Memento - Narrative Analysis

Emily Granger

Kingswood Level 3 Media

Memento - Narrative Analysis

Memento, Directed by Christopher Nolan, is a movie about Leonard Shelby, a man who suffers from short-term memory loss, and cannot remember events that have happened, people he’s met or places he’s been even just minutes beforehand. This was caused by an incident where he got hit behind the head when trying to save his wife. He remembers everything before the incident and his last memory is his wife being raped and killed. This is a film that can support many narrative theories such as theories by Todorov and Propp as well as Binary Opposition and Modular Narrative theories by Allan Cameron. My interpretation of this film in regards to these theories is that they can change depending on the specific way the viewer is reading the narrative. 

For Example, when I first started watching, I instantly assumed that Teddy was the villain, Lenny was the hero and the victim and that Natalie was the donor. This is because of the fact that when we see the picture of Teddy at the very beginning, we see the writing “Don’t believe his lies” without any context, this leads us to believe that he is the main antagonist in the film. This technically isn’t false, however, this isn’t revealed until towards the end of the film.  We can assume that Lenny is the hero as he is the one who killed Teddy, and at this point in time, us as the viewers are under the impression that he is the person that killed Lenny’s wife. The idea of Natalie being the donor comes from the fact that she gives Lenny information on Teddy, including conformation that his licence plate is that same as the one the Lenny believes to be the one of the killer. As I kept watching, I was also made to believe that Teddy was the fake hero, this is because it seemed like Teddy was feeding Lenny false information, such as telling him not to trust Natalie, as she is just going to use him, which she technically did. This was my first impression, however that all changed when I realised that the movie was being told in an abnormal structure, instead of having a beginning, a middle, and an end, it played in a way where the last scene was played first , then the first scene afterwards. Example, say there were 14 scenes, scene 14 would play first, then scene 1, then scene 13 and then scene 2 and so on. After realising this, Propp's theory switched, so instead of Teddy being the villain, he became the hero by helping Lenny get vengeance, even though it’s revealed that they had already killed the man who murdered his wife, and that Teddy was just a dirty cop who was leading Lenny to believe that drug dealers were “John G”, the murderer, so that he could kill them and pocket some of the money. I thought that Lenny turned into the villain as he purposely decided to forget what Teddy had told him and to set him up as his next John G by writing “Don’t believe his lies” on his polaroid. Even though some had swapped around, I still thought that Lenny was the victim, as people such as Natalie, Teddy and Burt used him for their own gain because of his short term memory loss. 

The switching of the hero and villain in the movie can lead into the theory of Binary Opposition and the ideas of Good vs Evil. Binary Opposition could be good vs evil, women vs men, few vs many or hero vs villain. In this case its Good vs Evil and Hero vs Villain. At the start of the movie, it seems like the ‘good hero’ was Lenny and the ‘evil villain’ was Teddy. It’s as if Lenny was seeking out the murderer who is (thought to be) Teddy, and Teddy is trying to throw Lenny off of his investigation on him. And example of this is when he gets Lenny to kill Jimmy, a drug dealer. It seems that Teddy is leading Lenny to believe that Jimmy was the murderer. However, just like with Props theory, it could switch depending on the way you watch and interpret the film. When thinking about Teddy as the hero, you can think about how Teddy is trying to make Lenny remember killing  John G, so he keeps getting drug dealers for him to kill (This technically doesn’t work, as Teddy is only doing this to pocket the money, however when thinking in terms of how people watch the film, it is a valid interpretation of the binary opposition of good vs evil. When switching them, you can think of Lenny as the representation of evil as he is, in a way, taking advantage of the fact that he is going to forget that he chose to kill Teddy by determining him as John G, by writing on the polaroid. It’s as if while he still remembers, he knows that he will believe he was the murderer, just by looking at his notes.

