Avaliações de usuários

The film starts with an man talking about his journey to achieve his dream of opening a pet cemetery in the south bay of San Francisco. We meet the people who help him: investors, friends, pet lovers. We also meet the guy against him, the guy who makes a living out of disposing of dead animals. This is the first part of the film. The second part of the film we meet a family that runs a successful pet cemetery, called the Bubbling Well Pet Cemetery. We meet the father, the head of the business, his wife, the moral supporter, for a lack of a better definition, and we meet the two sons involved in assisting in operations, one is a former insurance worker, the other is a business admin college grad. This is the basic outline of the film. And this sounds kind of boring, maybe. But boring it is not. If anything, slow at times. Thats because the camera is usually completely still and people are positioned in front of the camera, talking into it. What is interesting is how when these characters talk they let loose and go on tangents, exposing their world views, usually in the context of pets, and what we see is the humanity of these seemingly regular people, their musings on life and death, companionship, love, filial duty. For instance, the first man with the pet cemetery idea talks about how you can't trust people, how if you turn around they might stab you in the back, but his dog would never do this because you can trust your dog. The dead pet disposal guy rants about, and is surprised at the emotional connection people have with pets, as though it was something he just discovered in his line of work, and his line of work is treated by him as just a job, not anything controversial. And the sons of the successful pet cemetery owner, one is a motivational speaker. He talks about projecting ideas of success and refraining from using negative words with his little daughter, when she has done something wrong. And the other son talks about his musical aspirations and how he found out what love is in college and then found out about the hard break up afterwards. Erol Morris succeeds at exposing the layers of peoples in a real light, sometimes showing the contradictory and absurdness of peoples personalities and yet also showing the genuineness of people and their intentions. At times the film is comical, at times very serious, and other times sad. Morris is a keen observer of human behavior and this film illustrates this very well. For some local history from the southern SF bay area, for an interesting look at peoples views on very common human issues we can all relate with and of course on pets, see this nice movie. 8 out of 10.

Early Errol Morris documentary, pitting the true believers versus the salesmen of the world. Both trying to fill a need, I got the vibe that when Floyd McClure talked about that specifically, he was really talking about the emotional hole left in people's lives by a departed pet. Rather than a hole in one's wallet, or just the hole in the ground.

Evidently the first part of this took place darn close to where I live these days: Los Altos, CA! Indeed there is a "Gates of Heaven" cemetery up by Rancho San Antonio, but I think that's just for us two-legged critters.

While this definitely had some clever editing (a couple of times, he turned on a word beautifully from one interviewee to the next), there was a lot of strange miscellany left in the film. I call to the witness stand the lady who loaned her son $400 for a car, but never sees him any more. Additionally the two squabbling ladies of Los Altos. Fascinating to watch, and more of a precursor to Morris' "First Person" show (worth catching if you can!) He just kind of sets the camera down and let's folks go awhile...like a confessional/diary as much as his latter day interregatron.

Somehow, whether by coaxing them with a Coors, or just quietly sitting and filming, Morris gets people to really expound on whatever details of their life seem to really matter to them. A couple of the pet couples are placed before tall images of flora? Not sure of the significance.

The most touching moment is the filming of the little tombstones for a variety of pets, all with some heartfelt little sententia or sweet goodbye. Putting it on film in a way makes these even more immortal.

Not sure how people who don't have any pets at all will react to this. I watched this with our 11-year old Wire Fox Terrier, but he zonked out (tends to prefer Bollywwod?). But I'm sitting there thinking of his mortality and the proposed $3K charge for cataract surgery and being a bit torn between loving my pet deeply, versus calculating the cost of him.

I guess the rendering man is important; he did all he could to wipe the smirk off his face having clearly jumped the shark on the pet v. food debate. And I mean putting food on his table...as much as quasi-food like bonemeal and by-products. For him, it was just a job *clearly* and he seemed perplexed how anybody could see it otherwise.

