"Memento" Discussion: 4/14/02 - 4/20/02

[slade]

This is a thread to discuss the technical and/or thematic merits of Momento.

The purpose being to foster intelligent discussion of films without resorting to "It's a piece of crap." or "It's the greatest film ever." (And so that we all can gain a bit of a film education from everyone.)

We'll discuss a new film each week. Either Morticia or I will post the film in this forum in advance, and lock the topic until the first day of discussion.

Thanks everyone. We are excited and we hope this works (we're open to any ideas of how to make it better).

****SPOILER WARNING**** of course this entire thread is going to be full of spoilers.

[slade]

Just a bump to remind you it's coming next week.

edit: and here's a few threads to get your juices flowing:

http://www.dvdfile.com/interactive/f...hlight=memento

http://www.dvdfile.com/interactive/f...hlight=memento

http://www.dvdfile.com/interactive/f...hlight=memento

[DimWit]

There are 3 types of flicks: Actor driven, Director driven, and crap. Hollywood seems to be making a specialty of the latter. Sigh. Actor driven has 2 sub categories: performance and Star. A performance film is rare. Or more accurately, a *good* flick that’s made that way by the performances in it is rare. There’s far too many bad films with good performances in them to list. Star films are everywhere. Just because there’s the star is in the movie is no guarantee, but can you deny the power of that star over any other force for some movies? In many cases the flick wouldn’t even been made.

Then there’s the Director driven movie. Strangely, they seem to be the most memorable of all of them. Hitchcock, Huston, Wilder, Lean, Scorsese, Coppola, Ford, Spielberg… the list goes on. Each has a style or such an impact in an oeuvre that they influence all that goes after them.

That preamble is the scenic route to the the fact that Memento is definitely a director’s flick. While the performances are good, nah… excellent is better, the movie wouldn’t be anything without the vision and direction of Nolan. He elevates a tired story into a classic.

By now, I’m sure everyone knows the story; an amnesiac, a journey of discovery and retribution. Simple, even banal. For some reason Hollywood likes memory loss as a plot device. There’s been several of these in the last few years, mostly bad or just banally derivitive, which is the same thing. Nolan has lifted the genre by sharp editing, making the picture backwards to make the process of discovery as important to the audience as to the character. A simple thing, but most good ideas are.

***************************************************

Since Lenny’s going insane, shooting Teddy was a huge mistake. I want to know how he’s going to survive without Teddy giving him focus. I guess that’s the definition of a good movie… I want more. And what’s with Natalie? Didn’t she care that Jimmy’s dead?

In checking out the other threads that slade posted I noticed a theme...

Doesn't anyone notice that you can't believe Lenny? I doesn't matter that he says something as a fact. He's the biggest manipulator of all the characters in Memento. Especially to himself.

Even the premise is flawed when he says that he can't make any longterm memories... he can, it's just that there's no context to them. Point 1) in the flashback where he shoots one of the intruders, he's using Dodd's gun; Point 2) if his wife is killed, then what are those memories of her and him together AND he's tatooed. That's why the Jankis story is so important.
Lenny's a mess and getting worse.

[falling snow]

wow, you gave us much to debate about. first, memento isn't a film under "loss of memory" genre. i've read many articles and studied this film on my own and discovered that memento is a revised FILM NOIR. all the main elements of film noir is in fact in memento. there's an excellent article on the magazine 'cineaction', #56, which dissects this film in every way. here's excerpt of it on film noir

the film's narrative, harkening back to previous classic film noir, includes the lone figure on the periphery of civil and ordered society navigating through a world of duplicity and corruption, attempting to solve a criminal mystery. leonard acts as a moral barometer in the film. his conviction in the pursuit and judgement of the suspect(the mysterious 'john g.') projects an almost holy resonance. next to leonard, a fallen figure who is psychically crippled from completing his dutiful(honourabke?) task, the other characters appear evil, deceptive, and manipulative.

in the end, though, we as an audience, realize that lenny is in fact one of those characters who appear evil, deceptive and manipulative even though his intension are good. this is one of the brilliant aspect of this film, because of the backward narrative, we're forced to see his 'good' side and be empathetic and understand him and thus allowed to be deceived by him.

here's more on main film noir character(from http://odur.let.rug.nl/~usa/E/noir/noir07.htm )
In film noir the male protagonist is often a detective or an otherwise social alienated individual. Sometimes the male heroes are featured as amnesiacs, a situation that absolutely creates a feeling of social estrangement and disillusionment. These hard-boiled heroes are anti-social loners that are subject to existential angst.

