I don't think I've ever watched an episode of Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. Okay, so maybe I caught bits and pieces on PBS when I was a very young toddler. But as someone who was born in 1998, just three years before the show came to an end, I only witnessed the very tail end of Rogers' lengthy career as a warm and genial television host. The overall point is that Mister Rogers is not part of my cultural lexicon, nor is he a figure who had any real influence on me. So when I heard about ecstatic raves at Sundance for Won't You Be My Neighbor?, a documentary chronicling the life and times of Fred Rogers, I was slightly puzzled. Why were audiences losing their minds over what seemed like a fairly straight-forward doc? How could a film about a television program be generating so many strong emotions? I knew it had something to do with kindness and empathy in dark times, but I had to see this for myself.
I left both compelled and unaffected, a mix of contradictory feelings that I can't quite reconcile. As a study of Rogers' media philosophies and approach to television, Morgan Neville's documentary is fascinating and thought-provoking, providing a detailed look at the mental process of a man with a distinct set of moral and practical concepts. But as a viewing experience, Won't You Be My Neighbor? is only mildly engaging and pleasant, never coming close to anything resembling a transcendent, brilliant documentary. Without the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia, this feature-length Rogers tribute seems to shy away from real substance.
One thing is very clear from the start- Neville and the filmmakers absolutely adore Fred Rogers. And if their record of his life is to be believed, it's an understandable sense of reverence. Rogers was clearly a man with a kind heart and a pure soul, and his outlook on the potential of human decency was profoundly powerful. Neville's adoration is matched only by the enthusiasm of his interview subjects, who range from cast members to family and friends. Nobody has a bad word to say about Rogers, and that's to be expected. Everything I've ever read about the man indicates that he was as genuine and sweet as humanly possible.
In its portrayal of the TV host's life, Won't You Be My Neighbor? eschews a purely traditional linear approach, opting to discuss a series of important incidents while still keeping within the boundaries of a straight-forward template. Neville isn't going for Errol Morris-esque experimental strangeness, but he also seems to have little interest in providing a simple biography of Rogers. Instead, he wants to examine the mythos of Rogers, taking a close look at the doctrine that guided his life's work. How did his work as a child psychologist influence his show, and why did he get into TV in the first place? What influenced his characters, and what role did he believe that entertainment should play in the lives of children?
This is a bright idea, and it allows the viewer a chance to comprehend why Rogers became such an enduring figure beyond the confines of a tiny PBS program. Yet the film seems to be split between its more microscopic study of Rogers' philosophies and guiding morals and its exaltation of his generous spirit, often dismissing any contradictions or areas of intrigue in support of the idea that the world didn't deserve him. At one point, one of Rogers' sons notes that it was hard living with the second coming of Jesus Christ as his dad. Why not take a closer look at that? Crew members from the show note that the host had a tremendous sense of humor when it came to parodies and comic treatments of his material, but he is also described as a self-serious man with a disdain for children's pop culture. How did that contradiction manifest in his work? There's even the slightest hint of a tricky relationship with his sister, but that's left virtually unexplored. Why not detail his upbringing in more explicit terms?
Perhaps the most interesting territory comes near the end of the film, when Rogers' widow makes a comment that he might be tempted to give up entirely if he saw the world today. It's truly riveting, mostly because it reveals this to be a completely different film than what we thought it was. I'm not talking about the political angle, as Rogers has always been political, even more than ever in these times. But that dark and grim statement at the end reveals Won't You Be My Neighbor? to be a tragedy, the story of a man who tried his best and still couldn't keep the world together. Did Mister Rogers fail us or did we fail him?
This is a rich and captivating question, one that I think has a clear and obvious answer. As a story of a world that failed a man who tried to give it so much, Won't You Be My Neighbor? is practically Biblical. Too bad the movie doesn't seem to give this much thought. The film ends with a sequence that asks the viewer to think of someone who has changed their life for the better, whether it's a person who's still here or someone who has passed on. It's daring the audience not to cry, not to collapse entirely. However, it also subtly reveals the film's true intent, which is to make audiences dissolve into a puddle through whatever means necessary. It's a little manipulative and disappointing, especially in a film that could be so engrossing if it felt so inclined.
