So as I'm sitting around talking to my friend Lauryn (gossipping as usual), it hits me: our lives are so affected by lies, we barely even notice sometimes. Take gossip, for example. Despite what people try to say, everyone gossips at some point in their lives. It doesn't matter whether the story is true; it will be spread regardless. This reminds me of Momento in many ways. Firstly, Leonard's life was greatly affected by numerous lies, and most of the time he never even noticed it. He spent his days after the accident in a state of confusion, never knowing what to believe. Because of his condition, he gets to the point where he can't tell who's lying and who's telling the truth. Even though he goes through the same routines, he still can't pinpoint the lies from the truth. People, like Natalie for instance, can lie straight to his face without him noticing a thing. The same thing happens to people in this world everday. People get so good at lying, no one can ever catch them at it. In a way, it's kind of sad to think that a person who you are very close to can be lying to you about everything. That's pretty much what happens to Leonard throughout the movie. He trusts the wrong people, and in the end, never fully accepts that they were lying to him. This makes me think about how much we as a society focus on rumors and gossip on a day to day basis. Like Leonard and his condition, we go from one story to the next, forgetting the stuff in between. We can never focus on the truth in our lives simply because there's so many lies circulating at the same time. It also makes me think about all of the people I'm close to, and how I hope they don't lie to me like the people in Leonard's life lied to him.
If you think about it, anyone can lie. It takes real skill to be able to tell what's bullshit and what's not.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
The loving, caring and manipulative Natalie.
I thought that Natalie was playing Leonard. I thought that she was using him to get rid of men that were competing with her drug-dealing boyfriend. Then I thought that she was using him for his "money". Then I thought that maybe, just maybe she might love him, and perhaps she was helping him out of love (or pity as Leonard put it).
But no. Not only was she on a completely self-serving mission, she used Leonard's disability against him! She stole all the pens, got him good and pissed-off by insulting his late wife, and then when he hauled off and hit her, she used those injuries to get him to hurt another man.
A woman like Natalie gives women a bad name. Not only is she conniving and manipulative she also tries to use sex to get what she wants, although how well that works on a man that can't remember is hard to tell. But she tries it anyway. This woman has no shame, no remorse, no morals and really only cares for her boyfriend (James, the dead guy) as a steady stream of income.
Which leads me to wonder, as she is one of only four female characters in the movie, what kind of interaction Christopher Nolan has had with women.
Natalie, Catherine, Mrs. Jankis and the un-named hooker are the only women in the story. One's a manipulative monster, one is dead and worthy of unending devotion, but was shown as a very "uppity" woman (remember when she was in bed reading that novel?), one is an unstable woman who, according to Leonard, loved her husband so much that she starved him and eventually forced him to put her in a diabetic coma, and the last is a drugged out prostitute.
To be completely fair most of the male characters are the dredges of humanity. A crooked cop, a homicidal maniac, a con-artist desk clerk, a drug dealer. The only reasonably "normal" male character was Sammy Jankis, and he had brain damage!
Even so, is there some reason that Nolan decided on those four "stereotypes" of women? Did he believe that he was accurately representing women? Did he believe that it was the best way to push the movie into darker territory? Was he even thinking about his representation of women at all?
Even if he wasn't focused on, or even aware of how he was representing women, Nolan's portrayal seems less than complimentary to say the least.
But no. Not only was she on a completely self-serving mission, she used Leonard's disability against him! She stole all the pens, got him good and pissed-off by insulting his late wife, and then when he hauled off and hit her, she used those injuries to get him to hurt another man.
A woman like Natalie gives women a bad name. Not only is she conniving and manipulative she also tries to use sex to get what she wants, although how well that works on a man that can't remember is hard to tell. But she tries it anyway. This woman has no shame, no remorse, no morals and really only cares for her boyfriend (James, the dead guy) as a steady stream of income.
Which leads me to wonder, as she is one of only four female characters in the movie, what kind of interaction Christopher Nolan has had with women.
Natalie, Catherine, Mrs. Jankis and the un-named hooker are the only women in the story. One's a manipulative monster, one is dead and worthy of unending devotion, but was shown as a very "uppity" woman (remember when she was in bed reading that novel?), one is an unstable woman who, according to Leonard, loved her husband so much that she starved him and eventually forced him to put her in a diabetic coma, and the last is a drugged out prostitute.
To be completely fair most of the male characters are the dredges of humanity. A crooked cop, a homicidal maniac, a con-artist desk clerk, a drug dealer. The only reasonably "normal" male character was Sammy Jankis, and he had brain damage!
Even so, is there some reason that Nolan decided on those four "stereotypes" of women? Did he believe that he was accurately representing women? Did he believe that it was the best way to push the movie into darker territory? Was he even thinking about his representation of women at all?
Even if he wasn't focused on, or even aware of how he was representing women, Nolan's portrayal seems less than complimentary to say the least.
Me, Myself, and Lies
The movie "Memento" was confusing, exciting, and shocking. My favorite part about the movie was that every time I thought I had figured it out, the plot twisted again. In the beginning, the viewer was led to believe that Teddy was the killer. You start to worry about Leonard spending so much time with him, but then you begin to feel better because at least Natalie is someone who is there for him, helping him out. You later find out that Teddy is Leonard's true friend and that Natalie is the one that you should have been worried about. The movie took the viewer through so many viewpoints, and revealed information in very small increments, so that almost every ten minutes there was a different idea. The story kept evolving with every new detail, and the premature opinions that I had formed were completely destroyed, rebuilt, and destroyed again. It really made me think about how, without having all of the necessary information, people can make judgements and conjectures that make perfect sense to them, but are completely wrong. This happens in everyday life, where we are given bits of information and we draw conclusions but then realize that what we had imagined was nothing like the truth. When, at the end, we realize that Leonard's wife had actually sort of killed herself, you realize exactly how you went wrong in your other guesses, which is exactly what happens in life when we are confronted with the truth after having formed inaccurate ideas.
"Just don't think about it..."
I couldn't even begin to count the number of times I've been in a situation that wasn't to my liking, and hearing someone tell me, "just don't think about it."
