Obsession

I haven't seen a lot of horror, but I wonder why every one I've seen is so uniformly plastic in character and dialogue? Do I just happen to watch satirical horror? Is it elemental to the genre that character and dialogue are shallow, as a convoluted way of juxtaposing or justifying the depth of the terror? Are horror writers just garbage at those other screenwriting tenets?

Obsession wasn't the worst version of this problem, but it was off-putting in this way. My bar is set at realistic human interaction, even if the situations to which the humans respond are not realistic. I want to see people respond as people would respond. In fact, I seem to prefer movies with unrealistic situations; but the human response has to feel real. There's no way the Obsession characters would interact like they did in this movie, even if the supernatural element were natural. And I don't think it's just an analytical matter for me, I think it also feels fake. It's cringey and frustrating.

Obsession was a nice middle-ground between all-out horror and bright, relatable movie. I don't think horror is generally a good genre for me, but this one didn't go too deep. It wasn't too disturbing. And it had some thoughtful elements to balance out the fear.

It was a fun watch, but not a very impressive movie. I'm not sure why it was so successful; I guess because it hit that middle ground I mentioned.

I really disliked the main character, in every way. His physical presence made me uncomfortable, and his actions were continuously questionable. That he hung around for so long, without seeking a solution or fleeing, can't be excused. I'm sure this lack of likability serves a narrative purpose, though I think it also just made me enjoy the movie less.

Memento

Memento has been lurking on my lists for over a decade. I think I saw it once, in high school or college, but I always wondered if I missed something. At the same time, I gradually lost interest. It feels good to check it off, definitively, now, and it feels good to have liked it. It feels good not to grow more and more resentful of Christopher Nolan.

This might be the movie of his that I can dislike the least. Not that I really dislike any of his movies -- but they all have things I dislike, all except Memento. This is the most solid, least problematic Nolan movie I've seen. Even Interstellar, my favorite of them, is totally gross at times. Half the time I find myself talking about it, I'm mocking it. Memento, though, gives me nothing to tease, other than perhaps Guy Pearce's hairdo. But that's just the era. Writing-wise, it's the mellowest affair, the modest one, brainy without being flashy, noir instead of superheroes/astronauts/demigods/time-travelers/dream-stealers. It's just a guy with a condition. It's high-concept (like Tenet) without losing its humanity (unlike Tenet). Now, I actually like the fantastical premises of his flashier movies, but I don't like how they translate to flashy, superficial characters+dialogue. I want Nolan to blend his cerebral plots with fantastical settings AND down-to-earth dialogue. He's yet to achieve that, in my memory, but Memento is one of the more successful balancing acts. As far as making a solid movie, I'd take authentic writing over flashiness, even if, for making a memorable movie, I'd take the flashiness. In that sense -- appropriately -- Memento isn't his most memorable movie, other than the fact that it was maybe his breakthrough (so it felt flashier at the time). It's like Reservoir Dogs, which isn't Tarantino's flashiest, but is a landmark and a breakthrough. In fact, it's a lot like Reservoir Dogs...

I wish they could have gotten Brad Pitt as they apparently proposed. I can't confirm that I've seen Guy Pearce in anything else, and he doesn't quite have the presence to make this all work. He's just a Guy.