Write descriptive essay about Memento movie 2000, write an essay of at least 500 words on Memento, 5 paragraph essay on Memento, definition essay, descriptive essay, dichotomy essay.
Memento
Year:
2000
Country:
USA
Genre:
Crime, Drama, Thriller, Mystery
IMDB rating:
8.5
Director:
Christopher Nolan
Guy Pearce as Leonard
Carrie-Anne Moss as Natalie
Joe Pantoliano as Teddy Gammell
Russ Fega as Waiter
Jorja Fox as Leonard's Wife
Storyline: Memento chronicles two separate stories of Leonard, an ex-insurance investigator who can no longer build new memories, as he attempts to find the murderer of his wife, which is the last thing he remembers. One story line moves forward in time while the other tells the story backwards revealing more each time.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1916x816 px 13303 Mb h264 640 Kbps mkv Download
Reviews
Skin as Photograph
Spoilers herein.

I rate this very high on my scale, primarily for its ambition and intellect.

Usually I get annoyed at IMDB comments that report the story as if it were important, but it is here:

---Lenny's home is attacked, wife raped, him injured. He develops this `condition' which has no physical cause. In other words, the condition is invented. The insurance investigator (Sammy Jankins), uncovers him as a fraud by using electrified test blocks. Knowing this, his wife challenges him and he `accidentally' kills her rather than face the condition. Sent to a hospital, he escapes and ties up with the cop who investigated the case. Together, they track down the petty crook and kill him. Over time, the condition becomes more pronounced and embedded. The cop (Teddy) is crooked and exploits Lenny in a doublecross drug deal, getting him to kill Jimmy. Jimmy's girlfriend Natalie also manipulates Lenny to first chase off Dodd (who is looking for the missing money). Lenny decides to get even with Teddy, so plants a seed that he will use later to justify killing Teddy.

---It is essential to know that Lenny was never an insurance investigator, and that his condition is self-delusional. The order and ritual is not to cope with, but to create the condition. Remembering his wife increases the intensity behind the psychosis -- remembering his investigator gives him identity and focus in refining the condition -- knowing all this transforms the idea behind the film into something of genius.

That's because it is deeply self-referential: us looking at a film, especially at a mystery, is just the same as looking at a few polaroids and trying to create/remember a past. Watching movies is self-delusional, and with detective stories it is a game of wits between viewer and writer to outwit and manipulate each other just as here between Lenny and Teddy. (The filmmaker calls us, we shouldn't answer, but we forget.) This film goes further. An actor forms the picture by putting words on it; in the case of acting, the `picture' is the body, so it makes sense for the clue/words to appear on his body.

The combination of the three (words on skin, remembrances of images past, the mind duel with the writer) adds up to a pretty mind-expanding framework. That alone transports the intelligent viewer to another world, a shocking world of self. This makes the film important, and an important film deserves criticism.

So what could be better?

The ink on skin as referential of film acting was done so much more elegantly and deeply with `Pillow Book.' The playing with time was moderately clever compared to the other, deeper games in this film -- but it could have been much more challenging. It could have stuttered (`Limey') could have folded (`Pulp Fiction') could have paralleled (`Run Lola Run') could have spiralled deeper (`Snake Eyes'). Maybe in the next film.

I did not think the eye of the camera was very clever. This had `noirish' writing but not filming. More like the later `DOA' in the black and white would have really spun. The dialog and plot were needlessly simple. If I am going to go to the trouble to displace my mind for a day or two, I want it shifted beyond Jupiter. That the story was so simple was pandering to the dumb masses and annoyed.

But the biggest flaw was our friend Guy. Moss is not a real actress. Guy is, but he's of the rather simple kind, who thinks he plays a character. Consider what this film is: it is a film about films first, and within that we have a character inventing another character and reality. That's three roles in one. Woody Allen made a similar movie so far as this matter: `Sweet and Lowdown.' It was a fake documentary about a guy who created a stage persona which he subsequently adopted. Simple stuff plotwise compared to `Memento.' But it had Sean Penn. Watch Sean play three roles at once, weaving them into a complex multidimensional space. This film was intelligent enough in its conception to warrant such texture, to have the actor remind us that we are him and he isn't.

2001-05-14
Not as good as they'd make you believe
Don't believe the hype -- people seem to go out of their way to tell you how great this film is. The truth is that, when it comes to the crunch, it's actually not really anything that special.

Pearce, as the man who has no short term memory after he sustains a brain injury when his wife is raped and murdered, is competent enough, but this film does get really annoying in the way that it loops within the plot in order to get you back to the same point you were at 2 minutes ago -- and then moves onto the next scene.

That was really annoying.

A lot of this only makes sense in the last scene -- when the Sammy story finally comes to a point -- but by then it's taken an effort to sit through a lot of the rest of the film.

