Essay on Memento
858 Words4 Pages
Memento is a movie directed by Chris Nolan. It was released in 2000. The leading actor is Guy Pearce. Carrie Anne Moss and Joe Pantoliano are also in this movie. Memento is a perplexed thriller.
Leonard, the main character, is excellently played by Guy Pierce. He is constantly confused, yet still acts in a nonchalant way. Teddy (Pantoliano) and Natalie (Carrie Anne Moss) play puzzling characters, throughout the whole movie the viewer questions, whether they may or may not be Leonard’s friends.
The characters are not conform the general image of Americans, but that has a lot to do with the fact the audience does not know whether they should trust Leonard’s story or Leonard’s friends. Teddy does not look like an ordinary cop, and…show more content…
He lives his life by taking notes and Polaroid pictures, the “facts” he records in tattoo form all over his body. Every time he loses his concentration it’s as if he has just woken up, he is constantly assessing his situation. It is a nearly impossible way to live life. The only thing that keeps him going is the idea of revenge against his wife’s murderer.
The way this movie messes with time in the past is not new. Pulp Fiction did it, and many other movies did, but never like the way Memento has chosen to work it. The movie is broken up into individual segments, and each one ends where the one before it began. This is confusing, but it does not take long to understand how the story is going to be told. Nolan wants the audience to feel what it is like when you cannot make any new memories and cannot trust anyone. That is what Nolan accomplish, the audience feels like they are in Leonard’s shoes. This method Nolan uses creates an amount of tension and suspense. The audience knows what happened, but now they want to know why it happened. We learn the bits Leonard forgets. Nolan created a unique movie, blending color and black and white images and with this technique of filmmaking. It is truly original; the audience will feel just as confused and lost as Leonard when each scene begins.
In a way this movie is social commentary, in a world that wants people to believe they can trust everyone the movie shows what it is like when you
I’m Leonard Shelby – Analysis of Polaroid, Narration and Leonard in Memento
The use of Polaroid photographs and multiple plot lines in Memento function as a representation of Leonard’s character. The story itself follows two different plot lines: one that is presented in color (the main plot line), and another that is presented in monochrome (sub-plot line). The main plot follows a sequence that is non-linear and actually loops the story by starting where it ends and vice-versa, which is the plot sequence of the entire film in itself. The subplot follows a chronological sequence, contrasting with the main plot. By having two different plots, Memento not only succeeds in resembling Leonard’s character, but also reinforces the importance of the relationship between the Polaroid photographs and the narration sequence.
The first and most prominent scene consisting the Polaroid photographs is the opening scene. This scene is in reverse motion, resembling the narration sequence of the main plot line. In its original format, Leonard is shaking the photograph in order for the photograph to develop. However, edited into reverse, he is shaking the photograph, causing it to lose its color instead of gaining, representing his memory. This is not only an indirect introduction to Leonard’s disability but also a way of introducing the narrative style. By starting where the scene is meant to end, in actual time, the scene by far succeeds in summarizing the narrative style and Leonard’s memory, which is also found in the effect in the Polaroid photograph in that same scene. So, by making the opening scene reverse in a narrative and editing aspect, Leonard’s life, which is developed through fragmented and disordered events, is mirrored. The reverse motion continues until the very first monochromatic scene.
Throughout the film, the difference between now and then is touched upon constantly, especially through dialogue. There seems to be a sense of disparity through time and the fact that the concept of past and present are constantly being mentioned creates a dimension between Leonard, who is the only one that lives in a distorted timeline, and the other characters. The constant mention of time throughout the film captures the narration style and plot order. Memento follows a reversed version of cause and effect narration; the audience see the effect first then the cause. By doing this, it emerges the complete story in the way Leonard understands it: disorderly and fractured. We see this concept through the dialogues between the other characters and Leonard. The first time we are faced with the clash between past and present is in the beginning, just before Leonard kills Teddy. Teddy says to Leonard:
“You don’t know who you are.”
“I’m Leonard Shelby, I’m from San Francisco.”
“That’s who you were, that’s not what you’ve become.”
During the second monochrome scene, intra-diegetic narration is implemented for Leonard’s thoughts. Here, Leonard is rebelling against what Teddy said earlier on by narrating: “I mean you know who you are and you know kind of all about yourself. But just for day-to-day stuff, notes are really useful.” Later, Burt, the desk clerk at Discount Inn, admits to Leonard that he has been booked into two different rooms. He says, “This was your room, but now you’re in room 304.” So, seeing the contrast between Leonard and the other characters’ thoughts about past and present, it could be said that Leonard believes that what was will still forever be, Leonard was and still is Leonard Shelby from San Francisco. However, the others believe in change and that what was true does not necessarily mean it still is. This claim can be supported by the excessive use of the Polaroid photos by Leonard.
