Spoilers ahead…
In Mrinal Sen’s Bhuvan Shome, a rigid, rule-bound, middle-aged bureaucrat left the city to go hunting in a forest. There, an alert local girl made him aware of how little he knew, and how wide the rural-urban divide is in our country. Reduce the age of Sen’s protagonist, add a splash of Hrishikesh Mukherjee’s Satyakam (but without the suffocating nobility), and you have the curly-haired Election Commission officer, Newton (Rajkummar Rao, who, at this rate, will make critics run out of ways to praise his performances). In his first scene, we see him munching an apple, so we don’t forget the other Newton by the film’s end, where the latter’s Third Law is quoted: For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
The premise of Amit Masurkar’s Newton, then, can be inferred from the physicist’s (the older one; though our Newton, too, knows his Physics, having graduated in the subject) First Law: An object that is at rest will stay at rest unless a force acts upon it. The object at rest is India, and it’s personified by Aatma Singh (Pankaj Tripathi, who, also, at this rate, will make critics run out of ways to praise his performances), a Central Reserve Police Force Officer whose squad oversees a Naxal-infested jungle in Chattisgarh. He doesn’t see the point of Newton’s mission, which is to ensure smooth polling in these parts. (It’s the Lok Sabha election.) Why risk one’s neck for 78 tribals — chew on that number for a second — so cut off from civilisation that they don’t know who the candidates (or what the party promises) are?
One may remember the Second Law now: The rate of change of momentum of a body is directly proportional to the force applied. And so Newton forces Aatma Singh and his troops to accompany him (and his colleagues) to the middle of nowhere, where they set up a polling booth in a school in an abandoned village. Again, we think of the first time we saw Newton, fixing a fuse during a blackout. Over here, there’s no electricity to begin with.
Among the film’s (written by Amit Masurkar and Mayank Tewari) many triumphs is its refusal to make Newton a hero, Aatma Singh a villain. The latter loves his country. He protects it with his gun. It’s just he doesn’t really get what Newton is after, the principle of the whole thing. He calls it an “election picnic.” Newton, in a way, is the anti-Aatma Singh. The latter says, “I will lay down life and limb if and when the situation arises.” Newton is saying, “I am trying to ensure that, at least in theory, the situation itself never arises.”
I never imagined I could feel uncynical about our country’s often-farcical electoral process again, but an early scene made me positively wistful. It’s when everyone walks into the jungle, carrying plastic chairs and supplies and an EVM. The tribals may not know whom to vote for or even why they need to vote (given how little things change for them), but they should still be provided the opportunity to vote. What they do with this opportunity is another matter. That they be included in this process, even if it involves risk to life, is the very bedrock of democracy.
Not that Newton probably cares. When he played cricket as a kid, he was the umpire — now too, it’s all about rules and results. He isn’t interested in the philosophy of it all. He’s just a conscientious worker out to do the job entrusted to him, even if it means grabbing a machine gun in a brilliant scene. Sanjay Mishra gets a funny cameo as the Election Commission head who instructs people like Newton on what to do. They raise hands and ask questions, and this motif of learning runs through Newton. The tribals have to be taught how to vote. Newton himself has a lot to learn, which may be why he’s seated in front of a blackboard in the school that’s now a polling booth.
He has to learn about the other India. (Anjali Patil, as an Adivasi named Malko, plays the Suhasini Mulay role from Bhuvan Shome.) He has to learn not to take himself so seriously. The Sanjay Mishra character tells him, “Bahut bhaari naam hai. Apni mahaanta odhe ja rahe ho.” (That’s a mighty name you have. It’s like you want to advertise your greatness.) There’s an arranged-marriage scenario early on, where Newton walks away when he realises the girl is a minor whose favourite film is Saajan Chale Sasuraal. The latter fact alone may be grounds for disqualification, but even with the former, there’s the sense that Newton objects not because it comes from within but because the law says so. The film calls out this pompousness as “imaandari ka ghamand,” that he feels superior about his righteousness. After all, he isn’t doing anyone a favour. He’s just doing his job.
Given these lofty themes — and other ones, like Hindi imposition on Gondi children, or how unaware we are of people who live but a few hours away — you may expect the movie to be like Newton himself, smug and self-righteous about what it has set out to accomplish. And it does accomplish quite a bit in its less-than-two-hour running time.
