Bollywood Hungama

Is Ramayana benefiting from Adipurush's failure? The surprising advantage nobody is talking about

When Adipurush was released in June 2023, it was expected to be one of the biggest cinematic events of the year. Starring Prabhas, Kriti Sanon and Saif Ali Khan, the Om Raut directorial attempted to bring the timeless story of the Ramayana to a new generation through modern visual effects and large-scale filmmaking. The expectations were enormous. So was the disappointment. Despite a massive opening, Adipurush faced widespread criticism over its visual effects, dialogues, characterisation and treatment of the source material. Its theatrical performance declined sharply after the initial enthusiasm, turning what was supposed to be a landmark cinematic event into a cautionary tale for the industry. Three years later, another ambitious adaptation of the same epic is preparing to arrive in cinemas. Nitesh Tiwari's Ramayana: Part One, starring Ranbir Kapoor, Yash and Sai Pallavi, is scheduled to release on November 5, 2026. The film has been mounted on an enormous scale and carries expectations that extend far beyond conventional box-office success. Interestingly, however, the failure of Adipurush might have given Ramayana an unexpected advantage. Could one film's disappointment have created the perfect opportunity for another to succeed? Adipurush proved that the audience was there One of the most important lessons from Adipurush is often overlooked. Despite the controversies that surrounded the film after its release, it generated enormous initial interest. Audiences turned up in large numbers during the opening weekend, demonstrating the tremendous curiosity surrounding a big-screen adaptation of the Ramayana. This is significant because Adipurush did not fail due to a lack of familiarity with its subject. On the contrary, the story was already deeply embedded in Indian culture. The film benefited from that recognition, along with Prabhas' popularity and the promise of a large-scale spectacle. The problem emerged when audiences began evaluating the execution. The criticism surrounding the visual effects, dialogues and creative choices suggested that familiarity with the source material was not enough to guarantee sustained commercial success. In other words, Adipurush demonstrated both the extraordinary potential and the considerable risks of adapting the Ramayana. And that is precisely why its failure could work in favour of Nitesh Tiwari's film. The audience now knows exactly what it doesn't want Before Adipurush, the makers of a modern Ramayana adaptation faced a difficult creative challenge. How should such a revered story be presented to contemporary audiences? How much creative liberty would viewers accept? Could modern dialogue and visual effects make the epic more accessible without compromising its emotional and cultural identity? The response to Adipurush offered some important clues. A section of the audience objected strongly to what it perceived as inappropriate dialogues, unconvincing visual effects and departures from familiar characterisations. These reactions were not necessarily representative of every viewer. However, their intensity demonstrated how deeply audiences care about the way these characters are portrayed. For the makers of Ramayana, this creates an opportunity. They have the benefit of observing the public response to another expensive adaptation of the same story. Of course, there is no public evidence that the makers have altered their creative approach specifically because of Adipurush. But the broader lessons are difficult to ignore. Sometimes, a competitor's failure can provide valuable information about what the market expects. From disappointment to redemption There is also an interesting psychological dimension to the situation. When audiences are disappointed by a film based on a beloved story, their attachment to that story does not necessarily disappear. In fact, disappointment can sometimes increase the desire to see the material adapted successfully. This is where Ramayana could benefit. A section of viewers who were dissatisfied with Adipurush may be particularly interested in discovering whether Nitesh Tiwari's film delivers the cinematic experience they had hoped for. The possibility of finally witnessing a visually impressive and emotionally satisfying adaptation could become an important part of the film's appeal. Why the casting could make a difference The casting of Ramayana also offers an interesting contrast. Ranbir Kapoor plays Lord Rama, Sai Pallavi portrays Sita and Yash takes on the role of Ravana. The film also features Sunny Deol as Hanuman and Ravie Dubey as Lakshman. Each actor brings a distinct screen image and audience following. However, the more important question is whether the performances will convince audiences that they are watching the characters rather than merely recognising the stars. This was one of the central challenges facing Adipurush, and it will remain equally relevant for Ramayana. The visual-effects challenge The scale of Ramayana has attracted considerable attention, particularly because of its association with Prime Focus Studios and DNEG. The involvement of a globally established visual-effects company raises expectations of a technically sophisticated production. But Adipurush demonstrated that spending heavily on visual effects does not automatically guarantee audience approval. The challenge is not merely to create spectacular imagery. It is to create a believable cinematic world in which the visual effects complement the performances and storytelling. Audiences must feel emotionally connected to Ayodhya, Lanka and the characters inhabiting these worlds. The film must ensure that spectacle serves the story rather than overwhelming it. Could Adipurush also become a disadvantage? There is another side to this argument. The failure of Adipurush may have made audiences more cautious about expensive mythological spectacles. Viewers who felt disappointed in 2023 could approach Ramayana with greater scepticism, particularly when it comes to visual effects, dialogues and the portrayal of revered characters. This means Nitesh Tiwari's film may face more scrutiny than it otherwise would have. Every major promotional asset could be examined closely. Comparisons with Adipurush may become inevitable, even if the two films differ significantly in their creative approach. Moreover, the immense expectations surrounding Ramayana create an additional challenge. Merely being better received than Adipurush would not be enough. Given the scale of the project, the film will need to establish its own identity and deliver an experience that justifies its ambitions. The real lesson from Adipurush The biggest takeaway from Adipurush is not that audiences have rejected mythological cinema. Rather, it is that the audience's attachment to a beloved story cannot be taken for granted. The familiarity of the Ramayana can generate extraordinary curiosity, but sustained box-office success requires compelling storytelling, convincing performances and strong word of mouth. This distinction is especially important for Ramayana, which is planned as a two-part cinematic event. The first instalment must not only succeed commercially but also establish sufficient audience confidence and emotional investment to sustain anticipation for the sequel. A spectacular opening weekend would be an achievement. But strong collections in the subsequent weeks would offer much more convincing evidence that the film has connected with viewers. Adipurush may have shown the industry what audiences did not want. Ramayana now has the opportunity to show them what they were waiting for. And if Nitesh Tiwari and his team manage to deliver on that promise, the disappointment of 2023 could become an unexpected chapter in one of Indian cinema's biggest success stories. Also Read: Ramayana Promotion: Lord Rams grand bow on display at PVR Palladium in Mumbai