Verified by 
We can learn a lot more about fundamental aspects of psychology from movies than what you may think—about life, love and even the workings of the mind. In this sense, films can be powerful storytellers; they can shape our worldviews and, sometimes even impart valuable wisdom and knowledge. However, not all the lessons we take from Hollywood productions are accurate.
While some filmd do indeed provide genuine insights into human psychology, others are built on misconceptions. Following are two movies you may know and love but which are, to put it bluntly, based on some psychological hogwash.
1. Inside Out (2015)
Inside Out (2015) is a beloved family movie that captures the emotional journey of a young girl, Riley, as she navigates a major life event: moving to a new city. The film puts forward a unique, literal portrayal of her emotional turmoil, with her emotions—Joy, Sadness, Anger, Fear, and Disgust—brought to life as characters within her mind. Notably, central to the plot is the role of memories—depicted as glowing orbs that store Riley’s experiences.
These memories are visualized in a dazzling and organized manner. They are stored neatly in a designated part of Riley’s brain, arranged in endless rows according to their emotional valency: joyful, sad, or otherwise. They’re depicted as shelf-stable over time; they can be accessed with ease whenever necessary, but can be lost just as easily.
Although this portrayal is undeniably heartwarming and thrilling, the reality of how memory functions in the human brain is far more intricate and much less straightforward than the film suggests. As associate professor of psychology Jennifer Talarico explained, “That might be a handy visual metaphor for memory, but it’s not actually how memory works.”
Psychologists and neuroscientists have long shown that memories are not stored as neat, stable entities in a single location within the brain. Instead, research from Current Directions in Psychological Science suggests they are spread across the brain in complex, systematic networks. Talarico further explains: “Scholars believe that the components of events are processed by individual neural modules. Our brain has separate systems for basic cognitive functions: vision, hearing, language, emotion, and so on.”
“When we retrieve a memory, we reconstruct it from those component pieces,” she continues. This means that we can’t simply pluck a memory off of a cognitive shelf. Rather, we rebuild them from the pieces we store within our neural systems—seeing it in our mind’s eye, hearing it in our mind’s ear, and feeling its associated emotions all over again. Talarico concludes, “That reconstructive process is influenced by what we know about the world around us, our current thoughts and beliefs, and our ongoing goals. So, our memories can change over time, just as we do through the years.”
So, while Inside Out certainly provides a captivating and relatable story, it grossly oversimplifies the intricacy of human memory. In reality, memory is far more dynamic, fallible and subject to change than what we see on the screen.
2. Memento (2001)
Memento (2001), one of Christopher Nolan’s masterpieces, presents the gripping story of Leonard Shelby, a man on a relentless quest to solve the mystery of his wife’s murder. However, Shelby’s pursuit of justice is complicated by a severe condition that leaves him unable to form new memories. This supposed short-term memory loss forces him to rely on any and every clue he happens across—notes, photographs, or even tattoos—to keep track of crucial information. These tools are his sole lifeline as he navigates a world where everything he learns quickly fades.
Throughout the film, Shelby makes it abundantly clear that his inability to form new memories is the result of short-term memory loss. When asked if he suffers from amnesia, he corrects the assumption by saying, “It’s different.” He elaborates, “I have no short-term memory. I know who I am and all about myself, but since my injury, I can’t make any new memories. Everything fades. If we talk for too long, I’ll forget how we started. I don’t know if we’ve ever met before, and the next time I see you, I won’t remember this conversation.”
Thanks to Memento—as well as other popular films like Finding Nemo (2003) and 50 First Dates (2004)—many people believe that this is indeed what short-term memory loss entails. In fairness, it’s an intuitive leap: If one cannot form new memories, it seems reasonable to assume that short-term memory is impaired. However, this portrayal is very misleading. In actuality, the condition that Shelby experiences—in which he cannot retain any new information—is known as anterograde amnesia, which, according to research from the Clinical Handbook of Neurology, is characterized by being “grossly deficient in the formation of new memories"—precisely what Shelby experiences in Memento. On the other hand, short-term memory loss involves an inability to retain information that was just presented—as explained by research from the Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.
Think of it this way: If you met someone with short-term memory loss, they might struggle to remember how they started their sentence or what you’d just said to them, but they would likely still remember meeting you. In contrast, someone with anterograde amnesia, like Shelby, would be unable to retain even the fact that they had met you at all—let alone what you or they said. This distinction is both basic and crucial, yet it’s often confused due to how memory loss is depicted in films like Memento.
A version of this post also appears on Forbes.com.
