what they really did is take the basic idea - memory loss
and then figure out how to make the audience empathize the character - play the scenes in reverse order
which is the really clever part, very good filmmaking
if you like, the cinematography/editing is one long gripping psychological hitchcockian perspective device

but they also came up with lots of other good ideas for scenes using the concepts, and visual motifs and memorable images

AND they had to come up with a story that somehow built tension towards the beginning, it's not just any old story

these sorts of film should not be discouraged in favour of some 'interesting cinemetography' and useless philosophy bullcrap. is Die Hard a good film? yes. Did it come to a profound philosophical conclusion? no. Does it matter? no, because you accept the film on its own terms of what it's trying to achieve