Take the last shot. It makes you wince that nothing has changed. Newton refuses to break for lunch five minutes before the scheduled time, while, behind him, a colleague is reading a newspaper: he isn’t even working. Another film might have played a cello under this scene, but Naren Chandavarkar and Benedict Taylor’s score is subdued: just some light, martial-sounding percussion here, a mournful (though not melodramatic) clarinet there. There’s no musical highlighting when Newton is gently rebuked by Malko. Instead, there’s lots of silence, which makes us aware of time standing still in this jungle called Dandakaranya. Yes, the one from the Ramayana. This satire even makes room for a bit of sanskar.
There’s a lot that Newton could have patted itself on the back for, and there are some oddly triumphal notes: a foreign correspondent who adds nothing, or a discussion about the number five turning into a clenched Naxal fist. But consider this: while walking towards the school, in the scene I earlier said made me wistful, a character stops to take a shit. The film takes its issues — and not itself — seriously. The Ramayana allusion? The setup for a punchline about Ravana being our first pilot.The detailed discussion about the flow of people-traffic through the polling booth is a hoot; it’s as though they’re planning a heist. Newton even answers a long-festering question. Aatma Singh offers Newton and his cohorts eggs for breakfast and chicken for lunch. At least here, there’s no question which came first.
Copyright ©2017 Baradwaj Rangan. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Abhirup
September 23, 2017
“a discussion about the number five turning into a clenched Naxal fist”
I would like to know what you think of that bit. Does it indicate Malko is a Naxal sympathizer? But she says in a previous scene that the villagers would like to be rid of both the Naxalites and the CRPF. Plus, she is a government official taking part in the elections that the Naxals have ordered the people to shun. I couldn’t quite decide what to make of the clenched fist. Your views on it, if you please.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Abhirup
September 23, 2017
One more observation: I don’t think Newton walks away from the marriage because of the legal factors alone. Those factors may play a part in his opposition to the girl’s age, but he also wishes for a bride who is at least a graduate, and there is no law, to the best of my knowledge, that makes mandatory that one’s spouse be a graduate (or indeed, that he/she should have any educational qualification). I think that part of his demand indicates that he is an idealist, and not only a stickler for rules and laws.
LikeLike
Navneeth
September 23, 2017
The final lines. 😀 You, sir, have a gift for quips.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anu Warrier
September 23, 2017
Hoping it will release here! You are so right about Rajkumar Rao and Pankaj Tripathi – what wondrous times we live in, to be sure, when we can see these people in relatively mainstream films!
LikeLike
sanjana
September 23, 2017
Rules for the sake of rules. There are some who follow the book of rules and they can make life miserable for those who dont. Like strict teachers.
RR is an interesting actor and he is getting interesting roles.
LikeLike
Shazia Khanam
September 23, 2017
I would like to add to the scene when the live chicken is grabbed, sacrificed, and cooked up in parallel with the tribals being coaxed and driven to vote. One of them is a delicious meal for the officials while the other is fodder for media.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Amin
September 23, 2017
Sir , this one is going for Oscars from India.
Instead of calling “film didn’t take it seriously ”
Let, your normal human feel good and happy and let the “critic” in you be calm.
LikeLike
mostlycinema
September 24, 2017
Sir, Would love to hear your considered verdict if the film is a copy of Secret Ballot. There is no way of knowing except to watch the two films and make a judgement. One has to decide if the similarities are beyond co-incidence and factor in the fact that plagiarists always try to cover their tracks by changing things as proof of their innocence. And the utter childishness of Masurkar’s previous film Sulemani Keeda does not make a compelling argument that the filmmaker can suddenly evolve so much. Oh yes and another thing- a good film is a good film – and how does one watch it dispassionately even if it has been plagiarised? The magnitude of the moral sin is a relative one in the viewers eyes. I wish Newton had not been mired in this controversy – purely for the sake of the film which tells a story worth telling in our times in India.
LikeLike
Vidya
September 24, 2017
Amin , I think the not taking itself seriously was a compliment to the film..some people just don’t get you Mr BR! I haven’t seen the film but the headline for the review didn’t feel negative to me at all.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nawaf Khan
September 24, 2017
A brilliant review for a brilliant film! The ritual continues, watch a great movie on a Saturday and read your take on Sunday. What more could anyone ask for on a near-perfect weekend?
Tripathi and Rao were, of course, excellent throughout, but I also loved Ragubhir Yadav’s note-perfect portrayal of a lax, middle aged government official casually reminiscing about old times, making small talk and going about his job with the absolute minimum amount of energy and enthusiasm required. Also, the fact that he had a collection of obscure, B horror movies ( Seed of Chucky, Return of Chucky) on his phone was so familiar, having seen many working class individuals watching the same type of movies on their commutes to work.
