Another day, another controversy from the film industry! This time, it’s not about rewriting an existing film, not by its creator but by artificial intelligence!
Eros International recently announced the re-release of the 2013 romantic drama Raanjhanaa in Tamil titled Ambikapathy on August 1, 2025. But it comes with a twist in the tale as the film has a new AI-generated “happy ending” where the protagonist, Kundan, survives. The original, starring Dhanush and Sonam Kapoor, was a tragic love story between a Muslim girl and a Hindu boy that left a lasting impact, especially because of how it ended with Kundan's death. Even though the film has become a debatable topic over the years for romanticising toxicity, it's ending made the film what it was. Now, it's being altered by AI. But the bigger issue that lies here is that Aanand L. Rai, the director, claims that he wasn’t even informed about this. He learned about the AI-edited version through the news and expressed his heartbreak. For him, it wasn’t just about changing a plot point; it was about erasing intent, vision, and creative collaboration.
While Eros claims they’re well within their rights to do this as they own the film, they’ve missed a fundamental point - just because you can change something doesn’t mean you should. The move, they argue, is innovation; a way to explore new storytelling through tech. And anybody who is pointing out issues with this is involved in negative PR and standing against reinvention in cinema. But when the idea of reinventing doesn't involve consent from the very creator who gave the story its soul, is it really innovation or just exploitation? The timing is suspicious itself as this is happening at a time when Eros is already in a legal dispute with Rai’s Colour Yellow Productions over operational mismanagement and undisclosed financial matters where Rai's production house took some decisions without consulting Eros. Both parties have publicly stated that this is a separate issue.
India’s copyright laws largely favor producers and studios, not filmmakers. Even so, directors have moral rights, something reaffirmed in legal rulings like Kartar Singh v. Sajjan Kumar. But in practice, studios still have the final say, and now, with AI at their fingertips, that power may only grow stronger. Having said that, let's be clear about one thing - AI can be useful. It can help design, assist with world-building, or support storytelling like seen previously in Academy nominated films like The Brutalist. Barring that the usage of AI is limited and disclosed beforehand. But in this case, it isn't being utilized as an assisting tool to build something new; it's being used to rewrite a story, to alter a narrative years later. Which makes you wonder if this is borderline revisionism. After all, when used without the original creator’s approval, it becomes a dangerous precedent.
The situation also gains another layer when you realize that this may not be a one-off. Eros sees this as a "test run." If successful, they plan to revisit more films from their massive library and apply AI edits to more films like Bajirao Masatani, Bhajragi Bhaijaan, Dil Dhadkane Do and so many more. This in turn raises serious concerns about the future of film integrity and who has the authorship in the final say of the film. As Varun Grover rightly pointed out in a satirical take, sharing an old story about Masaan, proving that just because audiences prefer happy endings doesn’t mean every story needs one. Sad endings can have weight, depth, and resonance especially when they are in sync with the theme of the narrative. In Raanjhanaa, Kundan’s death meant something much like Jack in Titanic, his sacrifice gave the story its lasting power.
When asked about the matter, Pradeep Dwivedi, Group CEO, Eros International Media Limited said, “The AI-assisted re-release of Ambikapathy is a legally compliant and creatively respectful alternate edition, not a replacement of Raanjhanaa. Eros holds all exclusive rights to the film and financed it entirely—claims of outside investment are inaccurate. We strongly object to Mr. Aanand L. Rai’s unauthorized use of the 'World of Raanjhanaa' in Tere Ishq Mein and have issued a cease & desist notice. While we respect all creative collaborators, Eros, as the sole rights holder, will protect its IP and legacy against misrepresentation or misuse. Our goal is to honour cinema’s past while responsibly embracing future technologies.”
Note: We’ve reached out to Colour Yellow Productions’ for their official statement on this matter; we’re awaiting their revert on the same.
While Eros doesn’t intend to cause any harm and supports art and artists, this question remains - this controversy isn’t about whether AI should be used in cinema altogether or not; does it need to override the voices that created cinema in the first place? Because if every tragic, complicated, or unresolved ending is polished into something palatable, we risk losing raw, messy, human stories that connect with us the most. Moreover, this is as much about artistic integrity and liberty as much as it is about letting art be art. Because not every film needs to be seen as editable content that can be fitted into a trend. Some stories need to be left untouched, in our opinion.
What do you think about this topic? Tell us your thoughts in the comments below!
For more in-depth stories, follow us on @socialketchupbinge
/socialketchup/media/agency_attachments/2025/01/15/2025-01-15t065936648z-magazine-logo-black.png){kind=logo}
/socialketchup/media/media_files/2025/05/29/sk-magazine-450110.png)
Follow Us/socialketchup/media/media_files/2025/07/28/raanjhanaa-ai-ending-re-release-2025-07-28-17-44-03.png)