Before this movie, I would like to think that this statement is easier said than done. Memento gives a different spin on the truth of this statement. Leonard's world is completely based on his ability to remain focused, and by doing so, keeping his memory in tact for as long as possible. However, the moment Leonard "doesn't think about it" that memory is lost forever. There have been times where I wished I could just forget a memory, but Leonard showed me that I'd rather just deal with the problems than forget they ever happened.
I know it was not Leonard's fault that he lost his memory. His situation was terrible. However, even though his condition was not controllable, he learned how to work his own system. Revenge got the best of him. Even in his moments of clarity when he knew his deed had been done - he killed his wife's rapist, he chose to pretend it never happened. It was not his mental condition that forgot his successful revenge. He just "didn't think about it."
This movie has fit in with our class perfectly. Looking around while watching the movie, everyone was clearly captivated and connected with the movie. It was nice having the visual effects of what lies can do to us. While reading our literature, it was our minds that created the characters and acted it out in our heads. Watching the movie, the lies were even harder to not get caught up in. It was a perfect example of how a story can make us think and feel how the author wants us to feel. In this case, we were called in to Leonard's world - a world where we just don't have to think about it.
Before this movie, I would like to think that this statement is easier said than done. Memento gives a different spin on the truth of this statement. Leonard's world is completely based on his ability to remain focused, and by doing so, keeping his memory in tact for as long as possible. However, the moment Leonard "doesn't think about it" that memory is lost forever. There have been times where I wished I could just forget a memory, but Leonard showed me that I'd rather just deal with the problems than forget they ever happened.
I know it was not Leonard's fault that he lost his memory. His situation was terrible. However, even though his condition was not controllable, he learned how to work his own system. Revenge got the best of him. Even in his moments of clarity when he knew his deed had been done - he killed his wife's rapist, he chose to pretend it never happened. It was not his mental condition that forgot his successful revenge. He just "didn't think about it."
This movie has fit in with our class perfectly. Looking around while watching the movie, everyone was clearly captivated and connected with the movie. It was nice having the visual effects of what lies can do to us. While reading our literature, it was our minds that created the characters and acted it out in our heads. Watching the movie, the lies were even harder to not get caught up in. It was a perfect example of how a story can make us think and feel how the author wants us to feel. In this case, we were called in to Leonard's world - a world where we just don't have to think about it.
Living a lie
In Mementos, we see a man who has lost his memory, and lives day to day using his system of notes and only trusting his own handwriting. He's looking for the murderer of his wife, who was brutally murdered and raped. Soon however, we learn that Leonard (the protagonist) is living a lie, one he made for himself, though he cannot remember making it. Leonard it turns out, ended up killing his wife by giving her too many insulin shots, because he couldn't remember that he'd already done it. He can't bare to live with this truth, so he projects the reality as a story, the Sammy story. He uses this story as an example of someone who couldn't live with their disability, someone who was weak. The fact that he lies to himself, and therefore lies to us, the viewer, is totally in theme with the course. What is the truth? If Leonard truly believes that he didn't kill his wife, that a Sammy truly exists, does that now count as his truth? Or does he need to be held accountable for his actions, even though he cannot remember. He purposely tricks himself at the end of the movie, by making himself think that Teddy is actually John G, something that we see him discover throughout the film. His 6th tattoo, about the license plate number, is all a lie, but he purposely does that. Leonard can't bare to live in his reality, so he makes up his "Facts" and plants false truths and hints to help him live this lie. Everything around him is a lie. Like with Natalie, when she gets all the people to spit in the cup, and about 15 seconds later she serves Leonard and he drinks it, I was so grossed out and felt so sorry for him. all his supposed friends actually just use him, which is super sad.
Tattoos, Pictures, and War Stories
When watching this movie, I attempted to relate it to Time O'Brien's The Things They Carried. Amazingly, I found a similarity between the movie of the cruel life of a widowed man and the ever so confusing Vietnam novel. This similarity was the art of remembering, and how it changes.
In the movie, the protagonist with his "condition" attempts to remember things by writing down facts on the back of photographs and by tattooing them onto his body. In the novel, things are remembered by the characters through stories. The similarity-both memories are distorted. Due to a condition, memories are screwed with by those trying to take advantage of a poor character trying to get revenge. Due to the sake of story-telling, memories are tampered with to become a better or more extravagant story. This "distorted" memory leaves audiences looking for the truth or like me just all together frustrated. This makes both the novel and the movie a successful one.
I love movies I can just relax and watch, but a movie that makes an audience use their brain is a success!
In the movie, the protagonist with his "condition" attempts to remember things by writing down facts on the back of photographs and by tattooing them onto his body. In the novel, things are remembered by the characters through stories. The similarity-both memories are distorted. Due to a condition, memories are screwed with by those trying to take advantage of a poor character trying to get revenge. Due to the sake of story-telling, memories are tampered with to become a better or more extravagant story. This "distorted" memory leaves audiences looking for the truth or like me just all together frustrated. This makes both the novel and the movie a successful one.
I love movies I can just relax and watch, but a movie that makes an audience use their brain is a success!
