There are no goods and bads. only a bland Sarkar.

If you were one of those who wondered why Godfather HAD to be a movie of 3 hours length to masterfully depict the characters, go watch Sarkar. Not that Sarkar being too short, was its only folly. It was just one of them.
Sarkar (writing credits to newcomer Manish Gupta) was shockingly mediocre, having come from the Factory and more importantly made by the man himself. I found D run-of-the-mill (w.r.t. RGV camp) too. But, I kinda understood that because plainly put, it wasn't made by RGV himself. And, RGV's candour in telling that D has a definitive Hero and is more on lines with Don that Satya/Company was hitting the nail on its head as to what D actually was meant to be. But somehow, many claimed (incl. a not-so-candid/illusioned Varma this time) Sarkar to be RGV's best effort.Hence the shock.
RGV seems to have been not as ambitious as I thought he would have been when he was making Sarkar, that is, remaking The Godfather. Heck, let's not even use the word Ambition, as apparently there wasn't any, unless you count directing Big B as one.
Sarkar is a hip-packaged movie (read as more 'on lines with Don', or 'D' for that matter) relying much more on Amitabh-Abhishek chemistry rather than merits on scripting and directorial departments. I am saying this not by comparing/contrasting it with the Classic. Sarkar, independently as a movie, regardless of where it is inspired from, is a very ordinary effort. That it comes from RGV is what is unacceptable. Hell, we even have a cliched glib-talking villain in Kota Srinivasa Rao as Selvan Mani cracking insipid jokes (that he is going back to Tamilnadu and asking Rashid to go to Dubai) at serious situations that one would expect in superHero flicks when the lamenting villains await for Hero's inevitable arrival to take his revenge on them, and a self-mocking character in the bogus saint played by Jeeva. In the above instances, the audience may have got a few laughs, but at the cost of characterization assassination. Rashid stares, stares, stares and then dies [Chhota Sarkar's words here - "Tujhe marte huae dekhne ki mazaa khona nahi chahta tha" - are some rare points where the movie scores regardless of its plot; Again, contrast this with Michael Corleone who is in the baptism ceremony when the "revenge" is being taken]. And, whats with the heavy noisy background score? Was Amar Mohile thinking he was scoring for a horror flick? There were shades of such heavy BGM scores even in RGV's last directorial attempt Naach. But here it really irked me.
In a scene where some friend reveals to Vishram that Sarkar has got his bail, we hear a big bang on the background. The camera zooms fast towards Vishram for a moment and comes back in sync with the background thud - worthy of inclusion in next Simbhu flick where he would inform an overcaring/rich/powerful father that he just now slept with the latter's daughter. The performances were all competitive. Lesser appreciation because most of them are very much underwritten that some otherwise nice performances like that of Kay Kay's are tarnished.
I never thought I would be panning a RGV movie to this extent. Neither was the movie bad. But much much far away from being a worthy successor to Ramu's previous works on "Crime and Punishment", as he had put it here - "Satya and Company were just preparatory blueprints for SARKAR. With this film, I hope that my trilogy on crime and punishment; within the reality of our country, our city and our neighbourhood; has come a full circle." Hence, I have one question to Ramu. That, what was going on in his mind?
Perhaps, I should have given more thought to/interpretation on what Ramu had said here too.

P.S.:- For all the non-tamil-movie-watching readers, Simbhu is one of the last disasters that struck the tamil moviedom.