A Neighbor's Review of "Won't You Be My Neighbor"

I went with my mom to see Won't You Be My Neighbor. It is the first (and likely the last) documentary that I have ever had any kind of interest in. We saw it in a small theater room with only 4 rows of seats filled with mostly older people. Since I first saw the trailer for this film months ago and talked with others about it, I noticed the relevance of my age and its relation with history. A surprising number of my peers were not familiar with Mister Rogers' Neighborhood and as for those who were younger than me, they seemed to have no knowledge of him at all. To see that made me sad for a generation that didn't know Mr. Rogers and grateful for the privilege that I had to have grown up with him for a while.

View fullsize

The film immediately brought me back to childhood as it opened in the same manner that Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood did - with a happy familiar tune inviting me to be a neighbor. From there on, I experienced all the feels for the next 134 minutes. The documentary highlighted a series of episodes that exemplified the things that Mr. Rogers stood for, the goals that he had, and most importantly the person that he was.  In addition to highlighting these episodes, we, of course, heard from some of Mr. Rogers closest neighbors, including his family members and cast/crew members or guests from the show. There are also quiet, short moments in which Mr. Rogers is beautifully portrayed as a cartoon Daniel Tiger while the story progresses. It feels like a silent nod to the neighborhood of imagination. It is also efficacious in that it delineates the notion or the belief that Daniel Tiger was in a sense an extension of Mister Rogers true self, particularly as a child. Last but not least, there were many scenes of Mister Rogers himself speaking outside of the show, such as his well-known statement in support of public television, and lesser-known interviews. Viewers get a lovely portrait of Mr. Rogers, not a television personality, but a man, who incidentally happened to be the television personality of his show. For viewers who knew Mr. Rogers, it is a moving tribute, and for viewers who did not, it provides a more than sufficient education.

Several elements of the film were truly reminiscent of the simplicity and genuinely moving nature of Mister Rogers' Neighborhood. The timing and pace of the film are unhurried without feeling slow. The conversation with the audience is honest and sincere - telling us the facts as they are and taking time to appreciate how those made the storytellers feel or how they might make us feel. Another significant way in which the film is reminiscent of Mr. Roger's neighborhood is the way in which the conversations that are had, play against a backdrop of current events and issues we are dealing with now. In fact, it seems kind of meta - and it is a remarkable way to be reminded that in the “neighborhood” that we live in, we are watching history repeat itself.

Perhaps the magic of Mr. Rogers was that in the very same space in which he acknowledged the ugliest or hardest realities of life and humanity, he made us aware of all the good that is there right alongside those - the good of helpers in the midst of tragedy, the good of individuals in their day to day lives, and the good in ourselves, not just as it is, but as it could be. He told us that we were lovable just as we are, and also that we had the capacity to grow, to do good, and to love others.

One of the most striking moments in the film was when interviewees were asked to think of the people who helped them become who they are, which was a practice that Mr. Rogers had often encouraged. If I recall correctly each person was given a full minute to think about it. It is a quiet moment charged with deep emotion, in which neighbors on either side of the screen are reminded of the impact of the love they have received and good that already exists in our world.

In a time that is as dark and divisive as the one we live in now, the film reminds us of so many important truths, chief among them, that each individual has inherent value, and as such, they should be loved as they are. Likewise, we are reminded that “The greatest thing that we can do is to help somebody know that they're loved and capable of loving.”

While Mr. Rogers' message, which is ultimately the message of the film is consequential, perhaps the most appreciable gift for the audience is that the film tells us the very thing we hoped to know most, which is  that Mr. Rogers really was the person that he seemed to be - that he was as genuine, caring, kind, compassionate, determined, empathetic, and loving as he seemed to think that we could be. In this way especially, the film is reassuring and inspiring. It is an invitation to visit with a friend we have not seen in far too long (or may have just met), and a commission to carry on his legacy.

First Impression: grown-ish

I was excited to see the premiere of ABC's grown-ish.