The females in film noir are either of two types - dutiful, reliable, trustworthy and loving women; or femme fatales - mysterious, duplicitous, double-crossing, gorgeous, unloving, predatory, tough-sweet, unreliable, irresponsible, manipulative and desperate women. Usually, the male protagonist in film noir has to inevitably choose (or have the fateful choice made for him) between the women - and invariably he picks the femme fatale who goads him into committing murder or some other crime.

natalie is definitely combination of both types of females in film noir. she comes off as a genuinely caring person who supports lenny in every which way, but we see her as a manipulator with her own agenda, and ultimately leads lenny to kill teddy(i don't think she has anything against lenny, she knows he was just an instrument that killed her bf, so she's doing the same thing to get back to teddy). she also uses lenny to protext herself from problems he has created for her, and not simply taking advantage of his 'condition'.. but the instant shift from passivity to aggression is at once a shocking rupture in any sympathy extended to her as it is a strengthening of the connection to lenny by presenting him as further victimized.

another brilliant decision made on memento is to not show how lenny started his 'quest,' but rather show his story some time after. we don't exactly know when the intruders "killed" his wife or in fact she was killed by them or by him(if she is diabetic). we do not know the process of him starting his coping with his condition by tattooing himself, taking polaroids, drawing a map and started investigating this case. when i first saw the film, i thought to myself(along with dozens of questions), they're going to show how he got hs first tattoo and how he got that scratch on his cheek and when he started making that map on his wall. but none of these things are revealed. we are put into his shoes while starting his investigation over again. i think this is his second time looking into this matter, once for real with the help of teddy, but this definitely won't be the last time. at the end, we know that he can stop this process by reminding himself to tattoo "i've done it,"(in the screenplay, he actually writes that card in the his chevy, but looks at teddy searching for his keys and ripped the card and writes down teddy's plate number). if he stops his quest, his life becomes meaningless. with his wife murdered, he had a definite purpose in life, he needed to find and kill the killer(he even goes to say to natalie that it doesn't matter whether he realizes the killer is dead or not, his wife deserves a vengence). without this purpose, his entire life before him becomes meaningless.

now, here's my own questions. first, if he has lost all his ability to remember, how does he remember that he has a 'condition'? if he lost the short term memories he should not be able to remember that this condition was described to him by his doctor because this would have happened after his injury. second, if the memories of sammy jenkins is in fact distorted(as teddy implied), how did this come about? lenny said his memories before the injury was good, so there's more damage to his brain then just hippocampus?

[falling snow]

Originally posted by DimWit
Even the premise is flawed when he says that he can't make any longterm memories... he can, it's just that there's no context to them. Point 1) in the flashback where he shoots one of the intruders, he's using Dodd's gun;

if you notice, he shot the intruder BEFORE he got hit in the head, so this should be the last of his memories. and he DID NOT have dodd's gun, this is lenny's since he has not met dodd yet.

Point 2) if his wife is killed, then what are those memories of her and him together AND he's tatooed. That's why the Jankis story is so important.
Lenny's a mess and getting worse.

i think this sequence of him and his wife together is a dream sequence, it's him envisioning after his goal is met. it's like he's telling himself, he can finally relax with the thought of his wife comforting him after all this mess... jenkis story, i think, have dual purposes. first as a way to initiate us into his way of thinking and dealing with his own condition. second, after teddy gives lenny a lecture at the end, we realize that jenkis's story is a blend of what happened to his 'client' and himself. it's so much so that we don't know if it's him or sammy who's the subject of his own story. maybe he does have traces of his memories of him in the hospital or even afterwards, of him killing his wife(if he did in fact kill his wife, but we won't know that for sure)

i don't think lenny's condition or his morale's getting "worse," it's his new way of life. you don't know how he was before the injury, so you can't make judgement on his character since you've seen only one aspect of him driven by determination

[DimWit]

See? This is a mark of a great movie!

First: the "genre" was somewhat tongue in cheek. It's up to the director to make the genre. It's a "memory loss" genre until Nolan makes it into a Noire. Brilliant move.

As to Dodd's gun, look closely. The thing that everyone forgets (how apropos , the movie ISN'T reality. It's Lenny's reality. What HE's experiencing could be true or false. Just the fact that he has a memory of the wife while he has tattoos belies everything that he's reiterated for the whole movie. She's was supposed to have been dead, right?

