The Memento SPOILERS! Thread [revived zombie]

Cafe Society
81

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, Leonard’s pre-attack memories cannot be considered reliable. Leonard himself even discounts using memory, saying it is in general unreliable. So how much more unreliable is it from someone who has suffered a brain injury as well as a some obvious psychological damage.

There is nothing in the movie that would suggest to us that Leonard is reliable. yes, Teddy has lied and for a reason, but there is NO reason for him to create a lie about Sammy not existing and Leonard’s wife having diabetes.

It is also highly unlikely that there would be two people with the same short-term memory loss condition. In fact it might be argued that Leonard’s condition is strictly psycho-symatic, having developed as a result of his studying the case of the fraud, Sammy Jankis and the attack on his wife which he could not deal with.

And I’m right gosh darn it!! :slight_smile:

82

The scene at the end/beginning of the movie, just after Teddy has explained all to Lenny, is the clincher for me - and makes me take J Juggernaut’s position: Lenny snaps a shot of Jimmy’s car on it, and writes “my car” on the photo, even though, at that time he knows it is not his car. He then writes down “fact No. 6”, Teddy’s license plate number, even though, at that time, he knows that Teddy did not kill his wife.

To me, these are the conscious actions of Lenny’s alter-ego (temporarily jarred to the surface by Teddy’s rant) designed to further the aims of the alter-ego. Those aims are simple: “Maintain, at all costs, the delusion that someone else killed my wife”. Here, the cost is the murder of Teddy, the only one that knows the truth, the only one that might force him to face that truth (the alter-ego knows that by listing Teddy’s license number as fact 6, he is effectively telling the “other” Lenny to kill Teddy).

83

I agree that Teddy and Natalie are both using Leonard to further their own goals. Both think that Leonard is a perfect patsy. In the worst case scenario, even if he’s caught by the police after killing someone on their behalf, he won’t be able to testify against them.

The movie showed that both Teddy and Natalie spend a lot of time trying to prevent the other from gaining Leonard’s trust (and thereby controlling his actions). Teddy and Natalie both acted as if Leonard was a blank slate they could write anything on and saw each other as their only significant opponent. Which was a mistake because in the final scenes of the movie, Leonard demonstrated that he also had motives and was also capable of using his condidtion to manipulate his actions. Like Teddy and Natalie, Leonard intentionally planted false clues to delude himself.

In my opinion, Leonard did kill his wife with insulin. He spent time in a mental hospital. He realized how empty his life was without a purpose and he intentionally deluded himself into believing his wife had been killed because it gave him a goal. Teddy told him the truth when he said Leonard wanted a puzzle he couldn’t solve. When Teddy appeared to be trying to force Leonard to acknowledge the truth, Leonard pointedly didn’t just immediately kill Teddy. Instead, he intentionally manipulated the evidence to implicate Teddy in his investigation.

84

Anniz and I saw the film this evening, and I left in a cloud of confusion. Then, I searched for this thread and read it, and the linked sites and images. Thanks.

My question: what’s the significance of the prostitute? Leonard called her up to ‘pretend’ to be his wife in the hotel room. But, why?

85

I think that Leonard called the prostitute in order to condition himself to his wife’s leaving.
On the website, in the psychiatrist’s notes, it gives the date of Caroline Shelby’s death as 11/97. This is months after the date of the attack in the Shelby home according to the police report (I believe it’s dated 2/97). I really really want to believe that he didn’t kill her and that his injury is physiological, not psychological, but the website does very sneakily tell you that Caroline wasn’t killed in the attack. Of course, we can always hypothesize that she lingered in a coma for nine months, sending us back 'round in circles.

86

As Leonard later (earlier?) tells Natalie, every morning he wakes up and reaches over to his wife’s side of the bed for her; when he finds it cold he assumes she’s in the bathroom or something … in other words, every morning is the day of the attack all over again, and he loses her all over again. He can’t work through his grief because every morning he goes back to the beginning.

I think hiring the call girl and recreating the scene as accurately as he can is a desperate attempt to make himself push past that moment.

