The idea of a documentary about a pet cemetery sounded absolutely absurd to me when I was first introduced to the film, but as I watched, I found there was much more to this documentary than meets the eye.  The deep exploration of life, death, and the afterlife by the people in the film is quite surprising to me, especially since seemingly the documentary is supposed to be about dead pets. 

First off I want to talk about the deceased animals, which is the basis for the film.  I have always had outdoor cats, and we have always buried them in the yard, so the idea of spending money on these elaborate memorials and graves seems sort of silly to me, but watching the pet owners speak of their deceased animals tugs at my heart a bit. Don’t get me wrong, I love all of my cats, but I cannot see paying a lot of money to burry them like one would a human. However, I can see why people would not want their pets to be taken off to some factory and turned into glue so I guess there is some need out there for pet cemeteries, even if I do not use them personally.

 Amazingly these pets were like children to their owners and were cherished and adored in life and continue to get that treatment after death.   I guess it just goes to show the different values that people can have about death and what to do with the empty soulless bodies when someone is gone.  Once you are gone what difference does it make where your body ends up? Apparently to some people it makes a lot of difference, thus the need for the cemetery, and in this case the cemetery in question is a pet cemetery. 

Okay now that the pet talk is out of the way, I will get on to the real meaning of the film.  The way that Morris uses interviews with the Halberts and their clients to explain life and death is very meaningful.   It is hard to tell how much of what they are saying is truthful and how much is a show for the cameras, but even when they seem to be stretching the truth, there is still an aspect of honesty there.  I would definitely say that in this film, the interviews are a little less convincing than they are in Morris’s other films, especially Vernon, Florida, where the stories seem very believable.  Even when the people being interviewed are obviously backtracking and being too showy, there is still some truth whether intentional or not to what they are saying. 

A scene in the film that is a good example of this is where the older son Phil is interviewed.  Before he even gets to tell his story, his mother gives us a bit of background information on him, which sets up his interview.  First we see a painting of a boy, which indicates that she still thinks of him as a child.  Further evidence of this is given by his mother implying that he was not man enough to handle a grown up job, so he had to come back home and work for his parent in their business.   She shows her control over him, even now that he is an adult by stating that she convinced him to come back home; using that mother knows best mentality to persuade him.  Also, she demeans him by referring to his family as “little.”  By saying that she shows that she thinks he is trivial and not to be taken serious.  

After the mother’s description, the film cuts to Phil cutting the grass with a push mower, shirtless in the cemetery.  He starts talking about his job and states that “every man wants to pursue a job in sales,” which is very untrue.  This statement is stereotypical and close minded because obviously that is not everyone’s dream, but he tries to sell it as such because he wants some type of self help career and he thinks by telling his story on camera that he can somehow land such a career.

Phil explains why he left his job, saying that he was “burnt out” and weak mentally and physically, so he had no choice but to quit.  It is interesting that Morris pairs this up with an image of him doing physical labor that he has to be fit and have endurance to do, but that does not require much mental strength.  It makes what he says about being physically weak seem contradictory.  I feel that his mother is not the only one who tries to discredit him, but that Morris does as well by pairing this clip up with Phil’s interview. 

The film then cuts to the image of Phil sitting in front of a pool, with a red phone placed on the table beside him.  There are trees and plants behind the pool that are a bright green. The buttons on his shirt are about to pop open, which shows that he is living a little more comfortably and has gained weight since leaving his job, but he does not make enough money now to buy new clothes that fit him, which is why he needs the self help career. 

The blue water, with the sun’s bright reflection stands for honesty and truth, which shines through what Phil says, even if he tries at points to put on a show for the cameras. Also the water is moving, which symbolizes life. The juxtaposition of the green trees and the red phone is also something I noticed.  The red symbolizes stopping, perhaps meaning to stop existing, dying, in this case. It can be the death of the pets or of people and animals in general.  The green symbolizes go, which could mean go on living.  This is what the pet owners, and everyone must do when someone or something close to them die.  The trees are blowing in the wind, and this movement also symbolizes being alive.  The red phone is the only one of the three that does not move, which would certainly fit well with the portrayal of death.  “To create a work of art is not simply to copy the world but to add another, and very special, object to the world” (Braudy 135).  I think this statement is very true of what Morris tries to do here.  He not only uses the reality of what is going on in Phil’s world, but he also adds these objects in to correlate and further drive the message of his words home. 

            Now back to Phil.  He starts to go into his spiel about the R2/A2 formula, and he talks about motivation.  He states that he taught motivation classes, again trying to sell himself as a self help guru.  He uses the R2/A2 method as a way to cope with everything in life.  Phil uses the method as a way help him strive to get whatever he wants or needs to be happy. 

