An explanation, plus a defense of two main criticisms

Rating: 10/10 (21 March 2002)

This review probably won't mean much if you haven't seen the movie.
I've seen a bunch of reviews of this, and so far, I haven't seen this explanation for why it was shot chronologically backwards (sorry if it was to whomever else wrote it down first - the point is, I figured this out on my own). While it does help artistically (making the viewer sympathize with the lead by having to constantly reconstruct the past, and being constantly confused), it creates an even more practical simulation of the story. If the movie were shot forwards, the viewer would then remember the past - why things happened, who characters are. However, by shooting it backwards, viewers do not remember the past, like the character. It allows the viewer to watch each scene with no memory of the preceding events. SPOILER - Would you have reacted the same way to Natalie crying with blood on her face the same way if you knew it was Leonard who did it? Exactly. This technique allows for plot twists like that one by not letting the audience know the important info Leonard doesn't. This technique probably had many purposes, although I think the others were included after the decision to shoot backwards for this reason.
The most amazing artistic part of the movie, however, was its ability to create suspense by going backwards in time. SPOILER - I was gripped by the one note that drove most of the plot: the first about Teddy: "do not believe his lies". The movie was unconventional, but there was great suspense (for me, at least) about the origin of that note, since all the others came out of that one. Why would Teddy be lying? Couldn't his advice have been valid, too? I was dying to know during the second half. Everyone who said there is no suspense were obviously not willing to commit to the movie. The movie doesn't leave neon signs; You have to do a bit of thinking on your own. There was more to the movie than exploring a self-imposed limitation. There was suspense and mystery that required attention for true benefit. Considering the unconventional narrative structure, this movie was seamless in plot. Many complain "how can he remember his condition if he found out about it after the injury?", but remember, his condition, unlike Sammy's, was physical. He could remember things through instinct and repetition (checking the hotel night stand when he woke up). He could have made a note about his condition early, on, but I'd assume he'd have had to use it a lot (read: repetitively). That routine of explaining himself to everyone new - to him, everyone - could have become instinct, like opening the drawer, and he would have remembered it. Eat that! This was one of the most creative, artistically innovative movies since 2001: A Space Odyssey.