What just happened?

Rating: Null/10 (25 March 2001)

My memory isn't what it used to be: I put things down and don't remember where, I forget phone numbers, and wonder on my way to the bus stop if I turned off the kitchen faucet. I can't blame these incidents on the morning-after-the-night-before syndrome, so I attribute the decline to one too many blows to the head, but subconsciously cringe because I know in the back of my mind that memory loss is supposed to get worse with age. At least I think that's what they sayÂ…
Leonard has a condition: after a violent attack in which his wife was killed, and he suffered a brain injury, Leonard was left with the inability to form short-term memories. To keep track of people, places or things, he takes reams of Polaroids and writes endless notes to himself (some more indelible than others). This, and the fact that he can never be sure if people are being straight with him, tends to make the search for his wife's killer a tad more difficult.
"Memento" is one of those films that will, ironically, remind you of many others: it showcases elements of "The Fugitive", "Pulp Fiction", "The Usual Suspects" and any number of film noir pieces. What sets "Memento" apart is not it's somewhat fractured timeline, or that it begins at the end, rather it is the total lack of certainty of any aspect of what is unfolding on screen.
"Memento" plays on the idea that what we remember isn't necessarily what happened: if you ask two people why they were arguing, they may recall the major theme, but will typically remember specific details very differently. This is why police always take eyewitness testimony with a grain of salt, because they realize that recollections are suspect at the best of times. The film never lets you forget that.
The entire premise of the film rests on whether you believe in Leonard's affliction and Guy Pearce leaves you with few doubts - his deft ability to switch from lucidity to blind rage to total confusion is totally convincing. However, although Leonard spends much of his time in a waking-dream-state he is not stunned and is able to focus and process his surroundings, evanescent though they may be (unless recorded). The supporting cast is equally effective.
Joe Pantoliano is his usually slimy self as Teddy - or is he? We don't know why Teddy's helping Leonard or if he is. And Pantoliano is slick enough that the viewer is hard pressed to say if he's a savior or Judas. Carrie-Anne Moss turns in her wordiest performance (even if many of them are four-lettered) yet as a mystery woman/kindred spirit/manipulator. Again, the viewer is not sure about her character or motivation. Is there anything the viewer can rely on in this film? Short answer, yes, but you may not like it.
While the director has gone to great pains to achieve an art-house film feel, there's no hiding the money that went into it. The film's detailed visuals slick editing and subtle audio clues embedded in the soundtrack all serve to both distract and alert the viewer's attention. The hard to pin down plot and concerted efforts by the writer to obscure any absolutes, including the inclusion of numerous red herrings requires that you pay strict attention to every detail. Even then, I don't guarantee you'll catch everything (I know I didn't).
This is a film for anyone who's tired of cookie-cutter plotlines, and wants a little fiber in their film diet. When it's over, ask your movie buddy for their interpretation, buy tickets for the next screening, and repeat as necessary.