Talk:Main Vaapas Aaunga

I'm sorry in what way is this universal acclaim...changing to generally positive reviews. Voraciousdolphins (talk) 15:59, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

We cite reputed media publication in describing the acclaim the film has received from critics (and audiences, if available in the citation).

Quoting from the Hindustan Times article that has been cited:

"Starring Diljit Dosanjh, Naseeruddin Shah, Vedang Raina and Sharvari, the film opened to positive reviews from both critics and audiences".^[1]

References

Honeybrowneyes (talk) 09:40, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

This is an old talk page comment when the page said "universal acclaim"; and "positive reviews" ≠ "universal acclaim." Voraciousdolphins (talk) 18:53, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

It's not accurate to say positive from both critics and audiences.

It received mixed to positive from critics, positive from audiences. 2/5 ≠ positive reviews.

It's inaccurate to say the movie is a "sleeper hit"; I know that language was used by a newspaper, but it has barely made back its budget. Including that context is important when calling it a "sleeper hit."

Let us discuss here and refrain from editing it into oblivion. If I see changes again in this regard, I will message you on your talk page. Voraciousdolphins (talk) 08:03, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I've already quoted the citation in above topic, hence I'd refrain to repeat but still add reference for the sake of the archives in future.^[1]

It's inaccurate to say the movie is a "sleeper hit";

If there is a citation available for the same, why would it be inaccurate?^[2]

I know that language was used by a newspaper, but it has barely made back its budget.

That is your personal opinion, which I respect wholeheartedly, however an opinion is an opinion.

It still doesn't change the fact that Main Vaapas Aaunga is the 8th highest-grossing Hindi film of 2026.

Including that context is important when calling it a "sleeper hit."

Infobox exists right at the top with both the budget and the box office i.e. worldwide box office gross.

How is repeating the same figures at slightly bottom to the infobox, helping to bring context? It is rather confusing, as to why the budget and box office figures being mentioned outside of Infobox and Box Office sub-section within Reception section (unless it is a milestone like 1000 Crore Club).

Furthermore, it is not like only Hindustan Times has called the film a sleeper hit.

• NDTV^[3] :

Main Vaapas Aaunga has been declared a 'sleeper hit'.

• News18^[4] :

Mahesh Bhatt has praised Imtiaz Ali's Main Vaapas Aaunga, calling the sleeper hit an "act of rebellion" and applauding its emotional depth and quiet storytelling.

Main Vaapas Aaunga has emerged as a sleeper hit, and the movie directed by Imtiaz Ali continues to impress audiences in theatres. As the movie grows at the box office, Mahesh Bhatt has lauded the Sharvari and Vedang Raina starrer.

• NDTV again^[5] :

Imtiaz Ali's Main Vaapas Aaunga has truly been the dark horse nobody expected, emerging into the kind of victory that it has. The term that has once again resurrected itself with this film is 'sleeper hit'.

• Sacnilk^[6] :

Main Vaapas Aaunga has officially completed its three-week run at the box office, emerging as a certified sleeper hit.

• The Week (Indian magazine)^[7]

Its performance classifies it as a 'sleeper hit', demonstrating how exceptional audience appreciation and recommendations can lead to sustained box office growth, reminiscent of films like "Queen" and "12th Fail."

This kind of performance places "Main Vaapas Aaunga" in the exclusive category of "sleeper hits."These are movies that begin with modest collections but continue to grow because audiences strongly recommend them to others. Instead of fading after release, they build momentum over time.

References

Honeybrowneyes (talk) 10:56, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for all the citations, appreciate the work you put into this response.

I am not disputing that it is not a sleeper hit. But it is not a sleeper hit in the way that 12th Fail was a sleeper hit, which more than made over its budget. This movie has not done so yet, and many people on Wikipedia only read the first broad paragraph, in which calling it a sleeper hit would be misleading to say the least.

Plus, what is your problem in including the box office numbers? Other people agreed it was good.

You did not really address the characterization of the critics' reviews, which you characterize as fully positive. That is seriously not the case.

