Skip to main content

Well, I guess I can only make you remember the things you want to be true.

Memento
(2000)

(SPOILERS) Nolan joins forces with cinematographer Wally Pfister for the first time, and together they set the scene for the increasingly vast-in-scale – but cerebrally so – populist fare that would follow over the next two decades. Memento was one of those instantly cool cult indie darlings, like Donnie Darko or Pi, and you were invited to do little else but wow and flutter at a formidable new talent. Which is to say that Memento is impressive, both formally and thematically, but it also evidences the weakness that would increasingly manifest for the director going forward.

Memento’s conceit is both simple and effective; through telling his tale of an anterograde amnesiac in reverse, Nolan renders the straightforward facts concerning his protagonist’s quest complex and elusive. One can play the picture in chronological order if one has the right DVD (I still have the original R2 single disc edition); I’d never got round to it until this visit, and even then, I quickly gave up, as it simply isn’t very interesting viewed that way. Indeed, one of the reasons I suspect I haven’t returned to Memento in almost two decades is that, despite rating it highly, it isn’t so stimulating as a repeat offender. Thematically, yes, but as a narrative it rather wilts. First impressions are everything. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing (Roger Ebert suggested it wouldn’t warrant multiple viewings: “Confusion is the state we are intended to be in”); it rather depends what you’re angling for from your movie.

Certainly, the info dump that kicks off the proceedings (ie comes at the end of the released movie) is unwieldy to say the least. All that business with Sammy Jankis (Stephen Tobolowsky) turns out to have been Leonard’s own experience and – as Joe Pantoliano’s cop Teddy Gammell tells it – Leonard tracked down his wife’s killer(s) a long time ago, but due to his condition refused to accept it. Consequently, Teddy used Leonard’s vigilance for his own ends (this refusal to accept the truth in turn leads to Teddy’s death at “the beginning”). Now, it may be that Teddy is lying – Nolan noted audiences were unwilling to believe Teddy, in much the same manner that Leonard isn’t – but if that’s ambiguous, what is not is that we see Leonard actively nourishing his own self-deception. Which rather supports Teddy’s account, at least to a degree.

Indeed, for all Memento’s structural dazzle, as a puzzler it isn’t so distant from other shlockier genre examples. Had it turned out that Leonard was actually responsible for his wife’s death – and I bet Nolan considered it; the germ of the idea can be found in his assaulting Natalie, and then her turning it on him – it would have been in the same amnesiac/mental aberration furrow as the likes of Shattered and Shutter Island (God forbid it bore any relation to the latter).

Instead, what’s significant about Memento is how small its world is, and that – in direct contrast to Nolan’s subsequent fare, except maybe for Insomnia – is its salvation. All Leonard really does is become suspicious of Teddy, and thanks to a stray drinks coaster hook up with and get manipulated by Natalie (Carrie-Anne Moss). Indeed, it’s in this that Memento’s effective dissertation on paradigms is laid out. Those who know more about the world than Leonard, about the truth of the world – Teddy, Natalie, motel clerk Burt (Mark Boone Junior) fleecing Leonard for two rooms – have no compunction in influencing and using him for their own benefit, fully aware he stands no chance of seeing things as they really are. And possibly, even if they show him, he won’t believe them. Sound familiar?

If one has a limited understanding of or ability to perceive the world, it becomes impossible to make decisions about one’s circumstances that are beneficial to one’s wellbeing. And the more corrupted that perception is or becomes, the more one is likely to make choices that are actively counterproductive to the same.

Leonard is caught in a purgatory, spending his life going round in circles because others tell him to, and he actively allows them to tell him to. Decisions about where he lives (Burt), whom he makes friends with (Natalie, who deceives him and sends him on a massive detour, being Callum Keith Rennie’s Dodd) and whom he trusts as a guide (Teddy). In Memento, this truth is a particularly stark one, because it’s really rather pathetic that Leonard believes he’s onto something, that what he’s doing is important, that it’s “big”, and that the key to everything is within his grasp. But he actually has no idea and further, he cannot, because he has zero perspective. He can’t see things from above, looking down. Much like our lives, perhaps? Even when we think we believe we have insight, be it spiritual, political or global, we’re invariably still only snatching a sliver of something someone else is permitting us to perceive. “The world doesn’t just disappear when you close your eyes, does it?” But to an extent, it does.

Leonard has a massive book of clues, but his trying to work things out on a personal level is akin to the rabbit warren of, say, the JFK assassination; it will only turn up further questions, because the closer one gets, the further away one actually is from coherent perception. Leonard’s condition simply means his confirmation biases are more immediate and dramatic: “You don’t want the truth. You make up your own truth” he is told, and finally he admits “Do I lie to myself to be happy? In you case Teddy, yes, I will”.

Nolan commented "What the film says is that you can take on knowledge unconsciously through repetition, through habit". But that’s partly due to its internal logic (the how it is that Leonard even knows he has a condition). What it really says is that unconscious knowledge – intuition, if you like – is no more valid than flawed memory.