Neville has a dynamic individual in front of him, one who has the potential to form a reflective, layered text. Won't You Be My Neighbor? is a gigantic salute to Mister Rogers, and that's not a bad thing. But those hints of a more developed, honest examination of how Rogers' values correlate to the world we see today never come to fruition, fading away as the filmmakers stand in awe of this beacon of kindness. It's not hard to see why so many people are falling in love with this film. It also isn't hard to imagine a stronger, more provocative version of the Rogers story.
THE FINAL GRADE: B- (6.7/10)
Images: Focus/IMDb
One thing is very clear from the start- Neville and the filmmakers absolutely adore Fred Rogers. And if their record of his life is to be believed, it's an understandable sense of reverence. Rogers was clearly a man with a kind heart and a pure soul, and his outlook on the potential of human decency was profoundly powerful. Neville's adoration is matched only by the enthusiasm of his interview subjects, who range from cast members to family and friends. Nobody has a bad word to say about Rogers, and that's to be expected. Everything I've ever read about the man indicates that he was as genuine and sweet as humanly possible.
In its portrayal of the TV host's life, Won't You Be My Neighbor? eschews a purely traditional linear approach, opting to discuss a series of important incidents while still keeping within the boundaries of a straight-forward template. Neville isn't going for Errol Morris-esque experimental strangeness, but he also seems to have little interest in providing a simple biography of Rogers. Instead, he wants to examine the mythos of Rogers, taking a close look at the doctrine that guided his life's work. How did his work as a child psychologist influence his show, and why did he get into TV in the first place? What influenced his characters, and what role did he believe that entertainment should play in the lives of children?
This is a bright idea, and it allows the viewer a chance to comprehend why Rogers became such an enduring figure beyond the confines of a tiny PBS program. Yet the film seems to be split between its more microscopic study of Rogers' philosophies and guiding morals and its exaltation of his generous spirit, often dismissing any contradictions or areas of intrigue in support of the idea that the world didn't deserve him. At one point, one of Rogers' sons notes that it was hard living with the second coming of Jesus Christ as his dad. Why not take a closer look at that? Crew members from the show note that the host had a tremendous sense of humor when it came to parodies and comic treatments of his material, but he is also described as a self-serious man with a disdain for children's pop culture. How did that contradiction manifest in his work? There's even the slightest hint of a tricky relationship with his sister, but that's left virtually unexplored. Why not detail his upbringing in more explicit terms?
Perhaps the most interesting territory comes near the end of the film, when Rogers' widow makes a comment that he might be tempted to give up entirely if he saw the world today. It's truly riveting, mostly because it reveals this to be a completely different film than what we thought it was. I'm not talking about the political angle, as Rogers has always been political, even more than ever in these times. But that dark and grim statement at the end reveals Won't You Be My Neighbor? to be a tragedy, the story of a man who tried his best and still couldn't keep the world together. Did Mister Rogers fail us or did we fail him?
This is a rich and captivating question, one that I think has a clear and obvious answer. As a story of a world that failed a man who tried to give it so much, Won't You Be My Neighbor? is practically Biblical. Too bad the movie doesn't seem to give this much thought. The film ends with a sequence that asks the viewer to think of someone who has changed their life for the better, whether it's a person who's still here or someone who has passed on. It's daring the audience not to cry, not to collapse entirely. However, it also subtly reveals the film's true intent, which is to make audiences dissolve into a puddle through whatever means necessary. It's a little manipulative and disappointing, especially in a film that could be so engrossing if it felt so inclined.
Neville has a dynamic individual in front of him, one who has the potential to form a reflective, layered text. Won't You Be My Neighbor? is a gigantic salute to Mister Rogers, and that's not a bad thing. But those hints of a more developed, honest examination of how Rogers' values correlate to the world we see today never come to fruition, fading away as the filmmakers stand in awe of this beacon of kindness. It's not hard to see why so many people are falling in love with this film. It also isn't hard to imagine a stronger, more provocative version of the Rogers story.
THE FINAL GRADE: B- (6.7/10)
Images: Focus/IMDb
Comments
Post a Comment