Lenny has lost his bearings. He misremembers crucial facts. The signposts he's using are flawed, sometimes on purpose.

[slade]

The Story

I think we are supposed to believe that Lenny created the story of Sammy so that he could have purpose in life. This is how I read the story--chronologically (and with help from "Memento Mori"--the short story that inspired the movie):

Lenny's wife is attacked, but he kills the attacker (only one). His wife lives, but the truama, for whatever reason (probably coupled with the blow to the head) is too much for him to take and so he developes a type of dissociative condition (mental illness, rather than physical) that prevents him from making new memories. Everything he said that happened to Sammy, I believe actually happened to him (Lenny/Sammy -- very similar names. But the biggest give away of this is at 1:29:55 where it shows Sammy sitting in the hospital, but as the doctor walks in front of him it shows that it is really Lenny--play it at 1/8 speed and you'll easily see it).

So, Lenny is physically capable of making new memories, but not mentally capable (so to speak). Lenny's wife can't take this, and she does the insulin shot thing to him. Lenny can't really forget all this (as he doesn't have the physical illness--as shown by the lack of conditioning) and so he invents the Sammy story so that he can live with himself. He stays in the hopsital for a while until the notes to himself finally convince him to go looking for her killer.

Again, inventing a reality for himself so that he has a reason to live (we never do this ourselves, of course ). He finds his first victim and kills him. But, as he is taken away in the back of the police car he can't find a pen to write down waht he did. Likely, this is Teddy who is taking him away (and depriving him of a pen). Teddy then uses him to kill multiple people.

Finally, however, Teddy gets too careless and Lenny figures out what's going on. This pisses Lenny off and he creates himself another reality which ends up in Teddy getting killed. It would be interesting to see what Lenny now invents for himself to do since he's gotten "revenge".

This story, and especially the way it is told, is the strength of this movie. The first time I watched it I was blown away. The second time I watched it, it was a blast to put it all together. Unfortunately, this last time I watched it (last night) it definately was lacking in its original impact. I put the last few pieces together, but it wasn't nearly as exciting as the first two times. But, I don't think that detracts from two incredible viewings (most movies aren't good for even one).

I agree Nolan did a great job putting this movie together. The flip side of that, however, is that he's just copying himself. Following is told in exactly the same way. The budget is obviously smaller, so it has lower production values, but the story telling technique is precisely the same--so, he does lose some points for simply redoing what he already did. But, still easily comes out on top because it is so cool.

Memento as Film Noir

I believe Nolan felt that he was making a film noir when he made Memento (didn't he say this somewhere?), but I don't think he really got too many noir elements in there. falling snow, obviously, will disagree with this, and he/she did point out some noir elements that were used. But, for me, one of the main things that noir has to have is lots of shadowing and other symbollic uses of entrapment. I think Memento fails here.

Compare the nearly always well lit Memento, with the nearly never well lit Se7en (using for comparison, since I just watched it last week). Additionally, Se7en did a great job of showing depravity and searching for meaning (other basic noir elements) where as Memento struggled in these areas. Sure, Lenny is looking for meaning in his life without a memory, but he isn't looking too hard. Basically, he's satsified with his fooled-self approach to life. Even the final scene where he closes his eyes while driving just reinforces his ability to write off his angst.

This is another key to film noir--an unhappy ending. While it coudl be argued that the ending isn't happy--in many ways it is. Lenny will have the revenge he wants--while not against his wife's killer, it is against his own manipulator. And, he agrees with himself that life is worth living without a memory--it is still there after he opens his eyes.

Again, compare this to Se7en [SPOILERS FOR THIS MOVIE IN THIS PARAGRAPH] (which really has almost too happy an ending for film noir) where 2/3 of the good characters die and the bad guy gets exactly what he wants. The only redeeming thing about the ending of Se7en is that Sommerset sees the world as worth fighting for.

One final comparison with Se7en (which, you can tell, I do see as being very film noir) is the great job it did with bars to show the characters as trapped (see the Se7en thread for my discussion of this)--classic noir technique. I don't remember this, or any other trapped symbolism, ever being done in Memento.

In summary--Memento is a fun movie with a great story telling device that creates a unique experience (if you haven't already seen Following), but it is a fairly weak entry into the film noir genre. But, I still had a great time!

