*** Official "MEMENTO" Discussion Thread (1 Viewer)

[DonMac]

I saw Memento a couple of weeks ago and still think about this mesmerizing film. I think...
Spoiler:
...that everything Teddy said at the end (beginning) was true. Leonard killed his wife with insulin and Teddy helped him kill the real John G. two years earlier. Since then, Teddy has been using Leonard to get rid of drug dealers and other criminals. Leonard doesn't want to know the truth about his wife, it hurts and will continue to hurt him everytime someone tells it to him again. This truth both makes Leonard's life painful and meaningless, while the ongoing search for "John G." allows Leonard's life to have meaning, even if its a lie. So he decides to call what Teddy tells him a lie and make Teddy, the only one who who tells him the painful truth, his next John G. By eliminating Teddy, Leonard can continue his search for John G. without being reminded of the real truth. And, in his ongoing quest for a fictional John G., Leonard is like a modern Don Quixote attacking windmills, but its the only way for his life to have any sort of meaning. Otherwise, he'll be like Sammy Jankis just sitting there in a nursing home with nothing to do except watch commercials for the rest of his life.

------------------
"It is the customary fate of new truths to begin as heresies and to end as superstitions." - T. H. Huxley

 

[JungWoo]

I saw the movie today at last as a sort of double bill with Pearl Harbor, which turned out to be an insult to this movie.
I got Pulp Fiction right the first time I saw it, but this one is really confusing. And considering that others also found it fulll of mysteries, I think this is because of innate inconsistencies and someone said, missing puzzles, but this doesn't take least bit of fun away from the movie. After that onslaught of tastelessness, called Pearl Harbor, I think I watched Memento in less than desirable alertness (I totally missed "I've Done It" tattoo.), and I need to see watch more, but here are my 2 cents.
1. I think the movie plays not only on the uncertainty of memories of Lenny but also those of the audience (at least less alert ones). At first when I saw Natalie hand over Teddy's driver license files to Lenny, I thought she was trying to take Teddy out. And when it was revealed that Teddy was a cop, my sympathy with Teddy was strengthened. When it turned out that Teddy was trying to use Lenny to kill Jimmy, I got confused and tried to explain it so much that I came out of theater with impression that Teddy was a tragic victim (maybe my memory suppressed the unplesant info ). It was only much later that I figured things right. Since no one else seemed to have had this confusion, I will consider it Pearl Harbor Effect.
2. I don't think there is any reason to doubt what Teddy says to Lenny near the end. So Lenny did kill real or imagined John Doe (it really doesn't matter) with help of Teddy, who was the investigator of the rape case and used his condition for his purposes.
3. About the "I've Done It" tattoo, I don't have problem with it being there. He could have killed the rapist before wife died (although the zeal of revenge would be less strong). Since he can't remember it, he tattoos it on the chest. But after his wife dies, he wants to suppress feeling of being responsible, so he erases tattoo. Next day he can pursue the murderer in all honesty. This kind of suppression of memory is demonstrated in Lenny's acts after being told the truth by Teddy. He writes down Teddy's license plate because Teddy threatens his version of memory, so next day he can kill him as the murder in good faith.

 

[Adrian_P]

Saw this movie a while back. Just found this thread and decided to post my comments.
What a great piece of film noir. It has all the great elements of a thriller with a touch of black humour and great acting from Guy Pearce and Joe Pantoliano. Also some excellent direction from Christopher Nolan. Can't wait for the DVD.

 

[Andre F]

I saw this movie last night and LOVED IT!!!! I'm glad to see that it is making a few dollars in the movies but it should be a BIG hit. I guess people would rather see 'Freddy Got Fingered' than this gem. I'll be in line for the DVD.
-Andre F
------------------
-= Take your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape! =-

 

[Dwayne]

I saw this last weekend and definately found it to be one of this years' best.
I am still a little fuzzy a week after having seen, but I do believe that Teddy wasn't lying to Leonard at the end/beginning. Is it possible that Teddy is a "John G." but not the same that killed his wife? Also, the last shot suggests that his wife is still alive, which confuses me even more. I usually don't have a hard time sorting a complex film out, but Memento is definately an exception.
I'll have to watch this again.
-Dwayne

 

[Andre F]

I'll definately watch this film again.
-Andre F
------------------
-= Take your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape! =-

 

[Darren Crouse]

I just finished watching the film and was profoundly moved by it. The action sequences and the intricate plot were, of course laudable and challenging but I will confess to being moved, by lead character, Leonard. I find the film is more a metaphor for our lives as much as Leonard's, that is, we seem to be trapped in our own realities and fantasies about life. Do we live for the moment because that is all we have or do we accept our roles and functions as tools of a greater power than us (ie. Teddy/Society)? I hope I'm not becoming to existential here but I was wondering if anyone else felt this way?
Take Care,
Darren.
------------------
Religion is the opium of the masses. Revolution is the opium of the intellectuals.