Before I can begin to explain what it is that I hoped for and what exactly I found in the premiere of grown-ish, I have to tell you what it is that I so love about its parent show Black-ish.

Black-ish has provided viewers with a much-needed representation of a  black family in today's America. One of the things that is so refreshing about Black-ish is its general wholesomeness and the fact that it features a successful black family who defies many stereotypes without being stripped of its black culture. The characters are woke without being loud or pretentious. The show addresses issues of race without letting that be its sole focus. We got the spirit of The Cosby Show in a story of its own with enough modernity to be considered relevant and relatable. In many ways, the show has been unlike any other primetime show on television, so I had high hopes that when its spinoff was born, it would carry those favorable traits.

Now let’s talk grown-ish. The good news is that the show does, in fact, carry some of the traits I loved from Black-ish. Most notably, the producers have once again brought forth a missing demographic from primetime television. Black-ish is one of very few shows in our time to address the college experience of people of color. Representation matters - children of color need to know that “the quintessential college experience” is not reserved for the monochromatic demographic that we see in the majority of popular films and tv shows. Black characters in college are more than whitewashed or uncharacteristically obnoxious best friends for white kids. Also, there are parts of the college experience that can be very different for people of color. The show has yet to really address those issues, but we are only two episodes in and the potential is certainly there.

I do not have a lot to say about the show just yet, but I did have some strong feelings about my first impression.

In a matter of two episodes, we are introduced to the starter pack for every set of adolescent characters on TV. We have our closeted gay character with a religious background, our drug addicted cool kid, our drug dealer brainiac, our socially ignorant Christian girl, and our overly committed socially-conscious character. Then, of course, we have Zoe, who reminds us that of all of Dre Johnson’s children, she has had the least depth or character development. She is Dre’s favorite, generally self-centered, popular, and sometimes shows herself to be a caring older sister and daughter. On grown-ish, it looks Zoe will be figuring out who she is right along with us, which is fitting since a huge part of the college experience is learning who you are or who you want to be. Aside from Zoe, a lot of the characters from our starter pack already seem a bit cliched, but I am sure we will find their stories to be deeper than what they appear to be at this point. I can live with that.

The thing that I do not particularly care for is where and with what level of immediacy the show goes in its first couple of episodes. Within their first few weeks, Zoe and other characters are confronted or involved with drugs and alcohol, partying, cheating (academic), and sex.

Between this and the cliches represented in the starter pack character set, I feel like the show is folding into a neat little box of norms where it should be stretching beyond the typical portrayal of the college experience. Sure, all of those things are available in an average college experience, but they are not what make a college experience. Those can be present without being the focus of the characters’ experience.

If you’re reading this and you think that I am crazy or ridiculous, chances are that these things were a part of your experience. The things is, these were not a part of my experience, and while I hardly believe that mine was the typical college experience, I would dare say that there a lot of people like me who went through college without that part of the experience. Regardless of what anyone’s experience with those parts of college may have been, the most important parts of a college experience were not those things.

The most impactful parts of a college experience are the friends you make, the first times that you develop opinions that vary from the ones you were raised with, the first ethical, moral, and monetary decisions that you make on your own, your first consequential failures and independent successes. So far, the show has done a good job of showing us the beginning of such friendships.

Along the way, the distractions or challenges you face are more likely to come from things that you can’t control like health, family, and circumstance, than drugs, alcohol, or sex. These are the things that I hope grown-ish will show us more so than what it has so far. If that doesn’t happen soon, I think my high hopes for grown-ish may quickly fade, and the show will have lost out on an opportunity to tell a very different and interesting story befitting of such a different and interesting representation of characters.

Bonus: I love the opening credits for the show. The imagery is hazy and ambiguous - near to nostalgic without giving anything away, and the theme song has the same feeling. The song,  Grown, is sung by the cast's own very talented Chloe x Halle. I have been listening to it all day long.

