Review: A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood

Based on a 1998 Esquire magazine article, Matthew Rhys stars as a cynical journalist asked to do a puff piece on long-time children’s TV educator/hot Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks). Rhys sees the story as beneath him, but as he spends more time with the kindly Mr. Rogers, he comes to really like and greatly admire the patient, compassionate man. Meanwhile, Rhys has a wife (Susan Kelechi Watson) and family at home while he spends time with Mr. Rogers. He also has an estranged father (Chris Cooper) who has appeared out of nowhere, apparently looking for some kind of late-stage reconciliation. Rhys isn’t remotely interested, but you-know-who tries to turn that around.

 

Some of you are gonna violently resist this 2019 film from director Marielle Heller (“Can You Ever Forgive Me?”). It’s about seemingly the nicest man America ever produced, he’s played by ‘Mr. Nice Guy’ Tom Hanks, and it’s got the kind of plot that many cynics will roll their eyes at. This particular cynic rather enjoyed the film and wishes he wasn’t so damn cynical anyway. Hell, I feel kinda bad that my closest association to “Mr. Rogers’ Neighbourhood” before this film was Eddie Murphy’s brilliant, ‘urban’ “SNL” spin on it called “Mr. Robinson’s Neighbourhood”. I never got to see the real deal, I’m afraid. In fact, I’m not entirely certain if “Mr. Rogers’ Neighbourhood” was ever broadcast in Australia. I will admit that I would’ve liked a more straightforward biopic than Heller and screenwriters Micah Fitzerman-Blue and Noah Harpster (who teamed up for “Maleficent: Mistress of Evil”) provide here. There’s a good reason this film is ‘inspired by a true story’ rather than being ‘based’ on one. That’s because the screenwriters give us a rather Capra-esque storytelling device, and that mixture of biopic and Capra-esque corn could’ve gone horribly wrong. Perhaps some of you will still feel it does go wrong, and would’ve preferred a film that tells us more about Mr. Rogers’ life. I can understand that and even agree to some extent. However, using the Fred Rogers character in this way, part real character and part Henry Travers in “It’s a Wonderful Life”, it actually worked pretty well for me.

 

Tom Hanks isn’t a great physical likeness for Mr. Rogers, but he’s about as close as anyone as good an actor as he is going to get on the physical resemblance front. He attempts to get Rogers’ diction and phrasing on the opening theme song and certainly sings just about as badly as the real deal from the clips I’ve subsequently viewed of Fred Rogers online. It’s actually a really interesting performance because while Hanks can be a very loud actor at times, here he’s forced into being very quite and gentle, playing a truly ‘gentle man’. While Hanks never quite disappears into the role, there’s enough seeming commonality between Rogers and Hanks’ screen persona that he doesn’t really need to (They’re also strangely enough real-life distant cousins!). He gets the job done in what is actually one of his best turns, worthy of an Oscar nomination for sure. The difference between Hanks as Mr. Rogers and Hanks as “Larry Crowne” is that I was convinced that Mr. Rogers really was this good of a human being, by all reports he really was a nice, decent, and caring man who was difficult to interview because he kept wanting to get to know the person interviewing him! The film does a really good job of driving home the idea that while Rogers wasn’t putting on an act – he was a good man – he wasn’t actually saintly. He had to work hard to be this man of decency and integrity. The film wants us to realise that kindness and goodness and decency are choices.

 

I hate that I’m a cynical man in a cynical world that no longer has Fred Rogers in it. Saint or not, Mr. Rogers was clearly too good a human being for this world, and he’s the best thing in this film. That isn’t to say Hanks and Mr. Rogers are all this film has. Matthew Rhys and especially Chris Cooper are well-cast as a cynical journalist and absent father, respectively. They’re both strong enough to hold up their end of the film, given it’s really Mr. Rogers we’re here to see. Cooper is uncomfortably good as the long-time cheat and deadbeat dad who is now gravely unwell and trying to make amends with a son who just ain’t having it. Enter Mr. Rogers, strangely enough playing peacemaker. There’s an extraordinary bit later on involving silence and Mr. Rogers staring into the camera. At us. Mr. Rogers is teaching us, too. It’s amazing, because by that point we’ve accepted Hanks as Rogers so fully that one doesn’t think anything of it. We’re watching Mr. Rogers and he’s teaching us something. If the film has any real flaw it’s that the filmmakers lay it on a bit thick showing African-Americans loving “Mr. Rogers’ Neighbourhood”. It’s likely true – Eddie must’ve surely watched enough of it to get his parody so accurate – but it’s also likely that the filmmakers are a tad concerned about the whiteness of Mr. Rogers and people remembering the “SNL” parody. So they’ve over-compensated a bit.

 

Although it might disappoint people expecting a traditional biopic, this is a fine, well-acted film about a kind, decent, and compassionate man. If his story and character seem too good to be true, perhaps a lot of the blame is with us and our more cynical world, not Fred Rogers. We’re a work in progress, Mr. Rogers. For me, I mostly believed it, and being merely ‘inspired’ by a true story got me the rest of the way. I was even a little moved by this one, your mileage may greatly differ.  

 

Rating: B-