 

[Dean DeMass]

I finally got to see this gem on Friday night and I have to say this was one of the best films I have ever seen. Memento can be interpreted in so many ways and I love reading what has been written so far. I avoided all Memento threads and trailers until I saw the film and I am still blown away. I think I am going to have to see this again this weekend.
IMHO, I felt the shot of him and his wife laying in bed at the end of the movie was him thinking about what could have been if she was still alive. This film had more twists and turns than a roller coaster.
-Dean-
------------------
Link Removed
"I've seen you and you are not cool."

 

[HalS]

quote:This film had more twists and turns than a roller coaster.

After the second viewing, I realized that it is more linear than I thought in terms of the actual story, which is somewhat out of focus because of the time shift. Quite ingenious.
If you follow closely, the black and white scenes of Leonard are a sequence of Point A to Point B. And then the color scenes are a sequence of Point C to Point B in reverse. And they meet up at the end at Point B (the scene starts out in black and white and progresses to color). Looking at it that way, it's much easier to see what truly happened, which several people here have already disussed about his wife having survived the attack and Sammy's story was actually Leonard's. There's even a quick shot of Sammy in the hospital, that just for a second becomes Leonard. Within that, it also seems clear that Teddy started out to help Leonard and then realized after the first killing that he could manipulate Leonard for his own gains.

 

[Bjorn Olav Nyberg]

I just saw this movie this weekend, and I loved it. I have been reading the comments in this thread with great interest, and personally I agree most with the people that claim Sammy Jenkins never existed, and that he is just using Sammy to shift his guilt over to him. The shots that noone has mentioned, that supports this theory, involves first a flashback shot of Leonard on the bed pinching his wife in the thigh, and she says cut it out or something similar. Later, after the truth seems to be revealed, a similar flashback appear in which Leonard is setting a needle shot in her thigh. Also, in the end (or the beginning, however you may look at it) Leonard doesn't even look like a man with such a high profile job, just a kind of regular joe. Of course this may also be the result of an identity shift like he does after killing Jimmy G.
Also, I noticed the I've done it tattoo, because that was actually subtitled in Norwegian. But I figured that was just something he imagined for himself
In addition, I think Darren is really onto something, I was thinking along the similar lines myself. But specifically, I was thinking about how we perceive, and meditate over our own reality. I may be about the only pathethic loser (

) on this forum who has done this, but I would think most anybody here has done some thing or another that they are not too proud of (I'm not thinking illegal even, but arguably immoral) that thay have reflected upon so many times, that the situation may seem lifelike, and as well "acted out" similar scenarios about what one should have done instead. Do this one time too many, and in the end, how sure are you really about what really happened? This is the comment I got out of Memento, other than an unusually intelligent story (Compared to what I normally watch at least )
------------------
"You're 10 seconds away from the most embarrassing moment of your life!"
Click here to admit you want to see Ford Fairlane on DVD!
DVD List Link Removed

 

[Brian_J]

About this movie, does everyone now agree that:
1. Leonard is Sammy.
2. Jimmy was Natalie's boyfriend.
3. Because Teddy used Leonard to kill Jimmy, Natalie helps Leonard to kill Teddy.
4. Leonard makes Teddy a John G simply to manipulate his future memory. He can be manipulated simply by writings on paper.
Brian
------------------
Zed's Dead Baby...

 

[Doug R]

I've seen this movie 5 times in the theater (heh) and I agree with all your points. However, I'm not certain Natalie knowingly helped Leonard kill Teddy. She obviously helped him with the license plate and such but I'm not convinced she knew exactly what she was doing.
Leonard set up Teddy's death the moment he wrote Fact #6 on his index card. Natalie really did nothing except get that license, which was the correct license, from the DMV. In fact, if Natalie was "setting up" Teddy, to me it cheapens the ending where Leonard is the one who set Teddy up.
Some other observations that most of you probably know, but just commenting:
1) Like Sammy, I believe Leonard's condition is just psychological. He's physically capable of making new memories.
2) I believe the rape of his wife and the smack on the head plus lots of guilt (didn't save his wife from the rape, etc) caused his brain's short term memory to shut down. A cruel irony. He can remember the incident but nothing else sticks. That would explain "flashes" of memory... its not a physical problem, just a mental one.. therefore stuff would surface.
3) Leonard has conditioned himself to believe his wife died that night of the rape. But in fact, Sammy's story was his... his wife had diabetes and she orchestrated her death on the insulin test.
4) I think if you look at the website "evidence" there may be a question if there was a John G. even to begin with. Teddy says there was but he wouldn't know for sure. I tend to think there was.
------------------

