Eros International is facing backlash for re-releasing a 2013 hit, Raanjhanaa, with an AI-altered ending. The studio changed the tragic climax where the male lead dies, making him survive instead.
The issue started on August 1, when the Tamil-dubbed version titled Ambikapathy hit cinemas in Tamil Nadu with this new ending. Kundan, played by Dhanush, opens his eyes and stands up, reversing the film’s original death scene.
Soon after, director Aanand L Rai slammed the move. He called it “deeply disrespectful” and “a reckless takeover that strips the work of its intent, its context, and its soul.” Rai and Dhanush said the AI edit disturbs the film’s core and artistic integrity. 
Dhanush stated:
“This alternate ending stripped the film of its soul.
The re-release has completely disturbed me.”
“Raanjhanaa is not the film I committed to 12 years ago.”
“The use of AI to alter films is a deeply concerning precedent for both art and artists [that] threatens the integrity of storytelling and the legacy of cinema.”
Rai added on Instagram:
“Let me say this as clearly as I can: I do not support or endorse the AI-altered version … It is unauthorised.
And whatever it claims to be, it is not the film we intended, or made.”
“This was never just a film to us. It was shaped by human hands, human flaws, and human feeling.”
“To cloak a film’s emotional legacy in a synthetic cape without consent is not a creative act.
It’s an abject betrayal of everything we built.”
Eros International stands by its decision. CEO Pradeep Dwivedi said the AI re-release is “a creative reinterpretation, clearly labelled and transparently positioned.” He emphasized that Eros holds copyright and “full legal and moral rights” under Indian law.
Dwivedi also said:
“This re-release is not a replacement – it is a creative reinterpretation, clearly labelled and transparently positioned.”
“Eros is uniquely positioned to bridge cinematic legacy with future-ready formats.”
“We embrace generative AI as the next frontier in responsible storytelling.”
“Reimagining the movie’s ending is augmented storytelling, a wave of the future.”
The debate revolves around legality versus ethics. While Eros claims full legal rights to alter the film, critics argue it is unethical to change a movie without creators’ consent.
Mayank Shekhar, film critic, said:
“What’s left then is simply the legalese of who owns the copyright, or who paid for the product, and is hence the sole producer, and therefore the owner of the work.”
“Technically, I suppose, or so it seems, what Eros has done isn’t illegal – it’s certainly unethical.”
Film experts warn this move could mark the start of AI-edited movies altering original artistic works. Professor Richard Allen at City University of Hong Kong said:
“If producers think they can make more money out of old content by using AI, they will do so.”
AI has been used before for CGI, dubbing, and restorations, but this is the first time a studio has re-cut a film’s ending and released it in theaters using AI.
The controversy spotlights the urgent need for clear legal and ethical guidelines around AI’s role in storytelling and copyright. For now, the debate rages on — and so does Raanjhanaa with its new AI ending.