After seeing it again I had a couple of other thoughts. When Mrs. Sammy is in his office talking about how Sammy isn’t the same man, how she just wants her old Sammy back–I realized why he hates being called Lenny. Because he’s really remembering his own wife talking to him, saying she wants her old Lenny back.

(OK, I just realized this contradicts what I said before; on the one hand, he doesn’t want to be called Lenny because it might make him remember the truth, on the other he wants to relive the day of the attack so he CAN start remembering again … :sigh: it’s a complicated movie, and it’s not unreasonable for someone in Leonard’s desperate plight to pursue conflicting goals.)

When Leonard and Natalie kiss, I started thinking, what would it be like to have Leonard as a long-time lover? Presumably he could learn through conditioning what pleases the woman, but every encounter would have that wonderful first-time charge. Plus he’s Guy Pearce–YOWZA!

87

Okay, all of you are completely wrong.

:slight_smile:

Great movie. But I do have to say this reading the thread: while many people love to interpret a movie they’re own way, and I’m bound to come up with my own theory, we should really only be dealing with facts here, especially on The Straight Dope. Granted, its MPSIMS, but gross generalizations and conjectures are misleading, and should be prefaced with an admission of a WAG.

Like many in here, I think one of the key elements in this movie is the scene where we see the tattoo that reads “I’ve done it”, which can be seen here:

http://www.ece.mcgill.ca/~mperez1/memento.jpg

What is extremely important is the fact that right above this tattoo is the backwards tattoo that we’ve all seen in the movie that reads, “John G. raped and murdered my wife”.

Murdered? Then who the hell is that laying naked next to you?!?

Also, for those of you who’ve seen it a couple of times, what are the exact words and motions that Natalie makes when mentioning the spot where the “I’ve done it” tattoo “appears”?

Thirdly, what’s the deal with the picture of Lenny pointing at his chest? Everything is so blurry to me, that I don’t remember any of the conversation that took place regarding this. It appeared during the B&W scene in the hotel while Lenny is giving the Sammy talk on the phone (which I assume to be before he kills Jimmy, correct?), and after he kills Jimmy, when he burns that picture, and the picture he took of the dead Jimmy. Obviously, there is no “I’ve done it” tattoo on him in the picture, but is there a scar?

Enough with the questions. On with the comments. My browser is being picky, so I can’t quote anybody. With that said, someone mentions something about Lenny having the tattoo the whole time, but refuses to see it. I think this is bunk. The movie would have given us more clues if this was the case (like showing him with the tattoo, but him looking in the mirror at himself without the tattoo). I don’t buy it.

Damn, I need some answers! (Actually, I just need to go see it again…)

Thanks in advance!

Munch

88

When I saw the movie for the third time (what can I say, I loved it) I made a point to remember this. Natalie places her hand over Leonard’s heart (where there is no tattoo or scar visible) and says, “What about here?”

I don’t think so. You can see the picture on the Memento web site if you click on “foul” in the newspaper article.

Teddy says that he took the photo right after Leonard killed the real John G. The implication, I think, is that Leonard is pointing at the spot where he intends to get his “I’ve done it” tattoo. Whether Teddy is telling the truth here is up for debate.

I’m still wondering if Leonard’s quest will continue indefinitely after he has killed Teddy. :slight_smile:

89

… but I noticed the “blank spot” early on, the first time we see Leonard in his skivvies ::mops brow, takes quick gulp of cold water:: in front of the mirror. No tattoo, no scar, clearly a spot he’s saving for something important. I mean, it’s right over his heart.

90

Just saw the movie today (it finally made it here this weekend). Film Threat has a pretty good interview with Christopher Nolan, the director. The film is based on a short story written by his brother, and pitched to him on a cross country road trip.

The film was shot in only 25 1/2 days…

The last page of the interview goes into a bit of exploration of what Nolan was exploring in the “revenge” theme he used.

91

Well, Memento finally came to me. This thread has been very helpful in sorting through all the thoughts and impressions the movie left me with.

I do want to say this, though. I don’t believe the movie ever showed Leonard burning the polariod of the murdered Teddy. The opening scene was the development of the polariod in reverse. So the only burned polaroids that we see in the movie are the one of himself and the one of Jimmy. And I believe those two were burned in the process of framing Teddy in his mind.