 

[Alex Spindler]

I kind of disagree on Leonard having psychological short-term memory loss, as opposed to physical short-term memory loss.
The experiment in the Sammy story pointed out that repetitious learning was possible in the physical version. And Leonard shows all indications that he can learn by repetition. He 'learns' that he has his condition, he 'learns' his waking routine, he 'learns' his variation on the Sammy Jankis story.
Here is a potential hole in my theory. We know Sammy Jankis existed (Teddy knows about his real history), we know he was a real conman (meaning that whatever his claim was was bogus), we know he didn't have a wife (Teddy tells us and doesn't seem to be lying), but we don't know what his claim was at all. He may not have had short term memory loss at all, but was involved in some other insurance scam. Leonard may have pulled Sammy into his story because he was a conman (maybe even really 'his first real challenge as an investigator') that he had caught and was a convenient figure to project his condition on. But if Sammy did not have (a faked?) short term memory loss claim, then Leonard would have to have some other source for his repetition test memory. He would have to know the nature of the test (some electrified), and would have to know that a physiological case would be able to learn but that failure indicated a psychological case. This could be contained in his medical records (which I believe he kept in his folder), so he could have read the doctor's assessment of his condition and projected the results onto Sammy. He would believe that he had physiological STML and say that Sammy didn't. Maybe even his saying "I tell people about Sammy because it helps me to understand about my own condition" has meaning.
Either way, I believe that Leonard can learn through repetition because of how effectively he created the Sammy story. This may not prove that he has physiological STML, but it proves that he really does run his life by 'habit and repetition'.
------------------
Bombardment Society - Member

 

[MichaelPe]

The experiment in the Sammy story pointed out that repetitious learning was possible in the physical version. And Leonard shows all indications that he can learn by repetition. He 'learns' that he has his condition, he 'learns' his waking routine, he 'learns' his variation on the Sammy Jankis story.

Exactly. Leonard mentions that "conditioning didn't work for Sammy, he couldn't learn with repetition". But obviously, it worked for Leonard.
At the beginning of the film, Leonard says "You really need a system to make it work... You learn to write yourself little notes... You learn to trust your own handwriting..." Also, he learns to look in his jacket pockets for polaroids, and more importantly, he remembers to take a photo of something he may later forget.
Notice how he also learns how to give himself tattoos? When he's preparing the tattoo "needle", he looks just like Sammy Jankis preparing the insulin needle for his wife.

 

[Tyson]

The problem with the idea that Lenny "created" the Sammy character is this: If Lenny really killed his wife w/insulin, he would have only done it because of his disability (ie, didn't remember he had given her a shot 5 minutes before), but if that is the case, then he certainly wouldn't remember killing his wife 30 minutes later. So his pre-existing condition (memory loss) would prevent him from feeling any guilt about killing her, simply because he would not remember it, hence no need to lie to himself and "create" the Sammy Jankis character. The only reason he could possibly have to create the Jankis character is if he DID remember killing his wife and could not live with it. But if he could remember killing her, then surely he would have remembered that he already gave her the shot in the first place! Also, the web site is NOT part of the movie. The movie should be judged as a seperate and complete whole.
------------------
"Remember Sammy Jenkins"

 

[TimSniffin]

The problem with the idea that Lenny "created" the Sammy character is this: If Lenny really killed his wife w/insulin, he would have only done it because of his disability (ie, didn't remember he had given her a shot 5 minutes before), but if that is the case, then he certainly wouldn't remember killing his wife 30 minutes later. So his pre-existing condition (memory loss) would prevent him from feeling any guilt about killing her, simply because he would not remember it, hence no need to lie to himself and "create" the Sammy Jankis character.

Since Lenny's condition is psychological rather than physical, you could argue that he could still create the scenero in his mind using a real person (Sammy was a con-man; Lenny simply shifted his experience to him). Lenny's continuing condition might be the result of his wife's death by his hands....if I remember right, in the flashback sequences, Lenny didn't have a tattoo on him. Plus, his wife didn't seem to expect Lenny to pricking her with the needle, which was different from Sammy's story. Another lie cooked up by Lenny's mind--Sammy's wife, his wife, tried to get him to snap out of it with the overdose.
Another interpretation could be that Lenny simply fooled himself into the Sammy story, the same way he Spoiler: fooled himself into killing Teddy. Sammy was an existing character before Lenny's accident. Lenny just twisted his own memory of him and let his tattoo, do the rest.