The film reveals to us how and when Leonard took specific photos. In essence, the photographs are an evidence of a time that once existed but is now forever gone. But, due to Leonard’s disability, they will always be new and true every fifteen minutes (approximate time of how long it takes for Leonard to lose his new memories). So, in a way, they are timeless to him; there is no difference between the past and present, which we see twice when he questions how long it has been since he was in the hotel and since he’s been looking for John. G. The plot sequence is also supporting evidence of the past versus present idea.
As mentioned previously, the main plot is not in chronological order whilst the sub-plot (the monochromatic scenes) is in chronological order. So, by creating two different plots that develop in opposite timescales, Christopher Nolan creates another resemblance of Leonard’s character. The narrative structure is one that is formed of several different snippets of Leonard’s process of finding and killing John G. However, it is not put in order, rather it is interrupted by the sub-plot.
When the main plot is presented, the effect is shown before the cause, reflecting Leonard’s life. Leonard describes his disability as feeling like he just woke up. So, he sees the effect of the previous actions, but he does not remember those said actions, an effect that the narration structure creates for the audience as well. He knows what he is doing in the present but not what he just did. So, like the photographs, the narrative structure also represents Leonard’s character and disability. During the sub-plot, Leonard is shown talking to an unknown cop through a telephone. The majority of what they were talking about was Sammy Jankins, a man who experienced the same disability that Leonard did.
Leonard would use Sammy’s story as a way to explain his own disability. Until the very end, it was made to believe that Sammy was a different person than Leonard. Throughout the main plot, Leonard never remembers Sammy or at least never explains him. However, during the subplot, he explains the whole story to the cop. That being said, one could assume that Leonard knew Sammy before the incident. Yet, by the end it was made to seem that the two were interlinked not only because Leonard was working with Sammy, but as if they were the same person or that Leonard merged his memories of his last moments with his wife with Sammy’s story, meaning that Leonard was able to forget the things he’d intentionally want to, which is a reoccurring idea throughout the film.
This can be seen at the very end when Leonard purposely allows himself to forget what Teddy told him in order to have a purpose in life. However, this purpose is one that keeps coming back, it moves in a cycle as suggested by Teddy at the end. Teddy mentioned that Leonard has killed several other ‘John G.’s before in order to achieve his purpose: to gain revenge over his wife’s death. Yet, Leonard continues to keep himself from remembering. So, like the narration of the film, which keeps repeating and completing itself in circles, Leonard repeats his villainous acts.
Not only does Leonard use vengeance as an excuse to kill but he also uses it to forget that it was actually him who caused his wife’s death. This conclusion was found when Leonard realizes that his wife survived the attack and that it was his wife who had diabetes, not Sammy’s (Sammy didn’t even have a wife). Also, Leonard lead himself into believing that there were two men who were attacking his wife, when in reality there was only one – the one who he killed. So, by making himself believe that there was another man, he dedicated his life to killing that man even though there really wasn’t another one. Nonetheless, Sammy was a parallel to Leonard. Even though Sammy was what Leonard saw as a failure in terms of coping with his disability, Leonard based his ‘system’ on what he learnt about Sammy. That being said, Leonard was indeed in control of what he could remember. Leonard made himself remember himself as Sammy Jankins so that he wouldn’t have to remember him indirectly killing his wife. Leonard made himself believe that Sammy was incapable of remembering simple things as trivial as taking notes so that he could use Sammy as a bad example, even though he was Sammy himself. So, the subplot functioned as a window to Leonard’s true colors whilst the main plot showed us limited information about Leonard as an individual. By doing that, it creates a contrast between the two plot lines but then by the very end it concludes by linking the two together to fill in the gaps of the narration.
Nolan’s Memento tied the multiple plots together through Leonard’s character, which was indeed mirrored by the narrative structure of the film and the essence of the Polaroid snapshots. By creating importance of the Polaroid snapshots, multiple conflicting plot lines, and a complete parallel to Leonard’s character (Sammy), Leonard’s role and the narration structure were really emphasized. Leonard’s role as the main character is very different from the rest of the characters, which was seen through the idea of past versus present, found in the narration structure and Polaroid shots. So, every aspect of the film mentioned above work together to create a chaotic and layered effect to the film as well as simultaneously construct Leonard, who is a very complex character. As Burt said, “That must suck. It’s all backwards.”
What do you think? Leave a comment.