that Bollywood producers paid for official rights and often involved the original creators, treating the material with respect.
However, as we move into the mid-2020s, the scales are tipping. The practice of carbon-copy remakes is increasingly seen as a commercial shortcut that lacks creativity. Audiences and critics alike have grown more vocal: why recycle old hits instead of investing in new scripts or ideas? The “cash grab” label gets applied when a remake seems to exist solely to capitalize on a famous title, without offering any new perspective. For instance, if a film just copies and pastes the original into Hindi with a known Bollywood face, viewers often sense the cynicism behind it. The reception of films like Shehzada or Laxmii makes it evident that the audience can discern a lazy remake from an inspired one.
You May Also Like to Read
From an industry perspective, there’s a bit of soul-searching happening. Bollywood has seen some of its biggest recent successes coming from original content (Pathaan, Gangubai Kathiawadi, etc.) or from collaborating with Southern cinema in new ways (for example, Hindi stars working in South films or vice versa, and pan-India projects made jointly). Meanwhile, South Indian industries have become more aggressive in marketing their films nationally, reducing the need for Hindi remakes. In interviews, many trade analysts have noted that the era of easy remakes might be winding down, viewers simply have too much access to the originals now. As Komal Nahta, a noted trade expert, observed, South Indian films are available on so many platforms that Hindi remakes have started to feel irrelevant. If you can stream the Malayalam Drishyam or Telugu Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo on your phone with subtitles, a remake two years later must offer something truly extra to justify itself.
That doesn’t mean remakes will vanish entirely. There will always be filmmakers drawn to certain stories who believe they can adapt them in a meaningful way for a new cultural context. When done with passion and vision, a remake can still be a form of cultural fusion. It can highlight common themes across regions, love, family, justice, ambition, while celebrating differences in backdrop and flavor. A good remake can make a story “our own” for a different set of viewers. For example, Drishyam’s success in Hindi did not take away from the Malayalam film’s legacy; instead, it created two parallel classics, each cherished in their domain.
Moving forward, one might expect Bollywood to be more selective with remakes. The focus could shift to quality over quantity, only adapting those stories that have a wide appeal and reinventing them enough to offer novelty. We may also see remakes that serve as vehicles for artistic exchange: perhaps Bollywood directors remaking South films with a distinct directorial spin, or blending casts from both industries (trends that are slowly beginning). If remakes become a canvas for creativity, rather than a copy-paste exercise, they could very well represent cultural fusion.
On the other hand, if the sole motive is quick commercial gain, audiences will likely continue to reject them. The Indian audience is sending a clear message that they won’t be patronized with second-hand content unless it’s presented with genuine effort and relevance. In a country as diverse as ours, cultural exchange through cinema is a wonderful concept, but it has to be done with authenticity. Simply remaking a movie for profit, without cultural sensitivity or originality, is being called out now more than ever.
In conclusion, Bollywood’s adaptation of South Indian cinema has ridden on both sentiments. It has given us some memorable films and brought regional gems to the national stage (a true cultural fusion in those instances). Yet, it has also seen instances of formulaic rehashing, which amount to little more than chasing money on the back of someone else’s creativity. The ongoing challenge for filmmakers is to ensure that if they do choose to remake a film, they do it for the right reasons, to tell a great story in a new way, and not just because it’s a proven hit. Only then can remakes transcend the “cash grab” tag and be viewed as genuine creative works that contribute to India’s rich tapestry of cinema, uniting audiences across linguistic and cultural lines.