Make no mistake, it's not bad, but it's not anything sensational either.
2002-01-25
A string of pearls ...
This interesting movie is about a man who can only remember stuff that happens within a minute due to an accident he had when some rapists were molesting his wife. The story shows us a man on a quest to revenge the death of his wife, but with a twist! The movie moves backwards in time although the sequential series of events that progress in clusters are in a normal timeframe moving forwards in time. This way of telling a story opens up the narration in such a way that new perspectives and surprises revels themselves at the beginning of each new cluster, thus creating a deeper understanding of the previous cluster / action. There seems to be a metatheme in this movie. The main character was a detective for an insurance company before his accident. Now the whole movie seems to follow the path such a detective would go by when investigating. Namely, starting out with the crime itself and working backwards untill the person who did it and the motive is found. This movie might also allude to the current state of our historical science, showing that memory, and especially history can be tampered with and changed (especially in the hands of less morally founded individuals). Thus one might even say it is a profound criticism of the all objectivity. Basically though, this is a thriller about manipulation in its different shapes and forms, and how people use each others weaknesses to outwit each other and sometimes even themselves....

2001-08-20
Mediocre story saved by cinematographic contrivance
Perhaps because this movie was rated SO HIGHLY, my viewing was tainted by unrealistically bolstered expectations. Maybe...

There was a strange twist of irony at work here: the more I watched this film the less I liked it. What began as a wonderfully, refreshing look at (reverse) story-telling, became less entertaining and more tedious with each passing (and re-passing) flash-back (or is that flash-forward?)

Part of this film played like an old Twilight Zone episode I recall seeing many years ago. And that's not a bad thing. I enjoyed piecing together the "why" of the plot, since we already knew the "what." However, generally uninteresting and unappealing characters mar the performances, and while our hero may be unaware of time, as a viewer I was painfully aware of how his film seemed to drag, lacking a good sense of timing. As for the ending, it too could have been given the same delicious touches as the beginning sequence, but alas, it does nothing to reward the viewer for having endured the bulk of the film.

One reviewer commented how well this HIGHLY RATED film will hold up in another few years when compared to the classics. Others have asked how on earth it could have rated so high to begin with. The former will be answered on its own, and I believe time will not be too kind. The answer to the latter is akin to the McDonald's Syndrome: Those who grew up eating Big Macs on a regular basis erroneously come to believe it's actually good food. Perhaps compared to what Hollywood is offering these days, Memento is indeed gourmet fare. To me, it's still just a hamburger. (6 out of 10).

2001-11-17
is it really that good?
having been given recommendations from friends to watch this film, i duly booked a night in to watch it. what a mistake. i believe this is the most over-rated film in history. ok, the film was original yes. but entertaining? no, not in the slightest. even after watching it on another 2 occasions, my views haven't changed.!
2002-10-08
Best Movie of 2001 (Thus Far)
Incredible, riveting and powerful. What else could I say? This movie has all of the qualities of classic film noir as well as the magnitude of an original, unique concept that has been tried and tired before but works here.

Guy Pearce has been underrated for years (just think back now to Priscilla and can you believe this is the same guy) and finally might get the recognition here that was at least well-deserved of him back for LA Confidential. Powerful perfomances, well developed story with suspensful buildup of what our main character pieces together little by little makes this a must see.

Easily in my top 100 of all time.
2001-05-15
Forget about it!
An empty theatrical experience. A dull movie with no emotional core. Clever editing substitutes for lack of substance and dramatic appeal. Christopher Nolan's failed attempted to invent an original narrative structure.

The only intriguing aspect of this glossy Hollywood film disguised as daring indie is the fact it has received accolades from movie critics as well as average movie fans. 'Memento' is so smartly put together that both groups lack the courage to say that the movie is a failure and a bore for fear of not coming out ignorant and unsophisticated.

Long ago it was observed by Pauline Keal that art house audience accepts lack of clarity as complexity, accepts clumsiness and confusion as 'ambiguity' and as style. If you thought 'Limey' was pretentious, wait 'til you see this. Or, better yet, don't!

Just forget about it!
2001-03-27
Don't believe the hype
This is nothing special and I find it hard to accept the high voting for this film. The ending is so unspectacular and a huge anti-climax. With the excessive amount of time-shifting with scenes not shown in chronological order - it just overly confuses and irritates. Pulp Fiction for example did a much better job of this, but here scenes were all over the place and made the film difficult to follow. I stuck with it thinking that the ending will make sense of it all and will be worth the wait- but that turned out be very disappointing. Yes it has some clever moments in it but one viewing was enough for me-the film just doesn't interest to justify watching it again.
2007-08-13
No substance
Very little substance in this movie, with the gimmick (very well done) of telling the story in non-continuous sequences and almost in reverse order. But it is a frustrating and non-rewarding movie that cheats the audience at every step: a fictitious illness, characters that do things more to startle the audience rather than for a realistic reason, and an ending that is way too predictable and really silly at the same time. Basically, if you told the movie in a normal fashion, it would show more holes than a certain cheese I am fond of.
2001-10-14
Write descriptive essay about Memento movie 2000, Memento movie essay, literary essay Memento, Memento essay writing, narrative essay, Memento 500 word essay, argumentative essay Memento.
×