Also loved the line, ‘Vardi mein vinnati bhi dhamki lagti hai’. Simply marvellous writing.
As for the Oscars, I feel this is India’s best entry in about a decade.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sravishanker1401gmailcom
September 24, 2017
“we see him munching an apple, so we don’t forget the other Newton by the film’s end, where the latter’s Third Law is quoted”
Vow ! Filled with salvos right from line one
LikeLike
Dracarys
September 24, 2017
Looks like the movie is an ode to the theoretical merits of communism.
Theoretical, because we know practically what atrocities it has done and still carrying out.
No wonder it got selected for Oscars by the highly placed communist sympathizers!
Else on what basis a satirical movie is selected to represent a country on world stage?!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rohit Sathish Nair
September 25, 2017
At the slight risk of being labelled language/region-chauvinist, could I admit that I was reminded a bit of ‘Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum’ (reportedly one of the films that lost the Oscar ticket to ‘Newton’)while watching this film? I felt this kinship even with the performances, Pankaj Tripathy’s act being something like Fahadh Faasil’s turn there.
Rangan Sir, does this film qualify as a ‘Conradist’ film in your viewpoint? In the sense that rules, logic and reason go for a toss in this wilderness?
LikeLiked by 2 people
olemisstarana
September 25, 2017
BR: I loved this movie. I did find the apple and the chicken scene a little bit heavy handed.
Dracarys: Gentle counterpoint.
The protagonist of this movie is an election officer who is – not to put too fine a point on it – democracy. Even corporeally, the lines between the ballot box (or the election machine) and Newton are wholly blurred in the moment when he snatches it up after the fake firing and when he runs from Aatma Singh to the clearing on the bank of the lake. He is democracy when he stands taut, gun in hand, awkward, defending the very process that defines democracy – casting the ballot.
Aatma Singh is the authoritarian state, jackboot to face, grinding democracy (Newton) to the ground in the guise of protecting the nation – desh ka bhaar etc. In the end democracy survives – a little bruised, but definitely not broken. In fact, if must speculate, democracy might even “get the girl”. In Hindi cinema is there anything else that defines victory better than this? The villagers are not cast as communist/maoists/naxals or sympathizers thereof etc. They are acted upon, and none too gently, by democracy, authoritarianism and communism in varying measure.
May I ask how you get the “ode to the theoretical merits of communism” bit? Is there something I am missing? I must confess that I am also quite puzzled by your statement “Else on what basis a satirical movie is selected to represent a country on world stage?!” Why can a satire not represent a movie internationally? Have we really lost the ability to deride ourselves so much?
I will ride that last tangent – and this is not necessarily directed to you, dear Dracarys – but why is Newton a satire? I am unaware of whether or not the filmmakers themselves have described it as such, but even if they have, my point remains. How is this a satire (from dictionary.com “a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.”)? I do not see much derision here. Aatma Singh, Loknath, Newton are all treated with dignity. Even Aatma Singh, who – if one had to assign a broad role to everyone – is a sort of antagonist is a real human character. I don’t hate him. I sympathize with him.
Abhirup: Is a clenched fist only a sign of naxal resistance? I see it as resistance, period – Newton resists too. I didn’t read Malko as a naxal sympathizer myself.
Anu: HI! 🙂 Also, If this makes the oscar short list you’ll definitely see it on the big screen there.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Kid
September 25, 2017
Olemisstarana: So so glad to see you back here..I really missed your comments.And true to form, what a terrific comment.
By the way, you mentioned once about a Hindi film of Mammootty, “Triyatri”. In case you didn’t know it already, it is there on Youtube..it is a minor film but what a lovely minor film..
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
September 25, 2017
I am with olemisstarana on this one, did not feel like this is satire. Black comedy, yes. But satire, not really. Maybe it fulfills, in some weird way, Poe’s law, that some of us think this is reality after all and cannot be satire. As in, satire/parody has nothing on what’s actually ground reality.
LikeLike
brangan
September 25, 2017
olemisstarana: ‘satire’ in the sense of “the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.” I felt some of all this in here.
Abhirup: Got this interesting take as a response to my post on twitter:
“Malko showing the clenched fist – she leaves her loyalty open to interpretation, I thought. That’s one really interesting bit from the movie.”