[falling snow]

i believe that the non-linear narrative technique he first developed in following was an experiment that led to memento. i own it on dvd and watched it few times(great movie!) but i see no reason why this film is presented in the non-linear fashion. nolan was merely experimenting with this technique because it's not been done before(in mainstream cinema anyway). but the technique go hand in hand with memento's story and character and it was perfected with memento. so i don't think nolan was ripping himself off by "copying" a technique he used previously. i don't know how much knowledge you guys have with photoshop but here's an example. i study graphic design so i know photoshop inside out, and been using it for 5 years now. anyway, when i look at other people's work i could tell how much this person knows photoshop by the way s/he used filters. i've used and experimented with most of the filters in my work in the past but rarely now. when someone is a novice with photoshop, they use filters like the air they breathe. you could tell they had fun putting 2146 filters in one piece. they don't exactly have a reason for using it, but the fact that they're cool looking and fun to use. but pros almost never use filters and use them when they are a necessity. you get a work that requires a technique and you employ it accordingly, not because it's just there. similarly, nolan used the non-linear technique before and he wrote a script that called for this and he used it briliantly.

oh and i could tell slade had some fun writing your own version of "what happened." i wrote one just to remind myself next time i watch it again! hahhahaha but i doubt your part about him in the police car and meeting teddy is what happened. you were being creative! i think sammy did exist but like teddy said, he was a conman, trying to take advantage of the insurance claim. although your point about him being physically able to make memories but emotionally distressed is very valid, a condition called psychosomatic disease.BUT if lenny survived the attack without major damage and his wife survived as well, why the hell does he goes through the trouble to 'kill' her and go after the killer? if something like this happens, you'd probably seek counselling as both you and your wife is more or less stable in terms of health. you 'd not go through a more difficult path by doing what you said(but your theory explains why lenny remember he has a condition). so i think he really did damage his brain and the ability to form new memories.

this is one of the things that're brilliant about this film. since the film is so vague(in terms of what really happened) that EVERYONE has their own theories. and to certain extend they are ALL valid since there aren't any right answers either. every comment and opinions are neither right nor wrong but they are open to debates. i love this opportunity to have this kind of discussion since not too many friends of mine likes films the way i do. thank you for creating this forum!

[slade]

I probably overstated what I meant when I said that Nolan was copying himself with Memento's non-linear story telling. I agree with you that it was executed with greater precision and adds to the story more with Momento. I think my gripe is just that I wonder what else Nolan can do. Is this method of story telling his forte, or will he be able to expand beyond this into new creative realms? It will be interesting to see what Insomnia is like. I guess I'm just wondering how "much legs" Nolan has as a director; and, I suppose only time will tell.

falling snow said, "but i doubt your part about him in the police car and meeting teddy is what happened. you were being creative!"

I was being a little creative, but I did draw this from Memento Mori. Right at the end (proabably pages 48-50 on the dvd version of the story) he finds himself in the back of a car with handcuffs on and unable to find a pen. I did guess that it was Teddy who had him at that point--but it lends continuity to it that way. (and yes, I had fun with it ; I'm not sure why people would want the chronological version of this movie available, half the fun for me is figuring it out).


falling snow: "BUT if lenny survived the attack without major damage and his wife survived as well, why the hell does he goes through the trouble to 'kill' her and go after the killer?"

I think that Sammy's story is really Lenny's story (again, I don't think there ever was a Sammy--my best proof being the flash I mentioned before at 129:55; although it is also telling when Teddy explains it all to Lenny at the end). So, Lenny doesn't knowingly (at least consciously) kill his wife. It's just her trying to snap him out of it. But, then his unconscious is aware since it isn't a medical condition, but rather a psychologically induced condition. So, his unconscious has to deal with it, and does so by convincing himself that she died at the hands of the attacker--this also gives him a reason to live and push himself instaed of just sitting in the hopsital all day doing nothing but watching commercials on TV.

So, falling snow, I was hoping you would rebuke my analysis of Memento as a weak entry into the film noir genre. I'm interested in learning more about film noir and a discussion is how I learn best. So, what do you think (and this is an open questoin to everyone) about my analysis of Memento as film noir?

[DimWit]

Both Memento and Se7en have their noirish aspects. It's a little misleading though because in Hollywood speak, anything is noire if it doesn't have the traditional upbeat hollywood ending.