Tuesday's Ten: 10 Thoughts about "Anne with an E", the Netflix Show

For the love of Anne and for the sake of curiosity I sat down to watch “Anne with an E”, a new show on Netflix that reimagines Lucy Maud Montgomery’s Anne of Green Gables. When I first heard that Anne of Green Gables would be coming to Netflix, I was beside myself with joy and ready to throw a party to marathon one of my favorite films of all time. The feeling did not last long, since upon further investigation I discovered that this would be a new Anne, and not the childhood gem that had so inspired me as a child. I wanted to be excited, but I could only feel disappointment. That was months ago, and now that time has passed and I have processed the new show’s desire to bring Anne to a new generation, I was able to give the show a chance. Here are my initial thoughts after watching the first season. Let me warn you in advance that I have been pretty critical. Also, anytime I refer to “the original” story/character/etc, I am referring to the 1985 movie from Sullivan Entertainment (If you haven’t seen it, drop everything you are doing and go watch it now - check your local library, because the set cost upwards of $80).

*SPOILERS AHEAD!! - I’ve done my best not to be too specific about certain changes in the story.*
 

1. I need to reread the books.
   My first impression of the beloved title character in Montgomery’s classic series came from watching the long-running films on PBS. Although it had been my habit to read a book before watching its screen adaptation, I ended up seeing the films first, because I had no knowledge of the books. My, how I fell in love with the redheaded orphan. She was probably the first, and perhaps the only ficitional character I ever encountered that I so desperately would have liked to meet in real life. More than that, I wanted to be like her. In some ways, I think I already was. In fact, I felt certain that if Anne and I were to meet in real life she would agree that we were kindred spirits. It was not until years after watching Megan Follows portray the character that I came to know about the books, which I read and truly enjoyed, but did not commit to memory in the way that I had with the film. This being the case, as I watched the Netflix rendition, I noticed several discrepancies from the film and I was not sure whether those were liberties taken by the new writers and producers, or previously abandoned parts of the actual book.
   

2. This new cast is simply less endearing.
   I have no desire to disparage them in any way, and I would, in fact, say that over time, they grow on you, but next to the original cast, this new set of folks doesn't stack up. Let's begin with our lovable heroine, Anne. While Amybeth McNulty embodies the look of Anne and does good enough job of bringing her quirks to life, she is just not as sweet. If you are familiar with the character, then you will know that a number of her personality traits could be quite irritating on the wrong person. She “talks entirely too much”, she's overly dramatic, and she may even have a touch of folly, but somehow how none of it bothers me when Anne is portrayed by Megan Follows. Shortly after meeting McNulty's version, I did, in fact, find that I wanted a break from Anne’s talking. As for all of her little quirks, they seem to be less natural for McNulty. Watching her made me feel as though she was pretending to be Anne, whereas when I watch Megan Follows there is no question in my mind that she is in fact, Anne. It seems to me that she must have been quite like the character, to begin with. Similarly, other characters portrayals seemed a little unnatural. Colleen Dewhurst portrayed Marilla’s hardness with understated wit and a certain honesty that I have yet to see from the new Marilla. Matthew's quiet way, which Richard Farnsworth played with such authentic meekness does not seem to be coming across in the new Matthew. Diana seems less docile and sweet than the original Diana. In fact, the original Diana seemed to share Anne’s fondness for daydreaming and imagination, whereas this Diana seems to only observe Anne’s daydreaming ways. I could go down the whole line of characters, but I will stop at Gilbert Blythe and Ruby Gillis. While the new Gilbert is appropriately attractive, he lacks a certain sweetness and boyishness that Jonathan Crombie brought to the character. Although Gilbert was well-liked by the other characters in the original movie, he did not seem to be completely aware of that fact. This new Gilbert seems well aware and at times a little bit conceited. Gilbert’s storyline seems to have changed a bit as well, which would have some bearing on his personality. They have given him a heavy burden to bear which would harden a young boy and take away his boyish demeanor. At the very least I can say that Ruby Gillis seems to be a good match - small and mousy with a voice to match. At this point, we have only had the opportunity to watch the primary characters unfold a bit. I look forward to seeing the secondary characters develop more in the series.
   