But bottom line, all of these people were making their living (including Morris as the filmmaker) off the death of pets. We want our lives to be filled with more than making our rent and paying our bills, and one way we try to do that is through our relationships with pets.

This film's alright, not up there with some of Morris' other work. Oddly comic at times. Like jeez, the pet cemetery called "Bubbling Well", that sounds like a code phrase for a rendering plant. Ick. "Gates of Heaven" felt at times like a strange good-guy/bad-guy dramatic film rather than a documentary. By the way, where are the trophy (Caine?) and guitar (Abel?) brothers today?? Looks like they're still in business

http://www.bubbling-well.com/

Bottom line, I'd say see this, but only *after* taking the dog out for a nice walk or a run along the beach.

6/10

PS My dog wants to add

"A cemetery for cats, come on you've got to be kidding!"

At first glance, Gates of Heaven appears to be a documentary about the lives of people that run pet cemetaries. On second glance, you realize you are witnessing a visual essay on the subject of death and dying, and how these average folk deal with it.

There are esesentially three parts to the film. All deal with either the struggle to build a pet cemetery or maintaining a pet cemetery. The most interesting segment is with a family who runs a successful cemetery in the desert of California. You see generations of a family that has done nothing but run this business. They explain the philosophy behind why they choose to bury pets, and why pets deserve burial just as humans do.

Morris lets the camera do all the work. With the exception of two shots every other one is static. A talking head documentary that could probably fit the definition exactly. Morris knows when exactly to inject humor into the film, just enough to keep you interested.

If you saw this film nowadays, you would expect it to be on Lifetime or some other obscure cable channel. With a third glance and possibly a fourth, you can see the message Morris is trying to get across. Everyone has a way of dealing with death. It is just how you deal with it that determines how comfortable you are with it.

GATES OF HEAVEN is one of those fascinating films that no matter how many times you see, the mysteries contained in it only get deeper. The film is a documentary about pet cemeteries, but what may have turned into a freak show- a movie about people who value pets so much they pay thousands of dollars to bury them- becomes an inspection of the human soul. The film is a deep, dark chasm of human emotion. Errol Morris starts his famous documentary style of just letting people talk. Unlike Michael Moore or Nick Broomfield, who are as much the subject of their own documentaries as their directors, we never see or even hear Morris' voice. He just lets the people tell their story their way. The film is haunting and will stay with the viewer long after it's over. It truly is a landmark film in movie history. Roger Ebert was not overstating this movies genius when he named it one of the ten best films of all time. My Grade: 10/10

I first saw this movie in a college theater in its initial release. The movie poster claimed it was "Not quite a movie about pet cemeteries." I didn't know what to expect, but I have always liked the offbeat. This movie, which even Roger Ebert calls one of his all-time favorites, turned out to be offbeat and much, much more.

Without poking fun at his subjects, Morris exposes us to the world of pet cemeteries--both the owners and caretakers of them and the people who've placed the remains of a cherished pet in their care. Sometimes we are moved by empathy; other times we laugh out loud at the preposterousness of it. (Are they for real?) At no time does Morris pass judgment. He leaves that up to us.

Along the way we meet the owner of a rendering service, and learn what happens when the circus comes to town. We learn that "God" is "dog" spelled backwards, and we meet an aspiring musician. Morris captures on film the things that make us human: grief, love, self-importance, and an unabashed silliness. The result is a quirky, poignant, and sometimes hilarious look at man's relationship with his pets.

I saw this film for the first time about 2 years ago on IFC and thankfully I videotaped it. Since then, I've watched it 10 or 11 times and it always fascinates me. I especially like the last third of the film in which we meet the harberts family who own the Bubbling Well Pet Cemetary in Nappa Valley. They all seem so sincere and at the same time they crack me up. Errol Morris just has a way of letting real life people go on and on about a subject without it ever becoming boring...