Shorty Like a Memory in My Head
knahT doG siht eivom saw edam ni eht ,seitenin esuaceb ti si ylraen elbissopmi ot teg dioraloP mlif .syadawon tsuJ .gniyas yM stnerap dluow ylbaborp nwosid em fi I dellup a yuG ecreiP dna detrats gnittat flesym .pu nehT niaga ym stnerap dluow ylbaborp nwosid em fi I detrats gniffo nhoJ ,s’G esuaceb yeht dluow edulcni eno fo ym s’daD tseb sdneirf dna ym s’mom .tsitned mottoB ,enil I t’ndluoc evil s’ynneL efil dna teg yawa htiw .ti ynneL sekam eht esac rof hturt sa a evitcejbus tnemele ot seno sfeileb sa eh ylno seveileb tahw eh dah dlot flesmih ni eht .tsap I kniht erom naht gnihtyna I dluow ton eb elba ot evil htiw flesym gniwonk tahw I saw .gniod ynneL t’nseod ezilaer taht eh si gnillik eht gnorw yug sa eh si gniod ,ti tub eh saw ylluf tnazingoc fo sih erutuf ta eht tnemom eh delaes .ti oT ,ynneL eh si gniwollof stcaf taht eh dial tuo rof .flesmih eH t’nseod ezilaer taht ynneL morf evif setunim oga sah tsuj tes ffo rehtona tsujnu redrum taht sah yletulosba gnihton ot od htiw sih s’efiw .htaed ynneL seveileb taht lla sih snoitca era desab no .stcaf sihT fo esruoc si desab no eht feileb taht eh dluow ton eil ot .flesmih sihT si gnorw esuaceb ynneL si a tnereffid .nosrep eH srebmemer flesmih morf erofeb eht ,tnedicca ebyam a ynneL taht t’ndluow eil ot flesmih ot elbane sseltniop .egnever ehT epar dna tnerappa redrum fo sih efiw saw a sutepmi taht denrut mih otni a lufegnev reredrum ohw dluow llik rof a gnileef fo noitcafsitas taht detsal ssel naht net .setunim tahW siht wen ynneL t’ndid ,ezilaer ro yltnerappa erac ,tuoba saw taht net setunim fo noitcafsitas rof mih tnaem gnidne s’enoemos efil .reverof esehT ’stcaf‘ taht ynneL swollof era lla evitcejbus ot sih etats fo .dnim fI eh sees gnihtemos sa a doog ,aedi eh lliw evael a liart fo sbmurcdaerb rof eht ynneL net setunim retfa .mih sihT renni ytilarom si a yrev suoregnad rentrap ot ecnad .htiw eH si gniwollof shturt taht eh sah ylgniwonknu detcocnoc os eh nac eunitnoc ot leef erusaelp nwod eht .daor oS I ksa siht :noitseuq fI uoy nac tsurt ,flesruoy mohw nac uoy ?tsurt ynneL dluoc ylisae dael flesmih ot od ynam sgniht taht eh dluow ton yllautca tnaw ot .od eH dluoc oottat llik‘ ’flesruoy no sih ,mra dna tnerruc ynneL yam kniht taht eh yllautca dellik sih ,efiw dna dluow ylbaborp llik .flesmih ,rO fi enoemos esle erew elba ot oottat ,ynneL yeht dluoc od sseltnuoc sgniht ot etalupinam .mih ynneL ,sksa ehT“ dlrow t’nseod tsuj raeppasid nehw uoy esolc ruoy ,seye seod ”?ti ,oN ti .t’nseod tuB ni eht emas ,esnes hturt t’nseod tsuj raeppasid fi uoy ekam pu a .eil oT ,ynneL ,revewoh ti .seod s’ynneL elohw larom dna lacihte elacs si os os dekcuf .pu eH si gniyl ot flesmih ot tcurtsni flesmih ot timmoc snoitca taht era yletelpmoc tnavelerri ot sih tseuq rof ,ecnaegnev ylluf gniwonk taht eh si gniog ot od gnihtemos eh t’ndluohs .od dnA taht ecnetnes t’nseod neve emoc esolc ot woh gnisufnoc sih larom radar .si otnemeM si desab no noitalupinam dna evitcejbus .hturt llA eht sretcarahc ni eht mlif etalupinam ,ynneL gnidulcni .flesmih yracS sgniht neppah nehw hturt si revetahw ew yas ti .si ooT hcum rewop rof eno ,luos ni ym .dnim
"I have this condition."
If you could go back in time and forget certain moments, start fresh with no recollection of how or why you got where you are, would you? Leonard Shelby created lies to give his life purpose, but in all honesty, is that really any different than what we all do in our own lives?
In the movie Momento, Leonard Shelby tells us, "I have this condition". In a way, I think some of us may be envious of that condition. In his own twisted way, Leonard is able to give his life purpose through things like "learning to trust his own handwriting" and basing his life off "facts, not observations." The irony of this of course, is that his whole life, this purpose that he has created for himself and that the audience is so drawn into, is fictional and made up. The reason, I believe, that some of us may be envious of this condition is because we all do this everyday in our lives. Whether it is consciously or unconsciously, we all tell ourselves little lies to give our lives purpose and meaning, or to just make it through the day. Sometimes in life, it is difficult to find meaning in the mundane or the ordinary so in order to find this hidden purpose one might have to create it within his or her own life.
In the case of Leonard Shelby, he knew that his life would fall apart if he knew the truth, like Teddy said to him at the very end, which would technically be the beginning, "You don't want the truth, you make up your own truth." But maybe that is just it, maybe we all want to find purpose or forget or change something in our lives so badly that the real truth becomes irrelevant because we would rather believe our own truth. For some of us, the real world is just too hard to handle sometimes, but that does not mean that it doesn't still exist and hold meaning in our lives. Like Leonard said, "Just because there are things I don't remember doesn't make my actions meaningless. The world doesn't just disappear when you close your eyes, does it?" So, even though Leonard Shelby might be able to live his life based on lies that he has created to give himself a purpose, it only works because he cannot remember where the lies began. Unlike Leonard, we can all try to convince ourselves of certain things in our lives, but as much as we might like to think so sometimes, we will never be able to completely run away from the truth or reality.
We All Need Mirrors to Remind Ourselves Who We Are
Leonard Shelby might be the most unreliable narrator I’ve encountered in this course (and beating out Tim O’Brien is quite a feat). At the end of Memento—which is really the beginning of the story—Lenny wonders, “Will I lie to myself to be happy? ...[Y]es, I will.” Earlier in the movie –which is actually later in his life—he asks, ” Doesn't make a difference whether I know about it. Just because there are things I don't remember doesn't make my actions meaningless. The world doesn't just disappear when you close your eyes, does it?” This is not a result of memory loss, but instability in Lenny’s personality. He is taking two fundamentally different views. What makes something true: belief or actual events? It seems, to experience truth we need a frame of reference. Because of Lenny’s condition, we are not given one and are left confused. This forced me to make my own truth. In order to analyze the film I needed some grounding. I chose to believe Teddy’s story that Lenny’s wife died after the assault from the insulin he administered, and that Lenny had killed the second assailant.