 

[TysonN]

But if the problem were, in fact psychological, like it was with the Sammy character, then the entire rest of the movie is not possible. Lenny would not be able to learn anything, would not be able to have a system, he would just sit around all day watching TV like Sammy did, unable to function in any way. I thought that the whole point of the Sammy character was to explain how someone like Lenny could function and someone like Sammy could not. Now, if you are arguing that Lenny's condition was psychological (like Sammy's), then it is all a moot point because Lenny could never "learn" anything.
Do you think Sammy remembered his wife's death? I don't think he did, hence he was shown in the mental hospital (where he would have been remanded for care after her suicide) still "faking" a look of recognition to get a pat on the head from the doctors. So, even conceding (momentaritly) that Lenny's problem could have been psychological, if it mimicked Sammy's condition at all, it is still a moot point, he still would not remember killing his own wife & hence no guilt, no transferance, no serial killer-like killing spree.
Bottom line, if he killed his wife with insulin shots, it is only because of his pre-existing condition. But that very same pre-existing condition would prevent any type of guilt complex. There is no way around this. The only way one could get around this is to say that Lenny was a COMPLETE psychotic and all of John G stuff was a complete construct to cover his psychotic and murderous behavior. But, then you have to throw out most of the rest of the film in order to make that work - It means he did not "really" have short term memory loss, maybe it was a condition he "invented" after killing his wife (along w/the John G scenario), and simply used that as a spur to continue killing, and than Teddy simply found this ready made killing tool to help him deal with the nastier parts of being a dirty cop. But it seems kind of absurd to simply throw out parts of a movie that don't fit in with the "Lenny is a serial killer" theory. It is much better to stick with what the movie DOES show and modify the theory to fit the movie, rather than vice versa.
Also, I wanted to point out that both Teddy AND Lenny "used" Lenny to kill people. But there was a FUNDAMENTAL difference in their motivations - Teddy used Lenny for personal profit and gain. Lenny "used" himself (by destroying the photo's and taking down the license plate #) to PREVENT himself from being used for any more killings by Teddy. Hardly the actions of a psychotic serial killer in my book.
I think a big problem is that so many people a "supplementing" their judgement of the movie w/info from the web page. Obviously the web page comes down on the stance that Lenny is a very disturbed person & is in fact a serial murderer. But the web page has NO bearing on the movie. The movie is a self contained story, and in fact, judged strictly within the confines of the movie itself, the evidence is pretty clear that Lenny is just a guy that is trying to put things right with regards to his wife's death.
One other thing I think is brilliant about the film is that there is enough ambiguity about what Lenny really is to sort of make the film into a bit of a Rorschrash test, where either interpretation could be valid, and people will gravitate toward an interpretation that fits in to their own particular view of the world. In other words, if you tend to think the worst of people, then you will tend to think the worst of Lenny, while if you tend to see the "good" in people, you will tend to come down on Lenny's side. For myself, after the 1st viewing, I was convinced of Lenny's nobility, after the 2nd I was convinced of his evil. Now, after the 3rd and 4th viewing, I am back again on Lenny's side.

 

[Doug R]

I read somewhere that Jonathan and Christopher Nolan wrote the website material... so to say it's unrelated to the movie might be a bit drastic.
------------------

 

[TysonN]

Well, to be a bit rhetorical here, what if the web site had said something like,"All of the events in the film were merely the dreams/delusions of Teddy, who had a secret death wish & was fantasizing about a way to die in a memorable manner." Should we take it seriously, no matter who wrote it? In other words, if something on the web site contradicts what is actually in the movie, do we go with the movie, or the web site? IMHO, in the case of Memento, the web site CLEARLY contradicts things in the movie, so the question is whether the movie should be viewed and judged on its own, or supplanted w/info from the web site. And what if a person saw the movie and never went to the web site. Would their conclusions (based entirely on the content of the movie itself and nothing else) would they be "wrong"? If they would be "wrong", then why not simply include the info in the movie in the first place if you consider it so critical? Or, conversely, if the person would not be "wrong" w/their movie only interpretation, then isn't the web site really superflous and thus discardable?

 

[TysonN]

One more thing, if Lenny really were a serial killer, why the hell would he kill Teddy? Teddy is the perfect fit for him - Teddy will HELP him continue to manufacture scenarios where he can kill other people to his heart's content. Why would you want to rid yourself of someone so valuable? Teddy even told him "There's lots of John G's in the world". If he were truly psychotic, THIS is what he would blank out, he would simply not acknowledge that Teddy told him this & thus allow himself to continue to be set up by Teddy to kill more and more people. The fact that he DOES NOT want this to happen is the reason he sets himself up to kill Teddy.