"Gates of Heaven" is a 1978 film by acclaimed documentarian Errol Morris, which ostensibly is about the concept of the pet cemetery. Well, we *do* learn a little bit about the ins and outs of this particular niche business, but mostly, this non-fiction feature is about people, and getting to know their stories. They discuss their philosophies, approaches to problems, their motivations, their back stories, etc. And we also get some anecdotes from incidental characters regarding their beloved animal companions.

"Gates of Heaven" wouldn't suit all tastes. Morris isn't too concerned with making it particularly cinematic, and it mostly consists of people sitting down and giving interviews straight to an unmoving camera. This might seem boring to some people, but for this viewer, the individuals speaking here are people worth getting to know. It's pleasant to hear them speak, and they do so from the heart.

There are two basic stories: one of a pet cemetery that was the dream of a man named Floyd "Mac" McClure. Unfortunately, his dream didn't pan out. Then we hear about the family whose pet cemetery has been successful because they supposedly follow "good business practices".

We also get an earful about the "rendering" business, of taking dead animals and turning them into animal by-products. (Such as glue.) This will undoubtedly sound ghoulish to many viewers.

Ultimately, "Gates of Heaven" works because it is sensitive to the love that many humans have for their faithful animal companions - dogs, cats, birds, rodents, fish, etc. So the documentary does have resonance. While some people may question the priorities of those who pay big money to give their pets a proper send-off, the material is definitely relatable to others.

A good film with heart that does give its audience some poignant things to think about.

Seven out of 10.

Ebert put this film on his top 10 films of all time list. Now for this film to be up there with Citizen Kane and The Third Man, I was expecting to be thrown from my seat... that didn't happen.

I don't know how to rate this film. All throughout the doc, I didn't know what to make of it. The people were strangely saying very, very profound things, but I had to try hard to discard their appearance and mannerisms. I have a fear that the antics of Christopher Guest among others mocking simple people puts this film as a disadvantage. Halfway though I asked myself "Is this a comedy that I'm just not getting?" It had a Guffman air to it, which is to simply let the people talk and expect you to laugh. But is wasn't. I listened extra hard and started to see that it clearly did not show any comedic elements, but I still didn't know what to make of it. This film requires multiple viewings, but I don't really wanna see it again.

Ebert is right, this film is about much, much, much more than a Pet Cemetary. However, it is no where near one of the 10 greatest films of all time. Ebert must have lost a lot or pets or have a fixation on that movie theater in the sky.

A story about a pet cemetery may not sound appealing but Gates Of Heaven offers insight into the compassion humans feel for animals, explores the meaning of life and death, and portrays fascinating characters throughout. A slow film that puts you along side the characters as events unfold about the struggles of trying to build a pet cemetery and to keep it running despite the opposition.

The movie reveals so much about these people by simply letting them talk. and this is not for people who are so accustomed to high budget documentaries with tense music to hold your attention throughout the run time with with exquisitely framed shots and less music to accompany the scenes.

Werner Herzog dared to eat his shoe if the documentary was released in theaters. Later a short film was made of Herzog dining on his footwear titled "Werner Herzog Eats His Shoes".

When legendary director and film professor Werner Herzog told a puffed-chested student, Errol Morris, that if he will ever make a film about pet cemeteries, he would eat his own shoe, I bet you he did not say it in disbelief--he was daring Morris to do it. And what better test? The subject seems like it was randomly picked from a box. Yet here I am now, writing not a review, but giving an ovation to one of the most legendary works of art ever made.

Yet the subject is not what makes or breaks a documentary--it is the people. What they say? How they talk? "Gates of Heaven" has, probably, the most fascinating subjects. Their personalities are so complex, often so well-defined, that sometimes I felt they were playing some sort of characters! And what is this, exactly? I cried, laughed and then straight-up felt ridiculous multiple times, in varying order at a really fast pace. Is it really a documentary to bring to attention the pet cemetery business (yup, it's a thing) or an in-depth study into the personalities and philosophies of the type of people who would bury their companions? It is both these things and probably more.