Lenny states that physical things and actions in the world are all that matter. He wants his wife’s “murderer” dead, even if he cannot remember it. In itself, this idea makes little sense because people extract revenge to give themselves a sense of closure and consolation. Throughout the film we learn that Lenny has mixed the details of his own life with that of Sammy Jankens, this could have been done subconsciously, but in Lenny’s one lucid moment at the end of the film, he admits that he would lie to make his life bearable. The detective game he is playing is the only tie he has to his previous life. It gives him a sense of purpose. It is also comforting because his condition does not allow time for coping with the loss of his memory and wife. I believe that by admitting he would rather live a lie than in the real world he is admitting that belief is more essential to truth than actual happenings. This means that Lenny is lying to himself about more than just Sammy Jankins. He’s lying to himself about his entire world view. Without these falsehoods conditioned in, he wouldn’t be able to go on living.
Lenny states that physical things and actions in the world are all that matter. He wants his wife’s “murderer” dead, even if he cannot remember it. In itself, this idea makes little sense because people extract revenge to give themselves a sense of closure and consolation. Throughout the film we learn that Lenny has mixed the details of his own life with that of Sammy Jankens, this could have been done subconsciously, but in Lenny’s one lucid moment at the end of the film, he admits that he would lie to make his life bearable. The detective game he is playing is the only tie he has to his previous life. It gives him a sense of purpose. It is also comforting because his condition does not allow time for coping with the loss of his memory and wife. I believe that by admitting he would rather live a lie than in the real world he is admitting that belief is more essential to truth than actual happenings. This means that Lenny is lying to himself about more than just Sammy Jankins. He’s lying to himself about his entire world view. Without these falsehoods conditioned in, he wouldn’t be able to go on living.
Everybody Lies
I did not like this movie. When I watch a movie, I like relaxing. I put my mind on autopilot and glide to the happy ending, with convenient bathroom breaks during predictably scary and sad parts. With Memento my brain’s movie GPS was irrevocably confused. Forcing it to stray from the beloved pattern of romantic comedies and venture into the unknown realm of… the unknown.
Regardless of whether I enjoyed the film, Memento was appropriate to the themes of this class. Memento successfully blurred the lines between truth and fiction- making it nearly impossible to detect where truth ends and lies begin. This film reminds the viewer that memory is duplicitous.
Leonard, the main character- a man who suffers from a rare form of memory loss; he can remember the past, but cannot form new memories. Leonard lives his to avenge his wife’s rape and murder. He hunts down the murder throughout the movie but is denied the sweet flavor of revenge because he cannot remember if he actually killed his wife’s murder. In effect, Leonard tells himself that his wife’s murderer is still at large, when in reality he is her murderer.
Leonard says, “Do I lie to myself to be happy?... Yes I do.” However, do Leonard’s lies make him any different from normal people? Just because Leonard’s bases his life on lies, does not mean his life is meaningless. All people lie, to make themselves feel better. Even if Leonard bases his entire existence after his wife’s death on a lie, his life is imbibed with meaning, because he has a purpose.
I like movies that have a moral or those that make me feel good. This movie was left me confused, saddened and with a residual feeling of immorality, like the soap scum on a shower curtain.
Regardless of whether I enjoyed the film, Memento was appropriate to the themes of this class. Memento successfully blurred the lines between truth and fiction- making it nearly impossible to detect where truth ends and lies begin. This film reminds the viewer that memory is duplicitous.
Leonard, the main character- a man who suffers from a rare form of memory loss; he can remember the past, but cannot form new memories. Leonard lives his to avenge his wife’s rape and murder. He hunts down the murder throughout the movie but is denied the sweet flavor of revenge because he cannot remember if he actually killed his wife’s murder. In effect, Leonard tells himself that his wife’s murderer is still at large, when in reality he is her murderer.
Leonard says, “Do I lie to myself to be happy?... Yes I do.” However, do Leonard’s lies make him any different from normal people? Just because Leonard’s bases his life on lies, does not mean his life is meaningless. All people lie, to make themselves feel better. Even if Leonard bases his entire existence after his wife’s death on a lie, his life is imbibed with meaning, because he has a purpose.
I like movies that have a moral or those that make me feel good. This movie was left me confused, saddened and with a residual feeling of immorality, like the soap scum on a shower curtain.
You have to have a system.
Once again I have been forced to question what statements are true and what statements are false. Momento was an extreme brain twister at first. The story is told in reverse chronological order. I found this to be an extremely effective way at mimicking Leonards's own "condition". Leonard can only retain information for roughly five minutes. This is why each scene is roughly five minutes long.
Because of Leonard's "condition" he is forced to write everything down on photos in order to remember. This causes many problems for our protagonist. He is easily manipulated by people such as Teddy and Natalie. This manipulation can go so far as to involve the murder of innocent, or not so innocent (we don't know) people. The only thing that is important to Leonard is to get revenge for his wife. His wife was murdered by a John G. but he doesn't know which one. This poses a problem for Leonard. If he does finally get revenge on John G, he never remembers that he has. Therefor his lust for revenge is never subdued.
One aspect I felt was ironic was the fact that he kept mentioning how you had to come up with a system and that's how you could make it work with this disease. Yet he had a system that was based entirely on pens and photos. Without one of those he could not remember anything since his accident. The entire time he would keep saying "you see, you have to have a system" yet the entire movie he is being manipulated to do other's biddings. Some system.
Yeah I guess last but not least, the funniest part of the movie I though was where he was getting chased and goes, "Whats going on, I'm chasing somebody." Get's shot at and goes, "No they are chasing me." Classic.
Because of Leonard's "condition" he is forced to write everything down on photos in order to remember. This causes many problems for our protagonist. He is easily manipulated by people such as Teddy and Natalie. This manipulation can go so far as to involve the murder of innocent, or not so innocent (we don't know) people. The only thing that is important to Leonard is to get revenge for his wife. His wife was murdered by a John G. but he doesn't know which one. This poses a problem for Leonard. If he does finally get revenge on John G, he never remembers that he has. Therefor his lust for revenge is never subdued.