The film can also support Todorov’s theory of the 5 stages of narrative structure. Memento is in a way, telling the story backwards, so when taking notes on this movie I took them backwards and worked my way up. So to start with, Step 5. Which is a reinstatement of equilibrium is when Lenny kills Teddy when thinking he was the man who raped and killed his wife. This is a reinstatement as we can assume that Lenny has documented Teddy’s death as John G, and finally has vengeance on the man who killed his wife, which has given him the peace of mind that he had before the incident. Step 4 is the attempt to repair the disruption In this case, it’s Lenny trying to investigate the murder. This is an attempt to repair, as he wants’s to get revenge on the the killer by taking him out. Step 3 is a recognition of disruption: The recognition of in the film is Lenny suffering from short term memory loss. It’s as if he has to recognise that there has been a disruption every day of his life as he now has to live with it. He recognises that the last thing he is going to remember fully is the death of his wife.  Step 2 is the disruption itself. The disruption is Lenny’s wife being raped and murdered. This is the obvious disruption as he has lost the one person he loves the most. He tries to confront the attacker, which results in him getting his, leading into the recognition of disruption. And finally, Step 1, a state of equilibrium. In this case, the state of equilibrium is Lenny being happily married, has a job as an insurance investigator and is investigating a man named Sammy, who also has Short term memory loss. At this point in time, Lenny doesn’t believe that Sammy could forget something that has just happened. He tells Sammy’s wife and she tries to test Sammy by asking him to give her the shot she needs over and over, hoping that his love for her will make him remember, however it doesn’t and she dies. This fits into the idea that the equilibrium isn’t always good or idea. For Lenny, his marriage is good, but the result of his investigation isn’t ideal. 

At the start of the film, when I thought that the black and white scenes where just flashbacks instead on the same story just playing from the beginning, I thought that Allan Cameron’s Modular Narratives theory could apply here, specifically the Anachronic Modular Narrative. From the start of the film, it seems like the scenes with Sammy in have no clear dominance between the narrative threads, which is what the theory suggests. An example in the film of this is when Lenny hires a girl from an escort service and asks her to put his wife’s belongings around the room and to wait in the bathroom when he’s asleep. When he wakes up, he believes he’s at home and calls out to his wife. He starts to walk towards the bathroom when she obviously doesn’t answer. He starts remembering him doing the exact same thing on the night his wife was murdered. This could be flashback or it could be him just having the memory without being completely aware of what’s going on or where he is. As soon as he opens the door, he snaps back into reality and burns his wives belongings. Other examples of flashbacks within the film is when Lenny is thinking and explaining his investigation of Sammy, and how he didn’t learn from conditioning. This can be seen as as a flashback, as straight after this scene he says that conditioning worked for him as ‘Habit and routine make his life possible’. There are many scenes that show Sammy picking up shapes, some of which are electrified. Lenny and many doctors expected Sammy to be able to learn from instinct, so he didn’t end up getting shocked every time. The flashback (Or what seemed like flashbacks) are a good way to lead into the fact that Lenny can learn from conditioning. Another point that this theory states is that often scenes repeat themselves. This happens a lot in Momento, often when  a new piece of information has been revealed to the viewer. It adds the new information onto the previous scene so that the audience can still slightly piece together what is happening while still being kept in the dark enough. 

In conclusion, though it’s not in a traditional structure, Memento still fits the theories of Propp, Todorov and Binary Opposition, as well as the additional Anachronic Modular Narrative theory. Even though it, in a way, plays backwards, it still follows Todorov’s theory as it follows all 5 steps. It starts at the return of equilibrium and ends at with step 1, a return to equilibrium, with states 2 though 4 playing backwards during the rest of the film. It also follows Propp’s theory as the film does have a hero, a villain, a donor, a fake hero, and a victim. Even though they switch depending on the way the viewer interprets it, it still follows the ideas of the different types of characters. It also supports the binary opposition theory as a theme of it is hero vs villain and good vs evil. Both the good hero and evil villain switches between Lenny and Teddy, however it still follows the theory. Additionally, it follows the anachronic modular narrative theory by using what seems like flashbacks to link Lenny’s struggles with short term memory loss and his desire for revenge, with his investigation of Sammy Jankis and how he didn’t respond to conditioning as well as the murder of his wife and how that being his last full memory effects him and his investigation of finding the man who killed her.