Image by Alexandra_Koch from Pixabay One of my very first blogs was dedicated to my thoughts on the filmography of Christopher Nolan, who is considered by many to be one of the best directors of his generation alongside the likes of David Fincher, P.T. Anderson, and Quentin Tarantino. To summarize my thoughts here, I tend to enjoy the more grounded Nolan films like The Dark Knight and Dunkirk while his philosophical epics (specifically The Prestige and Tenet) tend to be more hit-or-miss. And so going into his sophomore feature Memento, I was cautiously optimistic as I thought the story being told would be thoroughly engaging and I would come away really liking it.
Unfortunately, this was not the case. To be clear, there is a good deal to like and respect about the craft that went into making Memento and thus it’s understandable why so many Nolan fans and moviegoers in general consider it to still be one of his best films. But I have to ask…why isn’t Memento great? [NOTE: This blog will contain spoilers for “Memento.” You have been warned.] What’s It About Memento follows Leonard Shelby (Guy Pearce), a victim of assault that caused him to have anterograde amnesia and thus no longer be able to form new memories. However, Leonard’s primary concern in life now is not his own disability but avenging his wife Catherine (Jorja Fox) who was raped and murdered. While he managed to kill the man who assaulted her, the accomplice managed to escape that night leaving Leonard with a singular goal of inflicting his own form of vigilante justice on the man whom he believes to be named “John G” or “James G.” To help in his investigation, Leonard keeps tedious notes to himself, takes Polaroid photos, and tattoos names and other information on himself since he forgets everything within five minutes of learning it. During the film’s black-and-white sequences, Leonard remembers a man called Sammy Jankis (Stephen Tobolowsky) who suffers from a similar amnesia to Leonard which caused him to fatally overdose his wife with insulin shots. However, Leonard suspects that Sammy’s condition is actually fake. In the film’s color sequences (which are shown in reverse chronological order), Leonard tattoos the license plate of “John G” onto himself before meeting a bartender named Natalie (Carrie-Anne Moss) according to one of his notes. At first, Natalie notices and comes to resent Leonard due to the fact that his clothing and car appear identical to her boyfriend’s Jimmy Grantz (Larry Holden). However, once aware of Leonard’s condition, Natalie persuades him to drive a man called Dodd (Callum Keith Rennie) out of town in exchange for running the “John G” license plate number for him. Afterwards (or beforehand 😊), Leonard meets a contact named Teddy (Joe Pantoliano) who warns him about Natalie but Leonard’s photograph of Teddy indicates that he cannot trust him. Once Natalie provides Leonard with the license plate information for a John Edward Gammell (which ends up being Teddy’s full name), Leonard drives Teddy to an abandoned building and shoots him (which happens to be the opening scene of the film). The final black-and-white sequence shows Leonard meeting with Teddy (an undercover police officer) and learns from him that the “John G” that he’s been looking for is Natalie’s boyfriend Jimmy. After strangling Jimmy, Leonard photographs his body and the final color sequence for the movie begins as the Polaroid develops. After swapping his clothes for Jimmy’s, Leonard becomes skeptical of Jimmy’s role in his wife’s murder when he hears him whisper “Sammy” (Leonard has only told the story of Sammy to those he has met). His concern and skepticism leads him back to Teddy, who reveals to Leonard that he and his wife’s real attacker was killed a year ago. Ever since, Teddy has been using Leonard and further reveals that “Sammy” is really Leonard’s memory of himself (which he has repressed out of guilt). The film concludes with Leonard burning the Polaroid of Jimmy’s body and tattooing Teddy’s license plate on himself and noting to himself that he is not to be trusted in order to mistake Teddy for “John G” and kill him. In a monologue, Leonard expresses his willingness to lie to himself in order to get justice for anybody that he feels has wronged him yet feels confident in his ability to be aware enough of the consequences of his actions. What’s Good About It That plot sounds pretty confusion, doesn’t it? On paper, Memento (in my humble opinion) simply doesn’t work. But with several creative minds at work both in front of and behind the camera, the film manages to overcome those odds and be moderately easy to follow. While many people can take credit for a piece of this pie, I want to shoutout a handful of notable individuals. On screen, Memento just cannot work without a believably sympathetic yet morally askew character being portrayed. And I think Guy Pearce fits that mold perfectly. The way he exemplifies the nuances of Leonard’s oddities with regards to how he copes mentally and emotionally with his