One aspect I felt was ironic was the fact that he kept mentioning how you had to come up with a system and that's how you could make it work with this disease. Yet he had a system that was based entirely on pens and photos. Without one of those he could not remember anything since his accident. The entire time he would keep saying "you see, you have to have a system" yet the entire movie he is being manipulated to do other's biddings. Some system.
Yeah I guess last but not least, the funniest part of the movie I though was where he was getting chased and goes, "Whats going on, I'm chasing somebody." Get's shot at and goes, "No they are chasing me." Classic.
I Totally Didn't See That Coming...
I’d like to start out by saying-- that movie was crazy good.
I really liked the way the film was set up, how the viewer would find out the consequences before he knew the actions that caused them. It lent to an exciting style that was interesting to watch and kept you wondering what would happen next, or what the circumstances were that led to a certain event.
I was completely surprised by the final scene. I was not at all expecting what happened to occur. I had no clue, and was completely caught off guard. With the information given to us the viewers, the possibility that Teddy was a “good-guy” never occured. He seemed like an conniving ass-hole throughout the movie, so when he turned out to have gone through the drill with Leonard’s revenge-seeking before, it was a cool turn of events.
I’m not really sure if I consider the story a lie; Leonard had that condition, that in my mind, kind of served as an excuse to make that leap in the end plausibly. I liked that twist.
Teddy Bears a Mystery
Throughout the movie, the audience sits in a cloud of confusion nearly as thick as Lennard. However, while Lennard can never remember Teddy, the audience develops a suspicion towards him. We do not know Teddy’s history with Lennard, just that Teddy claims to be a “friend.” However, there is little evidence to support this statement, therefore making Teddy’s motives dubious.
The first striking contradiction to Teddy’s claim of friendship is his treatment of Lennard. In nearly every scene, Teddy cusses at or flicks Lennard the finger. Friends do not curse each other out, except during playful moments. Additionally, Teddy’s tone of voice is usually short-tempered and hostile, except when he initially sees Lennard. At these times, his voice is exceptionally cheerful, suggesting that he wants something from Lennard. Such communication cannot be ascribed to friendship. Teddy warns Lennard not to trust Natalie because she will use him for her own gain. But this statement only sheds doubt on Teddy, for it raises the question of why he is helping Lennard. Most people, even Lennard’s wife, would not bother with a person like him. Therefore, Teddy’s motives must be for personal gain.
We learn at the end that Teddy is a cop, and that the person Lennard kills is a drug dealer that Teddy is investigating. This juncture doubles the suspicion towards Teddy. He says he simply wants to see Lennard smile as the “first” time he avenged his wife’s alleged death, which seems like a friendly gesture, though he cannot be trusted as Lennard’s friend. Thus, it can be assumed that Teddy is using Lennard to remove common criminals from the street.
Teddy’s vile ambitions become clear at the end of the movie. In his own mind, perhaps he thinks his treatment of Lennard is friendly, but helping someone to kill, even for revenge, causes severe damage. Lennard becomes further depressed after killing the drug dealer, and his vengeance lust grows stronger. As punishment for his corrupt ways, Teddy meets a just end: death by his own puppet.
The first striking contradiction to Teddy’s claim of friendship is his treatment of Lennard. In nearly every scene, Teddy cusses at or flicks Lennard the finger. Friends do not curse each other out, except during playful moments. Additionally, Teddy’s tone of voice is usually short-tempered and hostile, except when he initially sees Lennard. At these times, his voice is exceptionally cheerful, suggesting that he wants something from Lennard. Such communication cannot be ascribed to friendship. Teddy warns Lennard not to trust Natalie because she will use him for her own gain. But this statement only sheds doubt on Teddy, for it raises the question of why he is helping Lennard. Most people, even Lennard’s wife, would not bother with a person like him. Therefore, Teddy’s motives must be for personal gain.
We learn at the end that Teddy is a cop, and that the person Lennard kills is a drug dealer that Teddy is investigating. This juncture doubles the suspicion towards Teddy. He says he simply wants to see Lennard smile as the “first” time he avenged his wife’s alleged death, which seems like a friendly gesture, though he cannot be trusted as Lennard’s friend. Thus, it can be assumed that Teddy is using Lennard to remove common criminals from the street.
Teddy’s vile ambitions become clear at the end of the movie. In his own mind, perhaps he thinks his treatment of Lennard is friendly, but helping someone to kill, even for revenge, causes severe damage. Lennard becomes further depressed after killing the drug dealer, and his vengeance lust grows stronger. As punishment for his corrupt ways, Teddy meets a just end: death by his own puppet.
Monday, October 5, 2009
“You don't want the truth. You make up your own truth.”
Leonard Shelby has used deductive reasoning throughout his life. As an insurance fraud investigator, he could easily tell need from fraud, fact from fiction, truth from lies. He explains to his constant acquaintance Teddy, “Facts, not memories. That's how you investigate. I know; it's what I used to do." Even with his handicap, Leonard remains unabashed that he will avenge his wife through his thorough investigation.
But could he?
How accurate is Leonard Shelby's investigation? Or even his recollection prior to his accident?
Leonard sneers in his defense of his methods, “Memory can change the shape of a room; it can change the color of a car. And memories can be distorted. They're just an interpretation, they're not a record, and they're irrelevant if you have the facts.” But what does Leonard have before his accident? Even the details behind his wife's death, truths so unwavering that they are tattooed across Leonard's chest, are ambiguous. Leonard contends from the beginning that a man raped and strangled his wife. However, as the story progresses, we find that Leonard's wife possibly died due to an overdose of insulin possibly administered by Leonard himself. The story of Sammy Jankis also deems problematic and unclear. Leonard portrays a tale of a poor, utterly befuddled man with anterograde amnesia, who accidentally kills his wife. This varies from Teddy's portrayal of a con man who tried to pull an insurance scam.
But then again, how do you know Teddy is telling the truth?