Morris used absolutely no narration, everything being carried by the people interviewed. It starts with Floyd McClure, the first man who initiated the project and who then lost it because he simply had too much of a heart. He felt like he had a responsibility to these pets, to repay them in death for the joy they brought to people in life. This is both ridiculous and heart-warming. It's one of the many moments in which the film leaved me unsure what to feel. I don't know if it dared me to ponder at his philosophy, or just to fascinate me of what an unusual man he is. In any case, he speaks the truth and that is the key, but like most men in this film, he second-guesses human nature's purity, and found honesty in his little pets. "People like people because they like one another; and people don't trust one another thoroughly like an animal and a human being. I can know you very well but when I turn my back, I don't know you, not truly. But my little dog, I can turn my back on my little dog and I know he's my little friend. He's not gonna jump on me, or bite me... But human beings cannot be this way".

The people interviewed seem to have a pageant for philosophy. But of course they consider human relationship beneath an animal-human relationship. This takes place in California, in an America booming with industry, privilege and material well-being. It was a time when the United States was a democratic paragon. A well-oiled system in full effect, pushing people to find primordial, unconditional love in their pets. Their ever-increasing philosophies pushes this documentary into a league of its own. It is not really about pet cemeteries, as it is about anything else other than that. Is Morris just letting the camera roll as the people talk? Is he filming them, or just pressing "record" and then going for a bite with his crew and mocking the subjects for their seriousness, as well as Herzog for having to eat his shoe and subsequently, myself, for feeling, well, anything.

Whatever his intentions, the depth of this thing is true. Intended or not, this is probably the most insightful film I have ever seen. This is saying a lot for a documentary! Only when you realize that its insight goes out and away from pet cemeteries you start to realize you are watching something special. Apart from some basic technical presentations, it is, in the end, people just talking about themselves. But how unbelievable it is that it took a freaking pet cemetery to get people to open themselves up. "There's your dog; your dog's dead. But where's the thing that made it move? It had to be something, didn't it?" There it is; the quintessential question to life.

I haven't even mentioned the Harberts, yet. The two brothers who were the new owners of the cemetery. Phillip is the older one, more clean-cut than Danny, and his motives are strictly business-wise as it feels like he has a pathological need to prove himself. And what better to make a man feel a man than a pet cemetery, amirite? Danny, on the other hand, is what I think would pass for a hipster these days. He is lonely and an outsider. It is funny how they both end up talking about themselves more than they do about the cemetery. In fact, the pet cemetery is the least talked-about in this film and there is something unusual that I simply cannot put my finger on. It is killing me right now.

Whatever this thing is, it is an eternal, theistic legend; a static, linear discussion concealing an elaborate test for a viewer's response to a film. Or maybe it isn't. Maybe Morris just got lucky with the people he interviewed--or maybe they are paid actors? Nobody knows, and if you think you know, you probably don't, either. Herzog was a man of his word, by the way.

Someone made the comment that this film "is like a train wreck" and that you can't look away. This description fits to a tee. It is an excellent expose of pet owners and their attitudes towards their pet's death. I remember a dog of mine dying and not wanting to know what the vet was to do with the body. It's a tough thing if you love animals. Good stuff. 6.5 of 10

Comparable to 2001: A Space Odyssey, Apocalypse Now, Bicycle Thieves, and Citizen Kane, in its cinematic brilliance. Touching and poignant, in its own subtle way. Don't look for something obvious to blow you away. Just watch it, embrace it, and feel it. And then you will wonder at it. The film is a documentary about two pet cemeteries, but reaches far beyond this in its scope. It is immensely thought provoking, and the best description possible is that it is a cross between a Norman Rockwell painting, and Phillip Glass song. Be sure to check out other Errol Morris titles. He is a genius.

