Is Chhaava historically inaccurate?

[raajveer]

https://www.indiatimes.com/explainer...ts-651205.html

Vicky Kaushal's Chhaava has ignited quite some criticism online, with viewers calling out glaring historical inaccuracies in the portrayal of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj. From a controversial dancing scene to the omission of the iconic phrase 'Hindavi Swarajya,' fans are questioning the film's authenticity and attention to Maratha history.

Vicky Kaushal steps into the shoes of Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj, a Maratha warrior king, while Rashmika Mandanna portrays his wife, Maharani Yesubai, in the much-anticipated historical drama Chhaava, directed by Laxman Utekar. The recently released trailer has sparked heated debate online, with sharp-eyed viewers calling out glaring historical inaccuracies. From a scene showing Sambhaji dancing to the conspicuous omission of references to Hindavi Swarajya, the portrayal of Marathas' battle against the Mughal Empire is already facing scrutiny.The release of the trailer for Chhaava has ignited a debate online, with fans and critics alike dissecting every frame for historical authenticity—or the lack thereof. 'Why can't people make a realistic historical movie?'One scathing critique read, \"Absolute trash! Why can't we get a realistic historical movie? This era has everything—This period in history is super interesting, Aurangzeb is at his peak, Shivaji has died and Shambhaji has big shoes to fill. There is so much room for drama, intrigue and war. Yet they chose to make this shitty movie with over the top actors shouting at the top of their lungs.\"'Sambhaji was a warrior, not someone who danced for entertainment'The portrayal of Sambhaji dancing in the opening moments of the trailer has particularly ruffled feathers. \"WTF! I lost all momentum as soon as I saw him dancing. How could a Maharashtrian director approve this?\" another viewer lamented.Another wrote, \"I hated it when Sambhaji Raje was shown dancing. Why does Bollywood feel the need to add its touch everywhere? Our king was a warrior and a protector of Dharma, not someone who danced for entertainment.\"'Lack of Maratha accent'Fans have also taken issue with the film's production quality and accents. \"Man, my respect for Ranveer Singh and Sanjay Leela Bhansali just shot up. Vicky's Marathi accent is non-existent, and the sets look cheap. Bhansali is leagues ahead in crafting period dramas,\" wrote one user. Another quipped, \"Rashmika still sounds like she's saying 'Saami' instead of Sambha. The casting feels completely off.\"'Omission of Hindavi Swarajya'Even the omission of the iconic phrase \"Hindavi Swarajya,\" central to the Maratha identity, has drawn ire. The dialogue in the trailer reduces the mantra—\"हे हिंदवी स्वराज्य व्हावे ही श्रींची इच्छा\" (This Hindavi Swarajya is the divine will)—to simply \"हे राज्य व्हावे\" (This kingdom must exist). This sparked outrage among viewers who accused the filmmakers of diluting Sambhaji Maharaj's vision. \"Bollywood has deliberately removed 'Hindavi' to cater to their liberal agenda. This is unacceptable!\" wrote one commenter.\"They used the word Swarajya but not Hindavi Swarajya. It's shameful how they're trying to restrict Sambhaji Maharaj's vision to a regional identity,\" said another.'Historically inaccurate'Others expressed frustration over the shallow representation of the Marathas. \"The Marathas were shrewd and agile warriors who understood their terrain very well. No Mughal could truly penetrate their hill forts and they excelled in guerrilla warfare. I would've loved to see a scene of they planned their strategies. Instead we have the same old crap.\"With its historical inaccuracies, lack of authenticity, and divisive reception, Chhaava seems to have a steep climb ahead if it hopes to win over audiences—especially Maharashtrians who feel their heritage deserves better.