“You don't want the truth. You make up your own truth,” Teddy cries out in frustration to Leonard. But Teddy is not a reliable source either. Teddy is supposedly a corrupt cop with intentions to kill a drug dealer, though he has no way of proving this. After all, it was Teddy who manipulated Leonard into killing Jimmy; Leonard even makes a note of Teddy's deceit on his Polaroid. How are we to believe a word he says?
The most honest fact you can acquire from this movie is that the characters are a crew of liars who do not know themselves what the truth actually is. Memento is ingenious and thought provoking, fueling large levels of adrenaline throughout me and testing my allegiance to the truth. I can now classify it as one of my favorite movies. I feel overtime I will still continue to ponder and search for answers that are never there. Just as Leonard did, I feel after awhile, I'll stop investigating and just make up my own truth.
But could he?
How accurate is Leonard Shelby's investigation? Or even his recollection prior to his accident?
Leonard sneers in his defense of his methods, “Memory can change the shape of a room; it can change the color of a car. And memories can be distorted. They're just an interpretation, they're not a record, and they're irrelevant if you have the facts.” But what does Leonard have before his accident? Even the details behind his wife's death, truths so unwavering that they are tattooed across Leonard's chest, are ambiguous. Leonard contends from the beginning that a man raped and strangled his wife. However, as the story progresses, we find that Leonard's wife possibly died due to an overdose of insulin possibly administered by Leonard himself. The story of Sammy Jankis also deems problematic and unclear. Leonard portrays a tale of a poor, utterly befuddled man with anterograde amnesia, who accidentally kills his wife. This varies from Teddy's portrayal of a con man who tried to pull an insurance scam.
But then again, how do you know Teddy is telling the truth?
“You don't want the truth. You make up your own truth,” Teddy cries out in frustration to Leonard. But Teddy is not a reliable source either. Teddy is supposedly a corrupt cop with intentions to kill a drug dealer, though he has no way of proving this. After all, it was Teddy who manipulated Leonard into killing Jimmy; Leonard even makes a note of Teddy's deceit on his Polaroid. How are we to believe a word he says?
The most honest fact you can acquire from this movie is that the characters are a crew of liars who do not know themselves what the truth actually is. Memento is ingenious and thought provoking, fueling large levels of adrenaline throughout me and testing my allegiance to the truth. I can now classify it as one of my favorite movies. I feel overtime I will still continue to ponder and search for answers that are never there. Just as Leonard did, I feel after awhile, I'll stop investigating and just make up my own truth.
Revenge, or the Everlasting Gobstopper
Christopher Nolan's "Memento" paints a truly haunting and thought-provoking portrait of truth within lies in the mind of a man suffering from anterograde amnesia.
Throughout the film, the audience watches and feels increasing sympathy for the main character, who goes back and forth between being horribly frustrated and completely complacent as he becomes aware and then unaware of his situation. The people in his life come in and out of focus as friends or foes. Natalie, who you want to trust, remains shrouded in mystery as hints of he involvement in drug rings resurface. Teddy, the man who may or may not be an undercover cop, is not only a nervous and untrustworthy presence, but Leonard has the Polaroid in his own handwriting warning not to believe him. He also warns Leonard against Natalie, whose Polaroid note works in her favor. When Teddy reveals that he's been using Leonard to kill guilty men off the street, our suspicions are confirmed--Teddy is a dirty cop. As Leonard chases his wife's killer, his only moment of true lucidity is when he decides to target Teddy, who is a John G himself. Since Teddy fits all of the pieces that Leonard needs, some he even made up, is he not the man Leonard is looking for?
After each supposed murder, Lenny makes up a new murderer, distorting facts such as taking Teddy's license plate number, or taking out 12 pages of his police file, to fit a new target, he seems the most honest. He realizes that Teddy has been using him, and so aims to put an end to it. It's not just Teddy, it's a game he has to play to keep living, maybe with the hope that the next victim will stay, and make a memory of vengeance achieved.
Throughout the film, the audience watches and feels increasing sympathy for the main character, who goes back and forth between being horribly frustrated and completely complacent as he becomes aware and then unaware of his situation. The people in his life come in and out of focus as friends or foes. Natalie, who you want to trust, remains shrouded in mystery as hints of he involvement in drug rings resurface. Teddy, the man who may or may not be an undercover cop, is not only a nervous and untrustworthy presence, but Leonard has the Polaroid in his own handwriting warning not to believe him. He also warns Leonard against Natalie, whose Polaroid note works in her favor. When Teddy reveals that he's been using Leonard to kill guilty men off the street, our suspicions are confirmed--Teddy is a dirty cop. As Leonard chases his wife's killer, his only moment of true lucidity is when he decides to target Teddy, who is a John G himself. Since Teddy fits all of the pieces that Leonard needs, some he even made up, is he not the man Leonard is looking for?
After each supposed murder, Lenny makes up a new murderer, distorting facts such as taking Teddy's license plate number, or taking out 12 pages of his police file, to fit a new target, he seems the most honest. He realizes that Teddy has been using him, and so aims to put an end to it. It's not just Teddy, it's a game he has to play to keep living, maybe with the hope that the next victim will stay, and make a memory of vengeance achieved.
Natalie..Nat-a-lie
This movie started off by telling the end of the story. I need to watch at least another time to fully understand the plot. This was a way to show a different view of the story. We found out about things that occured and then it was explained. This movie reminded me of something Quinto Terantino would direct. I had no idea what to believe and what happened to Sammy or is that a story of him? Everything that happened was somewhat backwards and needed to be thought about after it happened.
The scene that got me very interested was the home "Sammy" was in the wheelchair and when the nurse walked by Lenorad was in the chair. This was a cool shot by the director because it cause some forshadowing and thinking of what was really going on. Do you believe the crazy memory lost man or the cop?
It seemed to me to be a good guy bad guy type movie. You want to believe the man fighting for the revenge of his wife but is he really the truth? Like everything else we read in this class we never know what is the truth and what is the lie or the overall plot of the story. So I have choose to just enjoy how I want to enjoy. This movie confused me but it is a movie I want to see again and hopefully it will make sense to me then.