If this had been the first Errol Morris documentary I'd seen, then perhaps I would have enjoyed it much more than I did. After having seen possibly his best film, MR. DEATH (a magnificent documentary by Morris), I think my expectations for GATES OF HEAVEN were higher than what it delivered.

This film is a documentary about pet cemeteries--the people who own them, run them, patronize them or who are in affiliated industries. Like other Morris documentaries I've seen, there is no narration--the people just talk and talk and talk. While this can work very well, in this documentary it created a piece with little sense of direction or purpose. Sometimes, what you saw was pretty interesting or insightful and often it just seemed like pointless rambling. I really wish Morris had taken the more poignant moments and fleshed them out some more. In particular, the rather sad old lady towards the beginning who just ranted about how her son takes advantage of her and how she's all alone--this was VERY powerful and compelling but then the scene abruptly changed--leaving me feeling rather annoyed. Another interesting person was the guy at the rendering plant. While I agreed, in part, with him and his sensibilities, he sure came off as a bit of a jerk and I wanted this to be pursued as well.

Overall, this is a very hit or miss film with many dull moments--peppered by some that are actually a bit intriguing. My advice is to try some of Morris' other documentaries--with experience, they certainly got better.

UPDATE: Apparently, director Werner Herzog told Morris that he'd eat his shoe if GATES OF HEAVEN ever got released. And, since it did, Les Blank made a strange little documentary in which Herzog talks (A LOT) and eats his shoe. I saw it on Turner Classic Movies recently.

As an animal lover I found many poignant moments here. The woman who would sometimes forget her dog was dead--I went through that myself in my teens with my beloved childhood dog, so I know how painful it is. And the cemetery owner's theory that pets are more important now because of the pill makes a lot of sense. Nevertheless, I feel certain Christopher Guest MUST have had this film in mind when he made "Best in Show"! Oh my god there is some unintended hilarity here. On the part of the interviewees, that is; I'm sure Morris knew what he had. The cemetery family, the rendering plant manager...hoo boy! The overall feeling, though, is that we love our animals and they are indeed very special and precious.

The elderly woman talking about her ungrateful bum of a son was very sad...I'm going to go call my mother right now.

They're not like us entirely, but they're just like us in an essential way: they want to have a good, solid profession (yes, it is as owners and workers at a pet cemetery), and they love(d) their pets. There's an essential part of the doc where a woman talks about the 'spirit' and how when a body dies the spirit must go elsewhere.

Although the topic of if there is heaven or hell or any kind of afterlife can be debated till days end, a film like Gates of Heaven, Errol Morris' debut, gives the very clear notion that an animal does have a spirit, because the human being that cares for it has a level of love and compassion and just sheer avoidance of loneliness that a spirit must be present. Life becomes all the greater of importance when loss comes, as a cycle comes for those who have loved and lost, and it's just the same with animals as with people. You don't have to be an eccentric, like some may be (or may not be depending on your definition of eccentric), to know what life is, at the least when it's gone.

There's not one person in Morris' bizarrely funny and expertly unobtrusive look at the lives and work of those involved with pet cemeteries who is without some kind of spirit, and in all their slightly strange (the guy who works at the meat processing plant), sort of mockable in the Christopher Guest sense (there's one guy, the ex-insurance agent son of the cemetery worker, who goes by the "Double As and Double Rs" as rules for life and has trophies on his desk when he had job applicants for encouragement), and cheerfully quaint (the old lady who complains about her son, and wishes she could drive) appearances on film, they're very much alive.

It's not exactly a satire, though one might think it was an off-key one if it were a mockumentary. 'Gates' is layered in ways that many documentaries try to shy away from, and at the same time Morris has a definite knack for presenting the people objectively- or however much a documentary filmmaker, or any filmmaker, can present them 'as is' in their testimonials- while having a very subtle hand with subjectivity with the camera. It's obvious Morris didn't have much money to make the film (it took Herzog and eating his shoe to help get the film released), but there are little moments of invention, like the spinning newspaper to the headline, or the unflinching angles on the ex-plot-of-land for the dead pets which is now next to a highway, or just simple pans or having one man- the musician son of the Harberts family- listening to the music he's recorded.