“And she wears red.”
mostlycinema: I haven’t seen ‘Secret Ballot’. A lot of what I think about this subject is in this piece:
Rohit Sathish Nair: I think ‘Conradist’ (is that actually a word) is more a journey into… well, the heart of darkness. That’s the general sense in which that book (or even ‘Lord jim’) is invoked. Have never seen ‘Conradian’ used in a light film like this — ‘light’ only in the sense that it’s not drama.
LikeLike
Rohit Sathish Nair
September 25, 2017
Rangan Sir: That was a rather silly attempt to cash in on the saveur du jeur of this thread. ‘Conradist’ sounds close enough to the comrade-communist hybrid that is ‘Comradist’!
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
September 25, 2017
Olemiss! Welcome back! 🙂 And thank you for that gentle comment. 🙂 🙂
I will eventually catch the film, somewhere! Just hope it’s in a theatre – there’s something about the experience of viewing a film in a theatre that just cannot be matched.
LikeLike
adits90
September 25, 2017
BR, I rushed to the theatre today after reading the first paragraph of this review. I must confess I was disappointed with the film not least because both Rajkumar Rao and Pankaj Tripathi have given much better performances. I thoroughly enjoyed watching Sudhir Mishra and Raghuvir Yadav and like someone commented earlier, we are living in good times because actors like these are getting the wonderful roles and limelight they deserve.
Now, coming back to the film, I think its well-made. Period. There is not one shot in the film that we haven’t seen a variation of before. In terms of writing, yes, making the protagonist more of a stickler than an idealist was interesting. The imandaari ka ghamand line gave me a key to the character’s conscious. And olemisstarana’s comment above helped me identify the reason for prickliness I have with the film. It is a very generic new-age India indie film who’s visual grammar follows the same set of rules, though thankfully its not as self-conscious as Masaan was. I felt the whimsical tone jarred with the narrative; A film dealing with these topics shouldn’t sympathize with its characters. In the hands of a better director, this premise could’ve become India’s Underground (Emir Kusrutica’s masterpiece). If only great films were made out of good intentions.
“It’s not the most talented ones who make films. The clever ones make films”. -Sudhir Mishra
P.S- How do I send you an entry for the Reader’s Write-in?
LikeLike
olemisstarana
September 26, 2017
Kid: You are too kind… 🙂 And generous! Thank you for the pointer for Triyatri, will rewatch posthaste!
LikeLike
Kid
September 26, 2017
Rohit: I will take a more serious stab at your question ..I haven’t seen Newton yet, but the only example of a Conradian work in the true sense in Hindi cinema is Kaala Patthar where Salim-Javed masterfully adapt Lord Jim and set it in the mines of Chasnala (the film arrives only four years after the original incident). Right from the poster where you have Bachchan’s coal-caked face crying in anguish (or rebellion..but rebellion from himself more than anything else) to Bachchan’s character Vijay Pal Singh being a stand-in for Lord Jim to the similar character arc to leading to his redemption..this was angry young man’s first foray in the Comradian heart of darkness (a more outward journey which ends with the mining disaster, but also an inward one.Notice this is the first film where the angry young man where he is not angry with the society or with his estranged father but with himself. Hrishikesh Mukherjee made the angry young man revisit his own heart of darkness in Bemisaal, a title which befits the film and the perforrmance of the leading man. One of the reasons why Bemisal is better than the Bengali original starring Uttam, “Ami Se O Sakha” is becuase of the reopening of the Bachchan’s “heart of darkness” chapter..the other major reason is that Uttam in the 70’s is not even close to being his best)..the jungles of Patusan (Java/Borneo) giving way to the mines of Bihar. And notice the coincidence..the famous fictitious port city (as well as Jim’s ship S.) in Lord Jim is called “Patna”, whose namesake (actual) city belongs to the very same state as Chasnala back then (now of course Dhanbad is in Jharkhand)
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
September 26, 2017
Yash Chopra couldn’t do full justice to Salim Javed’s Kala Patthar script. He just didn’t have the technical brilliance to pull of a film like that . Kala pathar would have been a classic in the hands of a techno whiz like Ramesh Sippy. i have always felt that this should have been his follow up to Sholay rather than the bondish Shaan. even if he had to make a Bondish film he should have picked Don, that would have been the perfect mix of indian masala with the western cool as Sholay was rather than Shaan which was rather too cold to work as a masala film
LikeLike
Pratiek Sparsh Samantara
September 26, 2017
I have been receiving many a scornful look for this, but I just didn’t buy the protagonist. Such rigidity with the rules (what we call classical positivism in law) works fine as an idea – and I guess the director’s bouncing off concepts through the story – but it made Newton less believable for me. Too one-dimensional with not enough kinks for me to take him seriously. I guess that makes for a fine satire all the same though…
LikeLike
sanjana
September 26, 2017
When they titled their film as Newton, they should have anticipated some controversy as the original one also had a tryst with controversy. I am referring to the Leibniz–Newton calculus controversy.
