Dhanush-Calls-AI-Edited-Raanjhana-Ending-a-Betrayal-Eros-Disputes-Claims-of-Prior-Objection

Dhanush Calls AI-Edited Raanjhana Ending a Betrayal: Eros Disputes Claims of Prior Objection

In a bold decision that has brought back a simmering conversation about artificial technology’s role in the creative industries, Tamil actor Dhanush has publicly condemned the AI-altered re-release of his 2013 blockbuster Raanjhana. Eros International decided to take it upon themselves and change the character’s fate. 

Eros maintains the edit ‘‘legal interpretations’’ but the backlash has been considerable, with filmmakers, fans, and legal experts expressing a serious degree of outrage and sparking questions about the ownership of creativity in an environment infused with Artificial Intelligence. 

Dhanush's Fired-up Rejection 

On August 3, 2025, Dhanush took to X (formerly Twitter) to voice his frustration: "This alternate ending has taken away the film's very heartbeat. The parties involved continue regardless of whether I liked or disliked it." He noted that a lack of oversight on AI manipulation could lead to telling stories without meaning and called for more consultation that encourages collaboration. His remarks echo earlier statements made by Aanand L. Rai, who described the edit as a "sloppy hijacking" of his original purpose.

Dhanush X ( Twitter post) re-release of Ranjhaana with an AI edit, how he was disturbed. (Source: ndtv.com )

Fan Reactions 

Fans were supportive of Dhanush for fighting for artistic intent, with tweets saying, "Kundan's death was the core of the story". Fans of mediated endings or new media suggested the happy ending "resonates with modern audiences", showing the split between audience members.

Legal and Creative Ethics: Eros's Response

Pradeep Dwivedi, CEO of Eros, defended the studio's action further, saying that the studio owns the IP and maintains 100% under the Indian copyright law. The AI re-edit of the film is described by Dwivedi as an "exploratory baby step" in the act of reimagining the classics; he even compared it to Hollywood's use of AI to de-age actors. Relevant arguments come from both parties:

  • Eros argues that Rai renounced his moral rights when he signed the contract, which Rai disputes.
  • Eros has labelled the AI film as an "alternate cut," similar to director's cuts.

However, legal professionals cite India’s ruling in Kartar Singh v. Sajjan Kumar (2022), affirming that a director's moral rights extend past the conclusion of production—complicating Eros's defense.

Industry Reactions

  • "Kabir Khan and Varun Grover both regarded Eros's action as 'unethical.'"
  • Legal action is being explored by organisations like the Indian Film & Television Directors' Association.

International Considerations:

This dispute has plenty of echoes with the concurrent 2023 strikes in Hollywood, where all guilds fought to stop AI from scriptwriting, likeness copying, etc. As soon as AI makes content into a remixable asset around the world, the lack of a regulatory framework in India leaves creators vulnerable.

A Moment of Reckoning for Cinema?

The Raanjhanaa fiasco illustrates a cultural ruler: studios looking to exploit AI to commercially reinvent, while the artists look to protect the continuity of their legacy. With Eros expected to do similar edits to over 3000 films, the industry is in for a reckoning. As Dhanush posts triumphantly again for the love of cinema, the battleground is defined, not only in courts but also within audiences' hearts everywhere.