Morris has lots of things like that going on, but it's really all a series of stories and personal accounts of two sides of pet cemetery workers/owners: the completely heartfelt and crippled Floyd McClure, who due to not getting all the paperwork right, despite having all of the heart he could muster up, lost his pet cemetery and all the animals were dug up. Seeing this gentle man of conscience is one part of Morris's layering, as he's a sincere individual who truly loves the animals he worked to find resting places (and despises the equally passionate, crafty but laughable rendering plant owner), and with a fatal flaw at work that he trusted animals more than people.

But then there's the mixed flip side of the Harberts family, who took the dead pets previously buried with McClure, where the patriarch is a consummate professional, his kids either have not much interest in the outside world except their own creativity (the musician), or have accepted their lot in life as a worker for the family (the ex-insurance salesman). These are the kinds of people that one would've not really seen on Six Feet Under, if only because in this case suggestion, from the interviews, says probably more than the deep character analysis of the show.

And Morris deftly mixes these two stories with some people who've had their pets buried, or knew people who had their pets buried, at the cemeteries. The woman who says the part about the pet having a spirit is one, but there's also the woman who tries to get her little dog to sing, or the one who talks about the grief she had with the death of her dog, and at the end of her tips to help save one's dog the husband says "neutered."

There are close-ups of the words on the grave-sites of the animals that ring this tragic-comic tone of the film ever so much, that there's enough in just having a memory left, of remembrances for these creatures that lived as short as two years and as long as sometimes twenty, for those who were closest to them. Gates of Heaven, while not quite Morris's best film (Fog of War and especially Thin Blue Line are higher up, though not by a lot) is a worthwhile 80 minute observation of the shaky but absolute reasons why that people need pets, and in effect just need each other period.

A documentary about a pet cemetery in California, and the people who have pets buried there.

Roger Ebert wrote that the film is an "underground legend," and in 1997 put it in his list of The Great Movies. This is a very strange film to have on the Great Movies list, especially considering it is probably not generally thought of as Morris' best. He is much more well known for "Thin Blue Line" or "Fog of War", for example.

But everyone has to start somewhere, and he started off with some quirky people. We see that here, and we see that with "Vernon, Florida". The Criterion collection was wise to package the two together, because they are very much the same sort of story in a way. Is it America or just humanity in general that has these oddballs?

Gates of Heaven is an interesting look at the pet cemetery business through the eyes of two pet cemetery owners (one successful, the other unsuccessful) and some of their clients. While I found the film somewhat boring, I can't deny that the people interviewed are mostly compelling characters. It is more a story of the people involved than the business, I'd like to say. It lets the people tell what their motivations are and how they feel about things relating to the subject of the documentary. Morris chooses to do this deliberately as it allows a glimpse into the human experience. I think this is a great idea but I wasn't the biggest fan of the execution. I don't particularly enjoy interviews when the interviewee is staring at the camera and a few of the people do do this. I would much rather watch someone as if they were talking to someone else, I don't know why that is. But, my biggest problem with the film is that it was too dry and boring. That could be a problem with me.

The main thing I got out of this documentary was, people were idiots in the 1970s. I mean, man, they could barely string together coherent sentences. The only person in this entire film who had any command of language was Cal Harberts, the founder of the Bubbling Well Pet Memorial Park. I enjoyed listening to his views the most.

His son Danny, who seemed like such a gentle soul and a surprisingly good musician, was also interesting, and I believe he's still alive in 2024. The park survived a wildfire in 2018 and is still operating today.

