This post is part of a larger deep dive
Curious about the role of memory formation and retrieval in Memento? Check out Memento Explained!
Or read the full Memento article!
Director: Christopher Nolan
Producer: Suzanne Todd, Jennifer Todd
Writer: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Guy Pearce, Carrie-Anne Moss, Joe Pantoliano
Year: 2000
Duration: 1h 53m
Country: U.S.A.
Language: English
Our rating
Your rating
When you watch a movie, it’s normal to expect a certain logic in how the storyline progresses. There is a beginning, a middle and an end. The storyline flows in a direction that doesn’t require the viewers to spend enormous brain processing piecing the sequences together.
These are “rules” that most cinematographers adhere to, and which we usually take it for granted.
Memento is an exception to this “rule”.
And I have to admit that the first time I watched Memento, it was a somewhat uncomfortable experience.
Because I watched the film shortly after it came out of the cinema, I thought maybe the feeling I had experienced was the result of my admittedly limited and non-eclectic cinematographic experience at the time.
However, having re-watched it 20 years later I stand by my initial evaluation – it’s perplexing. And note that I don’t mean it as a criticism. In fact, I revel in movies that take me out of my comfort zone, and weird movies surely fit the bill.
But Memento isn’t the typical weird. As we will see below, putting the story in its correct temporal order and with a few educated hunches, it is actually relatively easy to piece together.
As you will have noticed if you’ve watched the film, the weirdness comes, ironically, from the toll it takes on our working memory.
In this article we explore why that is.
Memento stars Guy Pierce as Leonard Shelby. One night, two thugs break in the house where Leonard and his wife, Catherine, live. The thugs rape and murder Leonard’s wife. Leonard manages to shoot one of the thugs dead but a second thug hits him on the head and escapes. The trauma to head causes permanent brain damage, and, as a result, Leonard cannot make any new memories. He decides to avenge his wife’s murder by tracking down the second thug and kill him, resorting to notes, tattoos and Polaroid photographs to keep track of his investigation.
The film is presented in reverse order: the first scene of the film is the last event of the story in its correct temporal order, whereas the last colour scene of the film is supposed to be the beginning of the story in its correct temporal order.
The black and white sequences are the beginning of the timeline and are presented in the correct temporal order. The last black-and-white scene merges into a colour scene (when Leonard kills Jimmy Grants). The story then progresses backwards until the very first scene of the film (Leonard shooting Teddy).
Even though the film is often described as having a non-linear narrative, it really isn’t. The story happens to be quite linear (each scene depends on the events of both the preceding and the following scene), it’s just presented in reverse order.
The team used an interesting blend of cinematographic techniques. The cameras follow Leonard around wherever he goes; and the way he rummages through pictures and documents while we hear his thoughts makes it all a very intimate viewing experience.
Even the palette of the picture was carefully considered. It appears, Nolan expressed the wish to turn the film all blue, but in the end, the production team decided to use more hues to make it look more realistic. Nevertheless, the amount of colours utilised was greatly restricted, thus leading to a perfect compromise between realistic scenes, but at the same time, a feeling of lacking.
And I loved the idea of presenting the film backwards!
Nolan apparently spent months trying to figure out how to bring the audience into Leonard’s point of view. He once said: “How do you give the audience experience of not being able to remember things? […] One day it occurred to me that all information could be given to the audience through the protagonist. […] The way to do that is to structure it backwards”.
The reversed scenes are such an ingenious technique, that I wonder why on earth hasn’t anyone thought of something like that before.
But Nolan was truly audacious. Just imagine the amount of resistance he must have felt when presenting his idea. It would be as if someone had thought of a crime/mystery film where you already know who the murderer is. How would a film like that even work?
But Memento does work. The storyline is so well-devised that the most interesting events were placed at the beginning of the storyline (i.e., at the end of the film). If you think about it, this is very odd, since the climax of a story is usually reached when a certain progression has built up.
Since we know from the get-go that Leonard killed Teddy (who he believes was his wife’s murderer), the viewer is left puzzled and conflicted as to what led Leonard, an amnesiac, to specifically target Teddy with such conviction.
Clues to Leonard’s reasoning are only given at the end of the film, thus resolving the viewer’s conflict and providing him/her with a sense of completion.
Brilliant!
If you’re lucky to be watching the film for the first time, I think now is just as a good of a time as any to watch it. Memento is one of those films that does not age.
What’s more, Memento was Nolan’s second feature-length film, so for a relatively inexperienced director at the time (2000/2001), Memento was a terrific achievement.
Here at Mindlybiz, Memento gets a star rating of 5.