 He keeps asking the question “what does it mean to me?”  By “this” he means life.  He is trying to find the meaning of life, and trying to teach others to find the meaning as well by using this formula for every situation. This is ironic because how can someone else teach others to find the meaning in their life?  I do not feel that anyone can ever really know what the meaning of life is for certain.  It is ambiguous and everyone can interpret the meaning of their life and existence as a whole in different ways. 

Supposedly Phil thinks he has found a formula including three theories that will help anyone to discover what they want to do in there life and how to go about doing it.  Each time he mentions one of these theories, he moves his hands in an emphasizing way, whether unconscious of it or not.  I feel that he probably does not even realize that while he is putting on this self help persona, that he is really revealing his real feelings about his life and what it takes to make him happy in life. 

He states “Why am I here” and then he answers “because you want to.”  I think this is a really important message that he weaves into is own life.  A person certainly has to want to be alive to truly live and enjoy life, and by him saying this, he shows that he does enjoy his life now that he has the pressures of a stressful job off his shoulders, but that he could enjoy it even more if successful in a career in which he gets to share his beliefs. He has the time to reflect on these feelings that he is having about what his life means. 

He also talks about what he calls “the activity knowledge,” which has a very deep message behind it.  He basically explains this as having a formula to find an answer.  I take this to mean that one has to want to question what the reason for their life is in order to find it.  The quest for one’s truth would be the formula that they would need in order to be able to fulfill their destiny.  While he explains this, he moves his hands in a circular motion, which gives the illustration of the formula working and cranking to find the answer.  Later he says that he does not yet have this “activity knowledge” but that by getting the “know-how,” he is on his way to reaching this formula.  The two ideas correlate together in that way.

The third theory Phil has is that one has to have “the know-how or experience” to succeed. It is quite funny to me that as soon as he says this, we get a cut to him mowing the grass again.  It is as if Morris is telling us that this is what he has the knowledge to do in life, and Phil even states that what he is currently doing is giving him the “know-how.”  I do not feel that he necessary means cutting grass is giving him knowledge, but that having the time to think and understand himself more is the benefit he is getting. This does not make him look like he is living up to the image of success that he is trying to portray, but at the same time, he seems to be happy in his life by having freedom in a calm environment.

It makes me wonder if Phil asked to be filmed in front of the pool to exude an air of wealth, or if Morris positioned him there to contrast with the images of him mowing the cemetery grass. Either way, the scene was intended to manipulate the viewer for some reason. If Phil picked the location, then he was trying to make himself into something he is not.  If Morris chose to tape there, then he was again trying to get us to question the authenticity of Phil’s words.  It is something that I keep thinking about because I want to believe that Morris did it so that I can believe Phil’s words more.  I think because some of the things he says are so profound about how he perceives the meaning of his life, that I want to feel that it is authentic and not merely for the showmanship aspect of it. 

            I also want to analyze the next scene about Danny’s thoughts and how Morris wants us to see him in a different way than he wants us to see Phil.  Again, he starts us off by having the mother give an introduction of her younger son.  Instead of starting off talking about his failures like she did with Phil, she starts with his success in graduating from college, but she then condescends him by talking about how he could not get a job and when he had no other choice he came back home to work at the cemetery as well.  She is very manipulative in getting both of her son’s back home, not wanting to give up her control over them. 

            Then there is a cut to an image of cactus and a house on a hill; very peaceful scenery to go along with Danny’s soft voice and tranquil mentality.  Then we see Danny’s interview.  At first, he is indoors in front of a television, which shows the reflection of the memorial park in it.  This is interesting because I take it to mean that someday Danny would like to be on that television screen performing his music, but the television’s reflection is like a crystal ball predicting that all he’ll ever be is the owner of a pet cemetery. 

            Danny talks about his days at college and how he did a lot of partying.  He says the most important part of learning is that “you are applying your brain; your exercising it.”  This makes sense to me.  Of course one must apply themselves in whatever they are doing, whether it is burying pets or making music, more importantly, one must apply themselves in life.

            Then we are cut to Danny outside, in a hammock with his guitar.  It is a very peaceful image and at first he has his eyes closed as if to feel the music.  The music he is making is very serene and beautiful. The wind is blowing this string on a stick behind him as well as the trees and his hammock signifying movement and being alive. Everything in this image has very earthy colors that make me think of life. 

Now we get the inspiration for his music.  He talks about how he fell in love at college and the music seems more melancholy as he says this. As he reflects back on this relationship, he has some wise thoughts about love, which can also be applied to life in general.  Danny states “true love is experiencing many different types of loves and learning what you want out of a relationship.”  I feel that underneath this he is talking more about life in general that to truly find what one wants out of life they must try lots of different things and find what it is that makes them happy.  He also states that through this relationship he learned “nothing lasts forever,” which also applies to life, meaning that everyone dies and everything ends, but that everyone should make the most of life while they are here.