amnesia not only comes off as grounded but serves for some great interactions with several supporting characters. Furthermore, the third-act reveal of Leonard’s devious actions doesn’t feel cheap or out of step with the narrative that writer-director Christopher Nolan has created. Instead, Pearce’s off-beat charisma combined with his moments going to deplorable lengths to maintain some semblance of psychological stability feels in line with the character that Nolan has written. Simply put, the central performance behind Memento’s protagonist makes the tragedy of this tormented soul a compelling part of a film that should draw you in more with its editing style and unconventional narrative structure. Not to understate the importance of Pearce’s acting to the movie, but most people (including myself) would agree that the MVP of Memento is its editor Dody Dorn (Insomnia, Matchstick Men, End of Watch). Without question, Nolan’s outside-the-box approach to telling this story could very easily turn off most general viewers if not for an editing style that keeps the audience following the narrative with relative ease. Of course, the dichotomous color schemes helps but also the way Dorn handles scene transitions from Nolan’s script is very on point. Whether or not you like Memento at the end of the day, you cannot deny that Dorn’s work as the editor makes the film worth seeing on its own terms. Of course, ultimately the genius (if there is such a thing at work here) that makes Memento a good movie is the story and direction from Christopher Nolan himself. Based on much of his later filmography, from Inception to Tenet, only a madly auteur-ish mind like his could conjure such a narrative and such a cinematically unique way to tell it. And it is his handling of the team that worked on the film is what, for me, makes Memento good enough to call a “good movie.” So, if you’re a little skeptical based on the plot description I gave earlier, take a chance on it knowing that it’s not a movie for everyone. If nothing else, you’ll come away knowing that Nolan has earned his reputation as one of the best filmmakers of his generation. What’s Holding It Back Reading the prior section might’ve convinced you that I actually love Memento. Well…I don’t. I respect it, which is why I wanted to write about its strengths while also arguing that I cannot consider it a “great movie.” Much of me holding back on giving such an accolade for the movie has to do with what I characterize as its “doubled-edged sword” nature. To begin with Nolan’s screenplay for Memento, I think there’s enough good in there to recommend it to people without giving off the impression that it’ll be a guaranteed “worth your time” kind of flick. For me, I look for any movie to give me characters that I fall in love with and enjoy watching their story unfold. And while I found myself somewhat charmed and sufficiently entertained by Leonard’s vigilante journey, I was never enthralled or enchanted by it. Furthermore, he’s certainly a sympathetic anti-hero while avoiding full-on villain status but never came off as a truly great character. Upon reflection, much of this for me comes from the lackluster reveal about the truth behind Leonard’s actions in the third act. It just didn’t hit for me the way Nolan seemed to intend, and I think much of this has to do with the fact that Leonard never came off to me as having a purely good side to him. Sure, he’s complex and tragic but that isn’t enough to convince me that he’s worth really caring about by the time the credits roll. Aside from the story and characters, I just think that the editing style and narrative structure of Memento turns off too many people to be considered great. Is it unique and unconventional? Definitely. Is it worth studying for historical or artistic purposes? For sure, if that’s your thing. But as a piece of gripping entertainment, I simply cannot place it on the same level as many other great films made around the same time or films with similar stories. On top of that, I’m more likely to recommend several other Christopher Nolan films to people than this one (including the weird ones), from Insomnia and Inception to The Dark Knight and Dunkirk. All of those I consider great films (or masterpieces, in the case of The Dark Knight), but Memento just doesn’t fit into that cinematic collective in my humble opinion. But maybe I’m wrong, and Memento is truly a cinematic masterpiece. I suppose you’ll have to convince me otherwise. 😊 What am I missing about Christopher Nolan’s Memento? Do you think it’s a great movie or do you agree that something’s holding it back from greatness? What opinions of mine do you find absolutely ridiculous? Let me know in the comments below. Until next time, this has been… Yours Truly, Amateur Analyst
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Austin McManusI have no academic or professional background in film production or criticism; I simply love watching and talking about movies. Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|