The scene that got me very interested was the home "Sammy" was in the wheelchair and when the nurse walked by Lenorad was in the chair. This was a cool shot by the director because it cause some forshadowing and thinking of what was really going on. Do you believe the crazy memory lost man or the cop?
It seemed to me to be a good guy bad guy type movie. You want to believe the man fighting for the revenge of his wife but is he really the truth? Like everything else we read in this class we never know what is the truth and what is the lie or the overall plot of the story. So I have choose to just enjoy how I want to enjoy. This movie confused me but it is a movie I want to see again and hopefully it will make sense to me then.
I don't feel drunk...
In the film ‘Memento’, Christopher Nolan draws a line between truth and lies by presenting a story in reverse from the perspective of an amnesiac.
In the beginning of the film (or the chronological end of the story) we believe these facts: Leonard’s the good guy, Teddy’s the bad guy, and Natalie’s the girl helping Leonard. Though as the story progresses (regresses), we learn these facts aren’t fully true. This becomes especially clear at the end (beginning), wherein Leonard decides to set up a trap to kill Teddy, and the once sympathetic character almost instantly turns into a pitiless murderer.
The way in which Leonard sets up Teddy is particularly interesting as well. Aside from the license plate number, it was the note on the back of the photo, which truly solidified Leonard’s suspicions, and kept Leonard continually disbelieving Teddy, even if he was telling the truth. The note read simply “Don’t Believe His Lies”. The phrasing is what struck me. It implies that, although Leonard will not believe Teddy’s lies, he is still open to believing other people’s lies, and as we see, he is fully capable of believing his own lies.
The film further elicits a response from the viewer by posing the question: Who should one believe? Could Teddy be telling the truth when he said that Sammy Jenkins was single, and that it was Leonard’s wife who died of an insulin over-dose? As Leonard said in his mysterious phone conversation- memories can be distorted.
Good guys, bad guys, truth, lies, facts, memories. It was never this confusing when Humphrey Bogart was solving a mystery.
Oops!... He did it again
The other night I went to a sorority party and put on a Welsh accent putting everyone under the impression that I was from Wales. Either I'm a better liar than O.J. fucking Simpson or these girls were the dumbest broads East of the Atlantic. I have been told many a time that I am a compulsive liar, so one could say I lie a lot. This is exciting. Most of the exciting things I hear about are false rumors concerning some made up situation. I live for that shit. I moved my sister’s car down the street one time and told her it got towed. Then it actually did get towed because I accidently parked it in an illegal parking zone. Jackpot. So I didn't actually lie. But I did. Because none of that actually happened. Great stuff. Tim O'Brien is a real asshole. He won't tell me what is true and what isn't. Ideally I would like to have a bit of footing from where I can start my analysis of this book. However, O'Brien tells a story, a story that I like. Therefore, it doesn't matter if he's lying. One can now learn from this story, because it isn't a true war story, therefore, I would argue, it's worth reading.
"A true war story... does not instruct. (O'Brien 68)"
Obviously, as this book is being used in our curriculum, we must have to learn from it. So somethings got to give. Either we can't learn from this story or it isn't true. Or do we take O'Brien for his word at all? If there is one jump off that we can base our opinions off of, it would be the informative chapters that O'Brien intertwines within the novel.
We talked about the dancing in the chapter Style and being a metaphor for this literature. O'Brien describes a girl dancing after her family was burned and killed. She conveys how the girl danced sideways, backwards, bare feet and on her toes, but all quite gracefully. O'Brien side steps, leaps backwards and back forward, and all around in his story telling. He keeps you one your toes and sometimes leaves you barefoot with no grasp on what you are actually reading. But the whole time, he does this gracefully. O'Brien's chapter on How to tell a True War Story could have been the name of the book minus the 'True War' part. O'Brien teaches Creative Writing at Texas State University, but could teach Bullshitting 101 anywhere in the country. There is no getting around it; he hooks you. He tells you straightforward that this story is not true, then he tells you that it is impossible to learn something from a true war story. O'Brien just made the case for how his own work can instruct whoever reads it. Anything that you can learn from is worth your time whether you think so or not. Knowledge is power, and the knowledge one can gain from this book is worth a lot more than the $16.23 I paid for it.
The most powerful stories we read are the ones we want to believe. I don't necessarily want to believe Vietnam happened, but I want to believe some of the things O'Brien talks about. Life is war. This is a story about war. Therefore this is a life story. Out of context O'Brien says, "A war story is... moral. It does... instruct, encourage virtue... suggest models of proper human behavior... restrain men from doing the things men have always done." His story does all of these things. O'Brien writes this story to show the reader how a story about war can have absolutely nothing to do with a war, and absolutely everything to do with life.
tragedy helps bring the truth
In "The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien, the author shows how the only way to try to make someone understand the horrors of war is to exaggerate the truth, even though perhaps is not completely true. The one story of all the stories in The Things They Carried that really affected me was the one of Kiowa dying, and how Norman Bowker ended up killing himself. The description of this veteran in his small town, driving around with nothing to do, no one to talk to really hit home. O'Brien shows how veterans are never the same. Norman sees people who he use to know, in his past life, pre Vietnam, but now he can't talk to them about what is going on. There is a sense of desperation, of needing to express himself but he cannot. In the letter to Tim O’Brien, he writes about how O'Brien should write about a Veteran who sounds very familiar to Norman. He says, "This guy wants to talk about it, but he can't..." (157) All he wants is to talk about Kiowa, perhaps be reassured that the death was not his fault, yet he can't find anyone to open up to. The ache and regret for not having pulled Kiowa harder probably weighed Norman down like an anchor. Yet none of it is true, as we learn at the end when the author says, " Norman Bowker was in no way responsible for what happened to Kiowa. Norman did not experience a failure of nerve that night. He did not freeze up or loose the Silver Star for valor. That part of the story is my own." (161)
Though we learn that the Norman's freeze up never happened, it is necessary so that the reader can come close to feeling the pain and constant regret and guilt Norman felt. By increasing the tragedy, the author helps the reader get closer to the emotional truth, even though it’s not entirely accurate.