• The Indian Express (Shubhra Gupta) gave it 3/5 stars, noting that while its "intentions are noble," the film "meanders, especially in the first half". [1]
• The Hindu noted that the film "occasionally trades subtext for overt messaging," finding it less nuanced than Ali’s best work. [[https://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/movies/main-vaapas-aaunga-movie-review-imtiaz-ali-naseeruddin-shah-diljit-dosanjh/article71088701.ece 1], [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFabGVtzQZ0&t=182 2]]
• Baradwaj Rangan described it as a "nice movie with many nice bits" that ultimately "don't add up to an emotionally affecting movie," specifically pointing out that the modern-day track felt weaker than the flashback sequences.https://baradwajrangan.wordpress.com/2026/06/15/imtiaz-alis-main-vaapas-aaunga-is-a-nice-movie-with-many-nice-bits-that-dont-add-up-to-an-emotionally-affecting-movie/
• India Today was more severe, with a headline labeling it "The weakest Imtiaz Ali film," criticizing the writing for the younger cast.

Voraciousdolphins (talk) 19:02, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for all the citations, appreciate the work you put into this response.

You're welcome.

I am not disputing that it is not a sleeper hit. But it is not a sleeper hit in the way that 12th Fail was a sleeper hit, which more than made over its budget.

Wikipedia has encyclopaedic articles of films that fulfill the notability guidelines.

It is not a trade analysis website, to analyze in-depth which movie has made its budget and which hasn't.

Also, by this logic, a Bollywood film also recovers its budget with OTT rights deal, satellite rights deal, music rights deal and brand tie-ups and product placements and overseas and distribution deals. We should also start including that for "context", shouldn't we?^[1]

This movie has not done so yet, and many people on Wikipedia only read the first broad paragraph, in which calling it a sleeper hit would be misleading to say the least.

I have already mentioned enough citations, stating it explicitly that Main Vaapas Aaunga is a sleeper hit. Let me repeat, because you refuse to acknowledge, calling assertions by prominent journalists and a trade analysis website (Sacnilk) "misleading."

NDTV^[2], News18^[3], NDTV again^[4], Sacnilk^[5] and The Week (Indian magazine)^[6].

Plus, what is your problem in including the box office numbers?

Personal attacks are unnecessary. I have already mentioned why the box office figures are usually only mentioned in Infobox and Box Office sub-section of Reception unless it has reached a milestone like 1000 Crore Club.

Other people agreed it was good.

Who are these "other people" and where have they "agreed it was good"?

You did not really address the characterization of the critics' reviews, which you characterize as fully positive. That is seriously not the case.

Because the Critical Response sub-section of Reception section exists for the same. We mention as many reviews from the reputed media publications there as possible, with a diversity of review ratings.

E.g. Quoting Cocktail 2 article:

It received mixed reviews from critics and emerged as 5th highest-grossing Hindi film of 2026.^[7]

Quoting The Times of India article (Ref. above) that was cited for it having received 'mixed reviews from critics.'

The movie opened to mixed reactions from the audience and critics; however, it still managed to score a good box office score.

But, a critic at Bollywood Hungama gave the film 4 stars out of 5, appreciating the performances of Shahid Kapoor, Kriti Sanon and Rashmika Mandanna.^[8]

By your logic, each and every review has got the place to be characterized at the top of the article, making the description that is supposed to be brief, too lengthy. Honeybrowneyes (talk) 01:03, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

There's just no problem with more context and making the section more detailed. Voraciousdolphins (talk) 01:37, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

I noticed one of the references to the "sleeper hit" sentence actually contradicted that claim, so I moved it to here:^[9] Trying to decipher the discussion above (Please keep the blank lines to a minimum; use indentation for threads) it may be clear there is some disagreement? Safety Cap   📢 18:03, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

There is a misunderstanding, @Safety Cap:

That reference from Hindustan Times is to cite that the film received positive reviews from critics.

Quoting from the article:

Starring Diljit Dosanjh, Naseeruddin Shah, Vedang Raina and Sharvari, the film opened to positive reviews from both critics and audiences.

It is not to cite that the film is a sleeper hit. The film released on 12 June 2026. The article is dated 13 June 2026 (updated). Obviously, at that time, it was too early to ascertain whether the film is a sleeper hit or not. Honeybrowneyes (talk) 02:30, 7 July 2026 (UTC)