In many respects this scale and approach to a movie is Nolan playing to his strengths; the geography of action is within his grasp, and the focus is within the cranium rather than overstretching itself with dazzling set pieces and special effects (which is where his limitations as a filmmaker usually manifest themselves). The intricacies of editing work for him when they’re exclusively to do with the mind. The Tobolowsky plot is easily the most arresting part of Memento, and it’s easy to see why Nolan decided to lace it throughout the middle section of the movie (watched in a chunk at the start, it takes up about a quarter of an hour). It’s an excellent “in” to the picture’s themes; Sammy’s wife (Harriet Sansom Harris) begins doubting her husband’s condition because someone else doubts her husband’s condition. How well do we know our minds? How well can we say we know who we are, let alone assess who others are?

All Nolan’s films are about perception and the limitations thereof to some degree, but Memento is the one that probably sets out this store most overtly. The director’s canvases will change, and sometimes, his efforts won’t be wholly satisfyingly, as he attempts to stretch the material to fit his predilections (Batman Begins). But it’s easy to see, on the predictive programming front, why Nolan has become such a darling of TPTB. He’s putting it out there in plain sight, how easy it is to blur and blend and fabricate the reality of the masses, and still we’ll be entirely malleable when we’re told to be.


Popular posts from this blog

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

If this were a hoax, would we have six dead men up on that mountain?

The X-Files 4.24: Gethsemane   Season Four is undoubtedly the point at which the duff arc episodes begin to amass, encroaching upon the decent ones for dominance. Fortunately, however, the season finale is a considerable improvement’s on Three’s, even if it’s a long way from the cliffhanger high of 2.25: Anasazi .

You have a very angry family, sir.

Eternals (2021) (SPOILERS) It would be overstating the case to suggest Eternals is a pleasant surprise, but given the adverse harbingers surrounding it, it’s a much more serviceable – if bloated – and thematically intriguing picture than I’d expected. The signature motifs of director and honestly-not-billionaire’s-progeny Chloé Zhao are present, mostly amounting to attempts at Malick-lite gauzy natural light and naturalism at odds with the rigidly unnatural material. There’s woke to spare too, since this is something of a Kevin Feige Phase Four flagship, one that rather floundered, showcasing his designs for a nu-MCU. Nevertheless, Eternals manages to maintain interest despite some very variable performances, effects, and the usual retreat into standard tropes, come the final big showdown.

Captain, he who walks in fire will burn his feet.

The Golden Voyage of Sinbad (1973) (SPOILERS) Ray Harryhausen returns to the kind of unadulterated fantasy material that made Jason and the Argonauts such a success – swords & stop motion, if you like. In between, there were a couple of less successful efforts, HG Wells adaptation First Men in the Moon and The Valley of the Gwangi (which I considered the best thing ever as a kid: dinosaur walks into a cowboy movie). Harryhausen’s special-effects supremacy – in a for-hire capacity – had also been consummately eclipsed by Raquel Welch’s fur bikini in One Million Years B.C . The Golden Voyage of Sinbad follows the expected Dynamation template – blank-slate hero, memorable creatures, McGuffin quest – but in its considerable favour, it also boasts a villainous performance by nobody-at-the-time, on-the-cusp-of-greatness Tom Baker.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

I think it’s wonderful the way things are changing.

Driving Miss Daisy (1989) (SPOILERS) The meticulous slightness of Driving Miss Daisy is precisely the reason it proved so lauded, and also why it presented a prime Best Picture pick: a feel-good, social-conscience-led flick for audiences who might not normally spare your standard Hollywood dross a glance. One for those who appreciate the typical Judi Dench feature, basically. While I’m hesitant to get behind anything Spike Lee, as Hollywood’s self-appointed race-relations arbiter, spouts, this was a year when he actually did deliver the goods, a genuinely decent movie – definitely a rarity for Lee – addressing the issues head-on that Driving Miss Daisy approaches in softly-softly fashion, reversing gingerly towards with the brake lights on. That doesn’t necessarily mean Do the Right Thing ought to have won Best Picture (or even that it should have been nominated for the same), but it does go to emphasise the Oscars’ tendency towards the self-congratulatory rather than the provocat

You’re the pattern and the prototype for a whole new age of biological exploration.

The Fly II (1989) (SPOILERS) David Cronenberg was not, it seems, a fan of the sequel to his hit 1986 remake, and while it’s quite possible he was just being snobby about a movie that put genre staples above theme or innovation, he wasn’t alone. Fox had realised, post- Aliens , that SF properties were ripe for hasty follow ups, and indiscriminately mined a number of popular pictures to immediately diminishing returns during the period ( Cocoon , Predator ). Neither critics nor audiences were impressed. In the case of The Fly II , though, it would be unfair to label the movie as outright bad. It simply lacks that *idea* that would justify the cash-in.