3. Who are these new characters?
   We have a new boy helping Matthew tend the land, an old love interest for Matthew, a woman who helps Gilbert take care of his father, more Andrews than I remember, and a shared dead brother between Matthew and Marilla. Perhaps these are all from the books . . . ?
   

4. The new backstories are a bit far-reaching.
   It would seem that this new version of the story has expanded the use of backstory to include new memories from Matthew and Marilla’s pasts and to embellish Anne’s story in a rather interesting way (more on that in a bit). Again, I find myself in a place of uncertainty as I do not entirely recall the books. However, all of this new backstory feels excessive. Did Marilla actually say no to Mr. Blythe’s proposal because of family obligation? In the movie her relationship with him ended because of an argument they had, followed by Marilla’s unwillingness to forgive him. Why does Matthew suddenly have a love interest? In the movie, he seemed quite content without one, although, I suppose in reality most everyone wants someone to love and be loved by. And how is the plot helped by Anne having been exposed to inappropriate knowledge? I wonder what these changes hope to accomplish.
   

5. An element of darkness has been added.
   From the additional backstories to Anne’s frequent flashbacks, the story has taken on an element of needless darkness. We see not just an unhappy girl in Anne’s memories, but a frightened, bullied, and an abused little girl. What’s more, where the original Anne seemed determined to move past those memories and look so longingly forward to the possibilities of her future, this new portrayal of Anne insists on revisiting her past, and the character seems to lack the strength of optimism that Megan Follows’ Anne had. Yes, it would be hard to move past all of the things that she has been through, and yes, she is somewhat optimistic, but she doesn’t share the original Anne’s ability to keep moving forward. Other characters have also had their stories darkened. Matthew tries to commit suicide - what the heck?!! Perhaps these changes are intended to make the story more realistic, but I think that removing that certain light from the story and it's characters and replacing it with all this darkness is truly a loss from the original story and the positive impact that the characters have on viewers.
   

6. An element of innocence has been taken away.
   While the original story could very well be described as pure, this new story has added subject matter that removes innocence from the story and from Anne herself. Giving Anne mature knowledge of intimacy and marital issues from her former home seems unfair to the character and unnecessary for the story. Anne’s innocence in youth and her ability to enjoy adult life without dwelling on certain subjects helped to make her the role model that she was to me. This is a story that has been accessible to children everywhere and suddenly needs a warning label. I had some level of warning, as a friend of mine on facebook posted: “Just a word of caution for any Anne of Green Gables fans... If you watch the new Netflix series with a 9yr old, you will be forced to discuss much more sex education than one would anticipate.” In addition to Anne’s knowledge of adult matters, the writer’s also decided to let her get her first visit from Aunt Flo on the show, going as far as to show her cleaning her sheets. What on earth?!! Is this some attempt at being feminist by normalizing menstruation? No. Just no. There is a time and a place for children to learn about that - the kids' channel on Netflix is certainly not it.
   

7. The social commentary on feminism is overstated.
   One of the reasons that Anne of Green Gables was so widely hailed by women was because the heroine was a strong feminist in a time where feminism was not a popular idea. While feminism was a bold idea, the story brought it forward oh so subtly. Characters in the story rarely made their points on the matter by stating them outright, and certainly not by referencing the idea by name. This new story places Marilla in a feminist mom’s group. What is that? And furthermore, does original Marilla strike you as the type of woman who would feel the need to attend a mom’s group? I mean how many times has she told Matthew that she will make all decisions about raising Anne on her own? The pastor tells Anne that she should stay home and train to be a wife? Subtle guys, really subtle. Why don’t we just give Anne a t-shirt that reads “this is what feminist looks like” and call it a day?
   

