depends on your point of view, duh. people who think like you are easier to please, people who are very different from you are harder for you to figure out and therefore harder to know how to please them.
My ENFP brother says I'm ridiculously high maintenance and that he feels like he's walking on egg shells with me all the time, he says I'm oversensitive and aggressive. He reckons no matter how cool something is or whatever he tries to tell me about, I'll always think it's lame and be unimpressed. Similar things, but to a lesser extreme, have been said to me by a few other people in my life - all people who are very different to me. The funny thing is, that's exactly how i feel about them too.
My buddies that I hang with most (ISTP, ISTJ, ENTJ, INTJ, ESTP and INFP) say the total opposite - they say they enjoy my company because I'm easy to please, easy going, totally accepting and tolerant and they feel free to say anything they like to me and know I won't get offended or shocked. They say they like the way that they can so easily tell what I'll like and what I won't, and almost all their recommendations to me of music, movies, TV, anything else, I've loved.
To my knowledge, the type difference that makes the biggest impact on this kinda thing is the T/F divide. Vast majority of T's see me as my buddies do... the only ones who haven't throughout my life have been either confirmed F's (tested) or highly probable F's (personal assessment).
Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!
"When it all comes down to dust
I will kill you if I must
I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen
Well said, substitute. I've found that to (mostly) be the case as well.
Another thing I'm never impressed with is overt sentimentality or the attempt at manipulating my emotions in movies, etc. And being clumsy or heavyhanded with it. This partly goes back to what Aderack was saying about "x exists! Look!" I remember rolling my eyes through the entirety of "Life is Beautiful." Yes, the Holocaust is tragic and families were affected and ripped apart by it. But I would be more emotionally affected by that just musing on that idea myself than having to watch the lead character's shenanigans in that movie. I just felt like someone was trying to yank my strings. "Look! At his brave! spirit!" Show me, from someone's unique perspective--catch me by surprise. I don't want to ever feel like, "aaaand this is the part where I cry."
I remember another movie (don't remember the title, though) about the McCarthy era and a theatre company whose play was censored/stopped because of allegations of Communism. Would have made for a good story, if the director (possibly Tim Robbins, IIRC) hadn't painted every single Senator as a cardboard cutout of a mustache-twirling villain. It was so obvious who the good guys were and who the bad guys were that you were entirely pulled out of the story. They weren't human and complex anymore. And yet, there were those in the audience that were moved by this story. They reacted exactly how the director wanted them to react. Sometimes I think people don't really care how well-done their movies are--somehow they fill in the blanks themselves and make them what they want them to be?
I will say, though, that not all movies have to be great art for me to enjoy them. And I can't really explain what makes a bad movie different from a guilty pleasure movie, and what makes completely unclever different from stupid/clever. I will laugh at a movie like Airplane all day long, because it's stupid/clever. I will usually also find Mike Myers/Will Ferrell movies hilarious.
Well, in the case of the repetitive mass media, it's because most of it is designed to be consumed by a medium-intelligence Sensing-preference audience. That's just smart marketing.
(Note that I didn't say Sensing is unintelligent; just that the majority of people are Sensing and aiming for a median intelligence level is obviously going to reach the most people.)
So for John Q. Public, just changing the details is enough to make the experience compelling again, even if it's really the same story over and over.
NTs are especially prone to noticing conceptual similarities between things, so we're hard to please because we have to see something truly original in art to really give it much respect (usually.) Of course different people define originality in different ways, but if we see too many conceptual similarities between different pieces of art, we start to feel we've been gipped because there's really nothing new here but a bunch of meaningless sensory data.
If you could be anything you want, I bet you'd be disappointed--am I right?
I seem to get this from a lot of NT people I know. Where I can be excited about something for one reason, they get irritated at something for one reason. If they've seen it before, even if it's in a different form, they find it very boring. They pass it off as some sort of "generic plot with x blah blah" as if it was an experiment...
Maybe they see the world as an experiment? INTJs and ENTPs I know seem to be that way.
I have a theory. You may not actually know that many NT's in real life. You MAY know a lot of assholes and are just assuming they're all NT's...
NTs aren't hard to please, you just aren't doing it right. I'd say this goes for everyone, certain things will impress certain people, what impresses an NT may be totally different than what impresses someone else.
But then again this is probably just a character trait. I know plenty of NTs... it's easy to please some, not so easy to please others. But it doesn't get in the way of interactions.
Well said, substitute. I've found that to (mostly) be the case as well.I remember another movie (don't remember the title, though) about the McCarthy era and a theatre company whose play was censored/stopped because of allegations of Communism.
Was that the one with Orson Welles' company? (Welles himself being played rather strangely?)