I think this thread deserves a bump anyways.

92

Yes, the opening scene was the photo developing in reverse, but we DO see Leonard burn a couple of photos, namely at the end of the movie. He burns the picture of him pointing to his chest, and of a dead Jimmy.

93

I saw the film again yesterday, and while I did see some things that support the “Lenny killed his wife” interpretation, I stand by my frequent assertations that Sammy killed his wife, and Leo DIDN’T kill his wife.

Further supporting “my” story:

The whole insulin overdose thing came about because Sammy’s wife thought he was faking. She thought this because he couldn’t learn through repition, something he should have been able to do. Lenny COULD learn through repitition (that’s how he knew about his condition and what pocket to find the pictures in, right?), ergo his wife (had she survived the attack) would have no reason to test him.

Just thought I’d throw that in. **I’m right and **(if you disagree with me) you’re wrong. :wink:

94

I’ve been reading this thread with a huge grin, seeing all the various theories bandied about, and I’m amazed, after all this time, that nobody has mentioned the license plate.

The what?

The license plate. Sure, it figures in the plot; on that level it’s right up front. But did anybody catch that the plate is shown with two slightly different numbers? And nobody in the movie seems to notice?

I’m just tossing in a potentially salient detail here. I’m not deliberately stirring a hornet’s nest or anything, but like I said, I’m quite surprised that nobody, apparently, picked up on this or saw fit to comment on it.

95

Actually, I did notice this last night. There is a I/1 mix-up, but I think it’s just a mistake since Lenny says “I” even when he’s clearly looking at a “1”. I think the tattoo got fucked up and so they just had to go with it. I don’t think it was a plot thing, but I could be wrong. Good catch, though!

96

Joey, I think you are mistaken about Sammy’s wife, she didn’t do the insulin thing because he couldn’t learn through repetition she did it to snap him out of the whole condition so he would go back to normal, so it is still possible that it was Lenny that killed his wife. Lenny’s wife did the insulin thing to “cure” him of his condition totally.

But apparently since I disagree with you I am wrong and you can disregard this entire post.

97

I don’t know how you derived this opinion from the movie, but in the story of Sammy (as related by Lenny in the film)the fact was she thought he was faking, not that she wanted to snap him out of it. If Lenny was falsely accusing Sammy, would the story at least been consistant?

Now you’re learning. :slight_smile:

98

**

So, here’s a little psych 101 theory: Leonard had the “I did it tattoo” the whole time after his first killing, as proposed above. But he can’t see it. I wouldn’t think this is very farfetched, considering how certain psychological condidtions can create drastic misperceptions. People with amputations feel that they still have limbs. There’s a perception disorder where people don’t know where their own limbs are. It’s possible that the “I did it” tattoo is there, but Leonard can’t/won’t acknowledge it. It explains the “what’s this” question, which makes no sense if there’s just an empty patch of skin on his chest.

99

People who have had amputated limbs still feel them for neurological reasons, not psychological ones.
I doubt that there was a tattoo there because during the black-and-white scenes, which I do not think are filtered through Leonard’s consciousness as the colored scenes may be, we don’t see any tatto there, nor do we see a scar.
[whiny voice]Nobody noticed my observation about the dates of the incident and of Mrs. Shelby’s death from the website, and now I’m horribly hurt (sniff, sniff).[/whiny voice]

100

This is an excellent point. In a psych class I once saw this video about a guy who had a fever that almost completely knocked out this part of his brain. He could remember everything before the fever (wife, kids, etc) but nothing after the fever for more than a few minutes. He was put in a special home. He lived there fore many years, and then, a doctor would say, “where is the kitchen,” and the guy would get upset because he knew that he did NOT “know” where the kitchen was. Yet, after many years, if the doctor said, “make me a cup of tea,” he COULD go find his way into the kitchen. Similarly, many people with retrograde amnesia are able to “cover for it” by faking recognition when they feel that they should remember someone. This is sort of about meta-cognition (thinking about thinking). I think that Leonard could honestly have severe retrograde amnesia, not be faking it, yet still “remember” to compensate for it cleverly.