Danny also talks about having heartache over this relationship and he says that “A broken heart is something that everyone should experience because it makes you appreciate any future experiences that you have.”  I find that this line is one of the deepest thoughts that he speaks because I definitely see this meaning going beyond love and applying to life in general.  I feel that it means that everyone experiences life, but also needs to live through a death in some form, so that they can truly value life and to be able to find the distinct meaning of it for themselves. 

He also says “You’ve felt the hurt so you can enjoy the positive aspects of love.”  Again, I feel like this refers more to life and death, and that it means once someone has experienced the death of a loved one, they can appreciate the happiness of life so much more because of the painful occurrence.  From my personal experience, I think this is true because I never take a second of my life for granted because I have seen up close how quickly and unexpectedly it can be taken away. 

It is odd to me that once he finishes all the love and life talk, he totally changes gears to talk about coming back home.  He makes a comment about how he has experienced all the aforementioned things and then way he goes into talking about home and working at the pet cemetery.  It makes me draw the conclusion that once he went out and discovered things about himself away from home and experienced the death of a relationship, that he decided that what was best for his life return home. 

As he explains how he ended up back home, we see a shot of the cemetery, and then him in the hammock again. He is swaying in the wind, which signifies that he is living his life on his terms. Then he tells us that he lives in the house that we were shown at the beginning of his interview, so it comes full circle.  At the very end of this scene there is a close up of his feet rocking back and forth in the hammock and his music plays.  I am not really sure what to make of that image but it seems powerful to me, like Morris is trying to tell us something.  The image is very tranquil and makes me feel like Danny has found peace with his life. “Film, like any other art form, must offer an interpretation of the world or, by the manipulation of the camera, create an alternative world” (Braudy 136).  I feel like Morris does just that with these images of Danny.

Danny has a calmness to him that makes me like and trust him more than Phil.  I feel that his is using this opportunity to promote himself and his music, but he does it in a more inconspicuous way than Phil does by simply playing his guitar.    Whereas Phil appears full of himself and like he is showing off his self help knowledge, Danny seems to be more at peace and honestly reflecting on his life.  I also feel that Phil ends up pondering his life in a sincere way, but that he does not start off with that intention the way that Danny does.  I would have to agree more with how Danny feels about life than Phil. 

The second part of my final blog will start here with responses to some interesting blog posts about Morris and Gates of Heaven. 

The first one I would like to talk about is a post from Robyn’s blog.  I agree with what she says about Morris’ use of editing in the film.  I stated earlier about how he used editing to manipulate how the viewer would see Phil in a contradictory way, but he also used it to show Danny in a more believable way to make us want to relate to him.

I found Beth’s post about Morris’ films to be interesting as well.  As I watch Morris’ films, I find myself asking the same thing and trying to figure out what hidden messages I should be looking, as well as what  underlying theme we should be getting from his documentaries.  As I wrote this paper and viewed various scenes, I often found myself wondering what certain colors meant and how the placement of the people in the film affected the theme. 

      Serena makes an insightful point with her blog about documentaries.    I would have to agree that Gates of Heaven does educate us and all of Morris’ documentaries do in someway.  While it may not be the typical way that a documentary normally informs us about something, Morris does indeed teach us about different views on life and death.  He uses covers such as a pet cemetary as a way to show us a deeper meaning and to help us relate the topics back to everyday life.

        As far as the collaboration on the painting, I think it is interesting that she is so involved in the signing of the painting because although Eben is the artist, she is responsible for the painting really coming to life. Without Jennie popping up into his life, I think he would have never realized his potential as an artist because he had to have her as his subject to really come alive in his work. I think it is fair to say that she manipulated the way the finished work would turn out. She chose when to visit him and what times in her life she wanted him to put into the representation. Maybe that is why she seems so shocked in the film to see herself. She gave him the ingredients but she did not know how the finished product would turn out until he showed her. I feel that because of this, it was a collaboration between the artist and the subject that completed the look of the portrait, which would explain why the film shows her saying his name as he signs the portrait.

I also was expecting more comments from the present time like the book starts with.  Eben also reverts back to present time on a few occasions when he mentions that his portrait of Jennie ends up in the museum, and I thought that at the end he would go back to the present time.  The book kind of abruptly ends. 

            At first, it seems strange for Eben to approach the little girl (kind of a no no in today’s world), but he seems genuinely concerned for her.  It is odd to me that he could fall for her though, since she was just a little girl when they first met.  He gets kind of obsessive over her which is a tad creepy. 

            I really like the descriptions of the places and the artwork.  It is really believable that the story is being told through the artist’s eyes because he is so descriptive as he tells the story.  I enjoy that aspect of the novel because it is really easy to visualize his paintings and murals.  And I totally agree with how terrible the cover art is because I picture Jennie quite differently than she is portrayed on the cover. 

R.I.P. Willy 1986-2007