This story really shook me up, and the fact that Norman didn't actually fail almost was more devastating because he was guilty for no reason. I think the soldiers silence, his incapacity to express what happened make them different from the rest of society. O'Brien writes about Norman that "He could not describe what happened next, not ever, but he would've tried anyway. He would've spoken carefully so as to make it real for anyone who would listen. There were bubbles where Kiowa's head should've been." (149)
This book proves that war does change you. No one will ever understand what soldiers go through, and they themselves often can't explain it. The only way is to exaggerate, lie, and add on details, to try to make the listener understand something they never fully will be able to.
I Have This Condition...
In all of the stories that we have been assigned to read so far in class, we have stumbled across the question of whether or not the narrator is trustworthy or not. To me, whether or not the narrator is truthful or not has never been an altering component. That is, until we had to watch Memento.
See, when you normally watch a movie, the narrator or main character is the point of view that becomes the viewers’, because that is how we (the viewers) are watching the movie. Thus, whatever the main character is going through, so are we. In Memento, though, it is confusing to try and figure out what is happening in the plot because the main character (Lenny), himself, has trouble figuring out what is actually happening in life.
Constantly having to look at his tattoos or notes written on his photos, Lenny has to live life based on what is put in front of him, whether it is the truth or not. This is what happens to the viewers too – we have to follow what is going on in the story, initially believing exactly what Lenny believes, whether or not it is the truth. However, to our advantage, we are able to decided for ourselves what we feel is the truth in the plot after watching a few minutes, something Lenny is never able to do himself.
That is why I feel that Lenny, the main character of this movie, is not someone who can be trusted in regards to the truth of the movie’s plot. Though his condition is medical and not something he can control, he has to live his life day by day finding a reason or goal (in this case, finding and killing “John G”), not knowing if he is continuing the same goal he was the day before. So for Lenny, there is not an actual truth or finite goal (just as there is never one specific “John G,” just who he chooses it to be for the day at hand), thus making the plot of the story hard to decipher for the readers when looking at it from Lenny’s point of view.
But hey, just as in any other book we have read and the million similar others out there, maybe the amount of trust readers can put into the narrator doesn’t matter. After all, Lenny is perfectly happy living day to day finding his “John G,” so doesn’t that make a valid plot for the story? To me, if the narrator/point of view is “successful” in what he/she is attempting to do, then it is a successful story/novel/movie/etc. It just happens to make getting to the end result complicated to the viewers, just like Memento had to askew the order of events and confuse us.
See, when you normally watch a movie, the narrator or main character is the point of view that becomes the viewers’, because that is how we (the viewers) are watching the movie. Thus, whatever the main character is going through, so are we. In Memento, though, it is confusing to try and figure out what is happening in the plot because the main character (Lenny), himself, has trouble figuring out what is actually happening in life.
Constantly having to look at his tattoos or notes written on his photos, Lenny has to live life based on what is put in front of him, whether it is the truth or not. This is what happens to the viewers too – we have to follow what is going on in the story, initially believing exactly what Lenny believes, whether or not it is the truth. However, to our advantage, we are able to decided for ourselves what we feel is the truth in the plot after watching a few minutes, something Lenny is never able to do himself.
That is why I feel that Lenny, the main character of this movie, is not someone who can be trusted in regards to the truth of the movie’s plot. Though his condition is medical and not something he can control, he has to live his life day by day finding a reason or goal (in this case, finding and killing “John G”), not knowing if he is continuing the same goal he was the day before. So for Lenny, there is not an actual truth or finite goal (just as there is never one specific “John G,” just who he chooses it to be for the day at hand), thus making the plot of the story hard to decipher for the readers when looking at it from Lenny’s point of view.
But hey, just as in any other book we have read and the million similar others out there, maybe the amount of trust readers can put into the narrator doesn’t matter. After all, Lenny is perfectly happy living day to day finding his “John G,” so doesn’t that make a valid plot for the story? To me, if the narrator/point of view is “successful” in what he/she is attempting to do, then it is a successful story/novel/movie/etc. It just happens to make getting to the end result complicated to the viewers, just like Memento had to askew the order of events and confuse us.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
Does it Matter?
The whole beginning of Memento sends us back and forth trying to figure out who to believe, who to trust. If we as viewers had had more of an omniscient point of view, the story would not have been as interesting. The way it was made, we felt almost empathetic toward Leonard, not knowing what was true and who was lying. I think the nonlinear time helped with that effect too.
At the end of the movie, we find out that it was Teddy who was telling the truth all along. Or at least that's what we're led to believe. We also find out that Leonard already has killed a couple "John G."'s and just can't remember. When he asked Teddy something about whether he killed the right guy, Teddy replied, "Does it matter?" I remembered this line in particular because that is the conclusion I have been coming to about the truth v. lies that we have been encountering and discussing in class.
So does it matter? For some people, lies are necessary according to their mindset. If they need to believe something in order to live up to their own standards, then they can do that. Leonard's condition made him unable to remember getting his revenge, but he also needs to believe that John G. is still out there. He needs to have something to chase, someone to kill. Even when he finds out the truth, he writes lies to himself so has something to believe later. So really, at the point of believing your own lies, I don't think it matters what's true and what isn't. It's all up to interpretation.
At the end of the movie, we find out that it was Teddy who was telling the truth all along. Or at least that's what we're led to believe. We also find out that Leonard already has killed a couple "John G."'s and just can't remember. When he asked Teddy something about whether he killed the right guy, Teddy replied, "Does it matter?" I remembered this line in particular because that is the conclusion I have been coming to about the truth v. lies that we have been encountering and discussing in class.
So does it matter? For some people, lies are necessary according to their mindset. If they need to believe something in order to live up to their own standards, then they can do that. Leonard's condition made him unable to remember getting his revenge, but he also needs to believe that John G. is still out there. He needs to have something to chase, someone to kill. Even when he finds out the truth, he writes lies to himself so has something to believe later. So really, at the point of believing your own lies, I don't think it matters what's true and what isn't. It's all up to interpretation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)