Unfortunately Dan's son David, who is now the third generation owner, appears to be a not so gentle soul and instead a very avid and ostentatious animal hunter. Which is really sad and hypocritical. I don't think Cal would approve.

This video has me half- crazed in trying to ascertain just what was the point of the whole thing. Does anyone need a movie to learn that humans have strong and sometimes bizarre pet relationships? Why mix a man"s dedication to building the best pet cemetary in the world with the tiresome motivation theory of his one son and the aimless meanderings of the other? What is the message here and why does this lame documentary deserve a cult following? Errol Morris is a favorite of mine, but this amateurish attempt of explaining death ia hardly a harbinger of his later,much greater efforts. Sorry, Ebert.

I picked a bad time to watch this movie. I just finished watching "Napoleon Dynamite," where it's unclear whether we're supposed to relate to the eccentric characters or pity and despise them. That film got me to thinking about other movies that seem to cast a condescending eye on the people involved, specifically "Waiting for Guffman," a fake documentary about small-town folk who want to take their community-theater production to Broadway, and "American Movie," a real documentary about people making a cheap horror film.

And now I watch this documentary, which tells the story of two pet cemeteries in California. And again it's unclear how the filmmaker feels about the people we meet, or how we're supposed to feel about them. Errol Morris, who followed this initial success with several other well-regarded documentaries – like "The Thin Blue Line" and "Fast, Cheap & Out of Control" – has an unobtrusive style here. He simply points the camera at people and let's them talk in long, rambling monologues. We never see or hear him, but of course his attitude is reflected in what material he chooses, how he edits it – and in the subject of the movie in the first place.

We first meet Floyd McClure, a paraplegic with a dream to create a pet cemetery. One inspiration is the death of his collie years before; and the other is the local rendering plant, which turns animals into glue. He rages against this hellish factory, not seeing the irony in noting that he couldn't smell the meat on his own table for the stench emanating from the place. He realizes his dream, only to see it fail. Then we visit a successful pet cemetery, run by a father and his two sons. One is a frustrated musician, nursing a broken heart. The other is joining the family business after selling insurance in Salt Lake City. Throughout, we also meet the people who have buried their pets.

Morris allows a lot of his subjects to cast themselves in a bad or ridiculous light. The man who runs the rendering department admits lying to the public whenever they have a beloved zoo animal. And though he's very defensive about his line of work, he can't suppress himself from calling the people who grieve over their dead pets "moaners." The older son at the successful cemetery is shown in his office, in which trophies line the desk and the shelves behind him. He claims a job applicant was impressed and inspired by the trophies. Throughout, he endlessly spouts clichés from motivational books.

Oddly, I didn't cringe as much at the people who spent thousands of dollars to bury their pets. Somehow they came off as silly, yet ennobled by their love for their animals.

Since this movie we've been treated to an endless stream of reality TV and Christopher Guest mockumentaries and Dave Letterman bits where the average guy on the street is put in the spotlight only to be made a fool of. I know a lot of people see this film as beautiful and full of interesting philosophical questions – Roger Ebert, who puts this on his all-time ten best list, prominently among them. Maybe I was in the wrong frame of mind, but I didn't enjoy it.

Errol Morris' irreverent look at the owners and patrons of pet cemeteries is often more a lampoon than a legitimate documentary, giving the impression that its director didn't mind making complete fools out of his subjects. The pet burial business can't help but invite a certain amount of mockery, but Morris goes out of his way to ridicule the people he interviews, in a series of deftly edited running monologues calculated to allow each person on the wrong end of the camera enough time to unwittingly expose his or her private neurosis. The tactic would be reprehensible if the results weren't so often hilarious (and, sometimes, inadvertently touching), although what some of these folks must have thought after seeing themselves in the finished film is anyone's guess. Morris certainly proves that truth is not only stranger than fiction but a lot funnier besides, and if his aim from the start was to find a vehicle for exposing human vanity and insecurity the film would have to be considered a stunning success.