while i, like most people, tend to enjoy tom hanks and while i'm sure he's done a fine job in the film, i've been trying for some time to put a finger on why i disliked the casting of him as mr. rogers. i think i finally understand. (thread)

other than "most people tend to agree they enjoy him," there isn't a single trait or quality that tom hanks has ever publicly shown that lines up with fred rogers' entire essence — what makes him mr. rogers.

fred rogers was a slight man and tom hanks isn't, but it goes well beyond the physical dissimilarity.

mr. rogers was ethereal and quiet; he was elegance and grace. but most importantly, he was light and bouyant.

fred rogers didn't mind if you looked at him or if you didn't. he wanted to be your friend and wanted to make sure you were heard and understood, but if you just needed to be left alone for a while, that was okay, too.

he existed and was (very importantly) tangible and real, but didn't need to be the center of attention. he embodied patience and slowness and understanding, much more interested in knowing about you than telling about himself. "it's you i like," after all.

meanwhile, most everything about hanks' likability comes from his bombast. rogers has a key weightlessness, but EVERYTHING about hanks is weighty. most performances involve a bray and a guffaw and ballyhoo.

tom hanks is weighty, and i don't mean in terms of physicality. he is an anchor and an alarm. he sits in the middle of the screen, commanding attention. in his dramatic roles, he is consumed with weight; a man deeply internally conflicted or pained.

he is compelling and terrific, but not in any of the ways that rogers was. even in hanks' most insular and serene film, he spends most of it shout-talking to a volleyball.

the performance will be there and i am looking forward to the film, but the essence was always misplaced.

also, colin hanks already played fred rogers on drunk history and that seems way closer

the casting itself is one of two things, i think. either

1. the producers wanted to have the most universally-liked man in hollywood play the most universally-liked man in the history of American media, no matter the miscast, or

2. the producers/studio were worried $300 million-plus number of people would go see an awards/holiday-season movie about fred rogers unless tom hanks was in it

the truth is probably somewhere between those

anyway, go watch WON'T YOU BE MY NEIGHBOR? and sob for one million years and be glad we have that.

i'm going to happily reassess after seeing the biopic.

thanks for attending my FRED talk