8. The timeline has shifted in a few places.
   This new writer has been quite liberal with her shifts in the story’s timeline. I suppose that is to be expected since this is a reimagining of the story. Still, I find that a number of the decisions she made were a bit disappointing for fans of the original story. After spending a little too much time in Anne’s past, she proceeds to speed up other parts of the story. For example, during Anne’s trial at Green Gables, she is invited to a picnic at the church. Sometime before the picnic there is an incident with Marilla's brooch. This all seems to take place very quickly compared to how it takes place in the original story. What's more, it's results are different than in the film. When Anne refuses to confess to taking the brooch, she is sent back to the orphanage the next morning. This completely changes the story. In fact, this change was so grave that I decided to look into it, and found that the writer made this decision because she wanted the mistake with the brooch to have more real consequences. It is an interesting choice, but one I would not make. Now there is a whole affair of finding the brooch and then going to get Anne back. I won't say more about it, in case you haven't seen it. In any case, the new writer also decided that once Anne attends the picnic she'll have a less than pleasant experience, which causes her to run away from the picnic so that she can be followed by Marilla, who will comfort her after finally apologizing for the error with the brooch. In my opinion, the real Marilla would never have waited so long to make her apology. Additionally, because Anne didn't get to enjoy the picnic in this version, we don't get to see her bonding with Diana Berry or meeting Gilbert Blythe for the first time. In fact, she meets Gilbert later on when she begins attending school. This new meeting shifts the starting dynamic between the two of them. We see Gilbert stepping in to protect Anne, whereas in the original story we see Anne beat Gilbert at a race. Those are two very different ways for us to see the characters together for the first time - boy saves girl vs. girl beats boy. Which of those two do you think would have done better for a feminist message?
   

9. This new version has reshaped iconic scenes.
   I waited to see if and how my favorite iconic scenes would play out in in the new version. While I was relieved to find that a number of those scenes were still included (some were missing, but may appear in a later season), I was not entirely satisfied with how they were executed. I have already mentioned that the brooch scene was a wreck. Even watching Anne tell the lie disappointed me. She did it so quickly and without the same dramatic flare as the original Anne. Let’s be real for a second here - fans of the original wanted to see how the slate scene would go down. The actions leading up to it (by Gilbert and the other boys) were not as numerous or as bothersome as they were in the original, which made Anne’s reaction seem more like an overreaction in the new version. Rather than the completely smashing of her slate over his head, new Anne uses her slate to slap Gilbert across the face. No broken slate - just a bit cracked. Honestly, it feels a bit cliche to have a girl slap a guy across the face when he's upset her, even if she uses a slate to do it. After the incident, Anne isn't even made to write sentences on the board as she does in the film. This change is important for a couple of reasons. First of all, we don't get to see how stubborn Anne is and how unfazed she is by the teacher’s punishment. There is something about watching Anne correct the teacher’s spelling of her name and then resolve to write the sentence 100 times without flinching. Secondly, the actions that are taken afterward once again change the story. Anne runs from the classroom and decides she is not returning to school. Then Marilla allows her to stay home for several days. The Anne I know would not run from a problem. She faces every challenge head-on with great pride and determination. And the Marilla I know would never let Anne stay home from school, certainly not over something like that. I am really lost as to what these changes are supposed to accomplish because it feels like we are making strong characters a little bit weak.
   

10. The music and the scenery are still beautiful.
    On a more positive note, the music and the scenery are beautiful. I look at the shots of Green Gables in this new version and still imagine that I would love to live there among all of the bright green land, crisp blue skies, and white lacy flowers. The music feels bright and discovering, as the story is, and the song during the open credits has fitting lyrics as well. The original soundtrack will always warm my heart when I hear it, but I can accept the modern sound of this new version.

All in all, the new show still carries forward a positive message and brings Anne to a fresh audience, and I can appreciate that. It cannot replace the original, but that was never the intention, I’m sure. I have been a harsh judge, but I can still support the endeavor of the show. I would love to know what other fans of the original think about the show. Is there anything that you liked or preferred about it? Please do comment and let me know!