LikeLike
KM
September 26, 2017
I have not seen a movie but I have a “Newton” in my family… my son. He is a stickler for rules and regulations. Deviations or breaking them is not acceptable. There are people like Newtons in the world… AND it is very frustrating to deal with them.
LikeLike
brangan
September 26, 2017
A contrarian viewpoint:
“By demonising the state apparatus, Amit Masurkar’s film ends up being just visual polemics draped in satire.”
https://www.newslaundry.com/2017/09/24/newton-a-lazy-satire-with-an-activist-subtext
LikeLike
San Kumar
September 27, 2017
Hi, I am in Chennai and want to see this movie. However I called SPI cinemas and they told me that the movie does not have English subtitles. Can someone tell me where I can catch this with English sub’s pls? Thx
LikeLike
olemisstarana
September 27, 2017
BR: Can I review this review?
The reviewer advocates for a different movie entirely – “… while the presiding officer has no question like – why do they need to come with such armed protection to conduct polls? Or why Maoists have called for a boycott of the polls? How security forces manage to live under such conditions of fear of Maoist violence in dense forests?” Far be it for me to put words in your mouth, but I recall having seen you gently chide commenters who ride such irrelevant horses. Besides, there is much that is addressed and answered subtly. Just because Masurkar doesn’t make the kind of Bhandarkarian cinema where the viewer must be led by the storyteller, chin in hand to conclusions doesn’t mean questions weren’t asked and answered weren’t implied.
Plus, ” Being the protagonist, obviously, Newton has been invested with the moral capital of the film – a dangerous thing for a political satire to do.” Uhhhhh… whybut?
And there’s this line that goes essentially, “I’ve never seen it happen, so it’s unrealistic.” “Families in small towns are as unlikely to fight over marriage proposals in public transport (as Newton and his parents do) as they are in Delhi Metro.” Ok bro. I’ve seen families have arguments in planes, trains and automobiles, so where does that leave us?
(This comment refers to this link)
https://www.newslaundry.com/2017/09/24/newton-a-lazy-satire-with-an-activist-subtext
LikeLiked by 3 people
Abhirup
September 29, 2017
Of course a clenched fist can mean things other than Naxal sympathies, but since it is a gesture Naxals use among themselves and the film is set in a region where they are active, it makes you inquisitive about Malko’s inclinations, though I admit there is nothing else in the film that indicates she is a Naxal sympathizer. That’s all.
LikeLike
olemisstarana
September 30, 2017
Abhirup: Fair enough. Symbols of resistance can easily be coopted and perverted by the mainstream, which is why it is good to have context while examining the resisters’ sympathies. As a viewer I see Netwon’s brand of straight and narrow honesty being non-mainstream, he himself is part of the resistance against newspaper reading, taash playing colleagues – he is also part of the resistance, imho.
LikeLike
Abhirup
September 30, 2017
Absolutely. Personally, my own sympathies would be with somebody like Newton rather than with Naxals, or any group that kills to achieve its purposes and tries to topple democratically elected governments to seize power themselves. If I do have to brandish a machine gun someday, I would much rather do it to ensure that people can vote (as Newton does) than to scare them away from voting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anand Sundaram
January 19, 2018
Baradwaj, Just watched the movie and came back to your site to read the review. A brilliant review. I have just one question. Why newton (Nutan) put his certificate in the drawer instead of hanging in the wall? Is there a hidden meaning to that?
LikeLike
arielsomebody
June 10, 2018
A Naxal-sympathising movie reviewed by a pre-eminent darbari urban naxal with supporting comments from the urban-naxal snakepit that is this blogs comment thread, that ‘gently’ nudges dissidents back to following the herd.
LikeLike
sanjana
June 10, 2018
A Naxal-sympathising movie reviewed by a pre-eminent darbari urban naxal with supporting comments from the urban-naxal snakepit that is this blogs comment thread, that ‘gently’ nudges dissidents back to following the herd.
Dont forget who sent it to Oscars in a mad rush and who gave national awards for this film though there were better films in other languages.
LikeLike