True Noire is all about character and atmosphere. The scene is as important as any of the actors. Several reasons; remember that Noire was cheap, sometimes desperately so. Short depth of fields to minimize cheap or nonexistent backgrounds, lots of shadows to emphasize the foreground, mostly backlot sets and cheap B&W stock. As with everything else, no money? Substitute creativity instead. And it worked superbly. No flash or sizzle because that cost money. The use the script and push the boundaries of current mores. Sex, implied and shown. Outrageous and scandalous behaviour by the characters. And never have it wrapped up neatly per hollywood convention.

By that criteria, neither film is close to being noire. But I doubt there's any than can be made today that would fit that definition, even an indie.

[Dehrian]

I like this film the more I see it, but there is one error that really bugs me:

When Dodd has followed Lenny into the trailer park, he pulls in behind Lenny's car to block him in and make it impossible for him to pull out. Dodd gets out of his car, knocks on Lenny's window, gets in the car, shoots, and then starts to chase Lenny.

Later, Lenny runs back to his car, and is able to pull straight out: Dodd's car has moved.

[falling snow]

hold on, i read the memento mori short story and it's only about 10 pages, isn't it? is there another version????

i'm not the most qualified expert on film noir (nor do i like genre films since they're more or less predictable-not to mention them being cookie cutters, aimed at the masses, this is one reason why i love dogme 95 films, they're going against everything hollywood stands for). i've only seen few noir films(chinatown, l.a. confidential, being two of them) so i can't give much insights into the genre. but personally i do see lenny as a fallen character, but we do not know that until in the end. rather than the character actually 'dying' in the end, i perceive lenny's identity we grow to associate and learn to appreciate fades away. so in a way, he is a doomed character. and if you carefully read my first entry, you'll notice that i said this film is a "revised" film noir, not a textbook genre film. it's a modern take on the films of the 20s, 30s.

yeah, i've been wondering what else nolan's able to do other than this non-linear film structure. and i was quickly disappointed to hear that he's doing a remake of a recent film(i hate remakes, recycling doesn't always put out the best quality stuff). but he's a young filmmaker so i'll definitely be looing out for his films in the future.

[slade]

hold on, i read the memento mori short story and it's only about 10 pages, isn't it? is there another version????

I've just read the one on the DVD. I don't know how many text pages it would be, but it was, I believe, about 50 screen shots of text.

Oh, and I think (but am not sure) that the original film noirs were post WWII (late 40s early 50s). I haven't seen too many of them either. My brother-in-law took a film noir class, I'll try to borrow his book from that class and take a look at it.

[Miggy]

Dehrian,

I've noticed that as well! I watched it just last week and I paid close attention there to see what I may have been missing - maybe it was a different camera angle when he's running back to the car - but I can't be sure.

Also, I believe Teddy was telling the truth at the end of the movie because he truly believed Lenny would just forget it. So, what would the point of lying be? So, that would mean there was a Sammy and that he was a con and that Sammy's story is really Lenny's. I believe this can be true even with the quick flash of Lenny sitting in the home instead of Sammy. It doesn't mean Sammy never existed. He was the con man. Lenny was the one in the home. I believe Lenny transplanted his story to Sammy to relieve himself of the guilt of accidentally killing his wife. Plus, there's the possiblity that since he fell vitim to the same condition Sammy was claiming, he might feel doubt about his conclusions now and has included the fact the Sammy wasn't faking into his story.

Miggy, the Thief

[glossybear]

I very nearly wrote my Thesis on Film Noir. My argument was basically that Film Noir wasn't a genre but rather a movement, until the mid 80s with the advent of "Neo-Noir" which is a genre, but a different beast entirely than traditonal Noir.

Traditional Noir grew out of America's post-war anxiety in the late 40s and lasted until roughly the mid fifties when the movement became more self reflexive. Many site "A Touch of Evil" as the last film of the movement. Interestingly enough the term Film Noir was coined in the French cinema journal Cahiers du Cinema in like 49 or so.

I have a pretty good library of texts on Film Noir and can provide a list if anyone is interested. I suggest "The Dark Side of the Screen" By Foster Hirsch as a great introduction/overview of Noir.

In my views Memento is absolutely a "Neo-Noir". All of the generic conventions are there: anti-hero, femme fatal, backstabbings, non-linear narrative structure, and very stylized visuals. But each element is tweaked enough to distance the film from a very formulaic "Neo-Noir". The Visuals are low-contrast and de-saturated. The femme fatal is herself a victim. The narrative IS linear, just backwards, and the Main Character only becomes noir-ish and dislikable at the very end of the film. Here is where I find Memento's biggest strength: upon repeated viewing the film completely changes its effect on the viewer.

