faddy brother!! aap itna siyana kab se hogaya yaar well said!! that is precisely my point of view, even I did like some of prev VVC work highly and still think, AB is very capable actor, who has prooved his metal, even without VVC or MANI RATNAM or RGV were born!

Mutiny, mutiny! What did you think of Viruddh? I liked it, though I found it similar to Dhoop, which I liked more.

what a joke!! man must be junkie!!

Why all this Eklavya bashing? Sure, it isn't the classic VVC claimed it would be, but I have yet to find one of his movies unwatchable. This flick had an excellent cast and engaging narrative. Only person I found out of sorts was Boman Irani, who was overacting too much. But that's likely cause of all the buffoon roles he has been doing his last 3 years in Bollywood.
At the very least, VVC flicks are always entertaining. And after the inordinately long Umrao Jaan last year, I found Eklavya a nice crisp short length.

Maybe that was its key box office disaster status factor? Indian audiences tend to prefer more mins/rupee.

I think people end up fighting too hard for or against anything: Eklavya, I think, is "good, not great," but many critics loved it; naturally, then, the "other side" came in to say it's utter trash — . If a movie's generally hated, some group usually comes in to say that's it's "phenomenol." Again, I liked Eklavya, but did feel it fell short of (my) expectations; I definitely did not thing it's garbage.

That was written by Taran Adarsh. I don't care what he has to say, he's a joke to say the least. Eklayva was not viewed as a "Pan's Labyrinth" by most of the western critics who saw it. But I can see why that UCLA screening went down well with the audience. It was probably the first time they saw a "bollywood" film that was different from what they thought, that surpassed their expectations, because to them bollywood films are thought to be rather mediocre. So Eklavya would be a breath of fresh air to them. I know a few Brits who saw Eklayva and was surprised with how different it was to the usual bollywood films they've seen. We the Zulm.net critics on the other hand watch many Indian films and I think we have a better idea of what is and isn't a good Indian film.

Anyway, my views on Eklavya remain the same. It was good, but not great and Amitabh's film all the way. But for VVC to work on it for 6 years and give us the end result, that it was disappointing.

Agreed and agreed -- .

why should we care how long it took to make a movie? if it's good, it's good.
agreed, if it doesn't meet one's expectations, a person has the right to say so. and yep, if i'm a fan of a director, i generally become anxious (my expectations rising) for the end product the longer i wait for it, but i've learned also to stop this madness over the years.
the more hyped up or delayed something is, the worse you'll feel about spending your money on it.
PERFECT EXAMPLES:
1) Dhoom 2 - one of the worst sequels in history, next to Superman 3; made the first popcorn flick look like the Mona Lisa
2) Umrao Jaan (remake) - It's confirmed. JP Dutta had lost his mind
3) Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam - Not horrible, but a major let down after an auspicious debut by Bhansali (he has redeemed himself somewhat since then)
4) Mohabbatein - OK, to be fair, nothing can live up to DDLJ as a debut, but this one seems like it was written by a 10 year old; no wonder Aditya has not directed a flick since
Aside: No, I did not intend for Aishwarya to be in each of the above, and this is not a reflection on her specifically
5) Baabul - Baghban was no classic, but it is great family cinema. Baabul was just slow and boring drivel, that took forever to get to its point

RARE EXCEPTIONS:
1) Lage Raho Munnabhai - The wait was not actually too much, and despite the fact that I could not get seats to it for 4 weeks, what a totally fun blast
2) Black - I did think it was over the top melodrama at times, like all Bhansali works, but what a great sock you in the face flick

Just giving my opinion on your opinions, Ali_ikram:

I thought Dhoom 2 was more entertaining than Dhoom, which, too, I liked. That said, the former's ending has to be one of the worst ever conceived by a filmmaker.

I haven't seen Dutta's Umrao Jaan, but I hear it's good (besides, I thought the "old one" [starring Rekha] was boring [albeit having great songs]).

Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam, for its "kind" of film ("artisitc romance," I suppose), was very good.

I don't have a particular leaning for this sort of cinema ("big-bidget romance"), but, as far as it's concerned, Mohabbatein worked as well as possible; that is, I liked it.

Baabul had a shitty climax (barring Amitabh Bachchan), but Baghban had ridiculously shitty moments sprinkled throughout. Amitabh Bachchan, there, too, was one of the few saving graces.

I very much liked Lage Raho Munnabhai, and quite liked Black (so, I basically agree with you, there).

Dhoom 2 was more entertaining than the first one, mainly because I didn't like the first one, the second one was not much better but Hrithik Roshan's character was probably the only good thing in Dhoom 2...oh and Brazil.

Dutta's Umrao Jaan was not really that bad, but not too good either. I'm not as big a fan of the first one than some others are.

Goes to prove the age old adage, "To each his own".

Sad part though is there are very few all time blockbusters that I enjoyed as much as the general populace.
a) Dhoom 2
b) HAHK
c) Sholay
d) Gadar

IMO, they're all average at best.
I guess I just have poor taste.

I loved Gadar when I saw it (at the time it was released), but amn't sure how much I'd like it now. Hum Aapke Hain Kaun...? also worked for me (and sort of still does), though I haven't a clue as to why. Dhoom 2 was quite great throughout, but really bit the shit out of at the end with its sheer stupidity (the last ten minutes or so have to be some of the dumbest to ever have been recorded on film). Sholay is magnificent -- one of the best movies ever made, internationally.

Eklavya is India's entry to Oscars --

Waaaaaaaaaa! Yawwnnnnnn

Ali