As I mentioned above, Memento’s story is not difficult to understand. Contrary to how it’s often described, Memento’s story is quite linear, only presented in reverse chronological order.
True that there can be at least two competing interpretations about who Leonard really was and what really happened to his wife. However, none of them is less “correct” than the other. As you’ll see, most of the clues supporting either interpretation are presented in the film in one way or another. In the end, it’s up to the viewer to determine which interpretation feels right to him/her.
Because of this reason we decided to give Memento a Bizarrometer score of 2.
As the sequence of the film is presented in reverse, we know how the story ends from the beginning. Leonard kills a guy named Teddy, thinking he was the second thug that had murdered his wife, Catherine.
As the film unfolds in reverse order, we realise that Teddy is a corrupt cop who wasn’t actually involved in the murder of Leonard’s wife. Towards the end of the film, Teddy explains his version of the events regarding Leonard and the attack on his wife. A frustrated and confused Leonard then decides to frame Teddy for Catherine’s murder, even though Leonard is well-aware Teddy isn’t the actual assassin.
So, we are left with, at least, two competing interpretations:
Interpretation 1 (I1): Leonard witnessed the rape of his wife and attempted murder, but his wife survived the attack. Leonard was hit on the head, and the resulting injury caused his amnesia. An officer named John Gammel (a.k.a. Teddy) took Leonard’s wife case. He sympathised with Leonard’s ordeal and helped him track the thug that escaped, so that Leonard could kill him. Even though Leonard does kill him, he cannot remember that he did, so he never feels he’s avenged his wife.
Not believing Leonard’s condition, Leonard’s wife tries the ultimate test in which she asks him to administer insulin shots over and over again to see if he snaps out of it. However, Leonard cannot remember having already administered the shots, so she dies with an overdose. To escape feelings of guilt for accidentally killing his wife, Leonard represses this entire event, and unconsciously edits the whole episode in memory as if it had happened to Sammy Jankis, a conman who Leonard exposed during his days as a claims insurance investigator.
Interpretation 2 (I2): Leonard’s wife was raped and murdered by one of the thugs, who Leonard kills with his revolver. The second thug hits Leonard and escapes, leaving Leonard with anterograde amnesia. The police archive the case, dismissing Leonard’s account that a second thug ever existed. So, Leonard decides to avenge his wife’s murder, by pursuing the second thug on his own. With the help of police acquaintances he gets hold of the case file and identifies a drug dealer called John G as the thug that escaped. Leonard has been on the chase for John G. ever since.
Sammy Jankis was an actual amnesiac (psychological amnesia) whose insurance claims Leonard was investigated. Because Leonard ruled the amnesia as psychological (not physical) Sammy and his wife didn’t get insurance money, and Leonard got promoted. Sammy accidentally kills his wife with an overdose of insulin shots and ends up in a nursing home.
Arguing about which interpretation is the correct one is, in my opinion, a moot point. The reason being that they are both likely correct! Nolan was adamant not to give away his favourite interpretation, and I believe he purposefully injected some ambiguity into the film so that either interpretation could be equally valid.
So, in the end, it all boils down to which interpretation you fancy the most.
One thing is certain though: Leonard intentionally makes Teddy a target. He is probably convinced Teddy isn’t his wife’s attacker, but nonetheless goes ahead with the wicked plan to frame him for his wife’s attack.
Why does he do it? Again, it all depends on which interpretation you find more likely.
If you lean towards I1, then Leonard frames Teddy because he does not want to accept Teddy’s account of events, even though he might suspect he is right. Knowing that John G. is already dead makes him feel that his life has lost its purpose. Note that he could have simply written down everything Teddy had told him, with a note to find evidence to either corroborate or disprove Teddy’s version. However, he deliberately chooses to burn the photograph and completely discards these crucial pieces of information.
By always having a John G. to chase, ensures that his life has some meaning (as he mentions in the end of the film, “I have to believe my actions still have meaning. Even if I can’t remember them”).
If you believe I2 instead, perhaps Leonard is indeed certain that Teddy is lying about everything he has told him, and that one way to be sure that Teddy doesn’t interfere with his quest to find the real John G. is to eliminate him. Perhaps he even suspects that Teddy might be his wife’s killer, given that he is also called John G. (a fact, hitherto unknown to Leonard).
Before expounding on these interpretations, let’s go all sciency and talk a bit about memory.
Masterpiece
amazing
amazing. 5-stars. blown away. great storytelling and structure. crazy twist, one of my favourite movies ever. youd never see it coming and its quite tragic when you think about it
Completely agree! Is there a particular interpretation of the ending you gravitate towards?
By the way, that was a very fitting name you have chosen 😀