At first I've found most people simpathize with Leonard. Only at the very end of the film do they realize what he is capable of. And even when Leonard kills Lenny its set up as Leonard's revenge. Only in the final moments of the film does the viewer see that this isn't the first time Leonard has killed, nor will it be the last. I also feel that this is done in such a way that the viewer can still have sympathy for Leonard as the credits roll. But the second time seeing the film, the viewer _KNOWS_ that Leonard is just liying to himself and suddenly Leonard is much less sympathetic.

[Indyphantom]

great film. I just wish Nolan was doing something more original for his next project instead of the remake of one of my favorite films from 1998, Insomnia . Robin Williams=:flush: :barf:


Memento has one of the most overlooked performances of the year, also...Carrie-Anne Moss. Bring on the SE

[Morticia]

I've seen this film twice in about as many months, and so far it has not lost its impact.

I distinctly remember the 'flash' of Lenny in Sammy's place in the institution the first time, and thought that meant that Lenny was only a step away from being just like Sammy. After a second viewing, and reading all the posts here, I'm not so sure anymore. Guess I'll have to watch it again, darn!

Anyway, the only film technique I'll add here (thanks to all who've done a great job in Film Class)....was the use of black and white film or color film.

With the exception of the Sammy Jankiss story, the narrative is spilt into forward motion (Lenny talking on the phone to an unknown person, who ends up being Teddy), filmed in black and white, and the backwards narrative, filmed in color. Notice when the two points merge, black and white become color.

I really don't know why this would have been used, except to cue the viewer when the 'voices' shift. I thought it was a cool device, and figured I should mention it.

[Miggy]

I've finally learned to catch when the B&W changes to color. For a while, I would just suddenly realized it changed, and I would think, "Well, I missed it again." I finally learned to look for the photograph developing, which I thought was a clever place to put it.

Miggy, the Thief

[glossybear]

Wow.
I never even noticed that before...

i have a feeling that they'll be teaching Memento is film classes for a LONG time...

Hasw anyone read the book "The Making of Memento"?

[mighty mint]

I really think that this was an amazing movie that the more you think about it and discuss it, the more you realize how well it was crafted. As to the mental health of Lenny, I think that he's going to get better from the chronological end of the movie because no one is there to feed his mind with an ongoing problem (like Teddy did). If Lenny loses his picture of Teddy shot before his psyche gets restored I don't know what that would do to him other than landing him in a padded cell.
It is very interesting to hear Lenny talk about how organized he is to remember and keep track but I think that a number of times he is without a pen and if he has one. He has only one. Tattoo that reminder on the bod..."Get 50 pens and put them in pockets!"
Great movie, awesome acting...superb discussion. Thankyou for giving me new things to see and think about.

[SilentFace]

keeping my thoughts short and sweet, the more I think about Lennys character the more it creeps me out. All in all I imagined that he would eventually get caught and end up back at the asylum

[BsK]

This was a solid effort, which I still want to experience more, having owning the SE and only experiencing it twice so far. I do believe that while Nolan's backwards direction is clever, it is however not entirely original. I think it is rooted in what Tarantino did in nearly all of his films, but I digress. I liked the story, interesting, compelling, and tough to decipher, especially just watching it once and backward only. I wish there were more humor to really enhance my enjoyment of the film, but there is some humor here and there, maybe just not as much as I typically like. Hey, not all stories can/should be funny I guess. Anyhow, I will continue to work on this film wiht repeat viewings down the road as I have not ultimately come to a final decision as to how much I like it.

[tqpix]

I like the fact that the movie goes backwards--never seen anything like this before, except for that one episode of Seinfeld.

This is one movie where I had to really pay attention. My mind sometimes wanders off when I'm watching a movie--I had to make sure that doesn't happen with this movie.

I really enjoyed the twist ending. There were two of them--WOW!

I think it is the reverse-chronological order that made this movie a bit confusing to me, but I still liked it. I seem to like things that are a bit confusing--that must be why I'm a big fan of Mulholland Dr. and The Lost Highway.

Another movie I really liked where the scenes don't go in chronological order is the Japanese movie Chaos. That movie doesn't go in reverse-chronological order like Memento, but the scenes are thrown at you at random.

[MiddleEarthGirl]

Maybe Lenoard had a real brain disorder? I used the film in a psychology paper and the prf had the same idea