[NT] Fictional NTs

[The Ü™]

Matrix is so painfully derivative I cringe whenever I see it.

But it is visually sexy. Undeniably so. Just so long as I don't have the sound or captioning on or think.

Glad you and I are on the same page.

But the movie that is even more visually sexy is Dark City, released in 1998, a year before The Matrix.

If you saw that movie, you'll know what an uninspired rip-off The Matrix really is, even visually.

 

[rivercrow]

Glad you and I are on the same page.

Don't get too comfortable. I'm channeling the spirit of OS/2 Warp tonight.

But the movie that is even more visually sexy is Dark City, released in 1998, a year before The Matrix.

If you saw that movie, you'll know what an uninspired rip-off The Matrix really is, even visually.

I see very few movies. After you've seen Last Year at Marienbad, all other cinema pales.

 

[MacGuffin]

The Matrix gives me a boner.

 

[The Ü™]

The Matrix gives me a boner.

Disney cartoons give me a boner. Especially The Lion King.

 

[Mac]

hee, you've had some practice answering that question! And a very healthy response.

To be honest, I've never seen Godfather anything, LOTR (depending on who you talk to) wasn't nearly as good as so many non-Tolkienites made it out to be, and Titanic was... meh.

So you are not missing much.

(But I really hope you've seen Spiderman.)

Yeah, plenty of practice. Once someone threatened to push me in front of a passing truck if I hadn't seen Forrest Gump (which I had so I was safe).

I did watch about 10 minutes of Titanic. It looked boring so I just watched Law & Order instead (which is a great show, by the way)

I've seen all the Spiderman movies. They were good, except the 3rd one was a disappointment. Cool special effects, but not so great acting at times and too many villans and subplots. Spiderman is too sensitive of a superhero for my taste anyway. He cried at least 4-5 times in the 3rd movie (and not very well, I might add). I prefer Batman.

 

[Natrushka]

Nope. Without Campbell, Lucas sucks.

That's why Star Wars 1-3 suck.

I don't know I'd go as far as say "suck" but they're certainly not in the same league. Maybe I'm jaded.

 

[Natrushka]

The Matrix gives me a boner.

Ditto.

 

[The Ü™]

Yeah, plenty of practice. Once someone threatened to push me in front of a passing truck if I hadn't seen Forrest Gump (which I had so I was safe).

I did watch about 10 minutes of Titanic. It looked boring so I just watched Law & Order instead (which is a great show, by the way)

I've seen all the Spiderman movies. They were good, except the 3rd one was a disappointment. Cool special effects, but not so great acting at times and too many villans and subplots. Spiderman is too sensitive of a superhero for my taste anyway. He cried at least 4-5 times in the 3rd movie (and not very well, I might add). I prefer Batman.

I fancy The Punisher, myself. Though I've never been much of a comic book reader, I liked the movie. (I typed the Punisher as an INTJ, as well.)

 

[Totenkindly]

Spiderman is too sensitive of a superhero for my taste anyway. He cried at least 4-5 times in the 3rd movie (and not very well, I might add). I prefer Batman.

Well, Peter is probably an INFP... and we all know how sensitive they are.

Batman is a neat character. I particularly liked the Christopher Nolan version (but I like all the movies Chris has done -- he's consistent and thorough and sensible in his thinking).

Everyone has different tastes... but I can't even watch Star Wars 1-3. I laughed out loud numerous times in the theater, and they just can't hold my interest, it's like insipid static to my brain. I usually just forward to the lightsaber battles, if I'm going to watch anything at all. (sigh. I wanted to like them more.)

Matrix was better. The first movie was excellent, the second was good in its own way (it's more of an action picture with the emphasis on interlocking all the plot pieces together... and the meeting with the Architect was priceless, even if confusing for all the S's in the audience when it first came out).

The third one was far too comic-book/cookie-cutter in pacing/scene cutting... every little scene ended with some supposedly "profound" comment or interplay, and got predictable. The part that resonates with me is the whole sense of Neo "the god" slowly being stripped of everything that made him "him" and in the end just being a man and embracing his own death willingly, and having that be the "right answer." I know what it's like to feel that alone, walking into the land of shadow...

 

[The Ü™]

I'm now starting to think that Jigsaw is an INFJ. Because he kills people with low morals. And he doesn't exactly kill them -- he tests them.

 

[Mac]

I'm now starting to think that Jigsaw is an INFJ. Because he kills people with low morals. And he doesn't exactly kill them -- he tests them.

My best friend, who is the INFJ type, is obsessed with the Saw movies. He is a lot like Jigsaw (except for the whole kidnapping people and putting them in death traps).

 

[substitute]

I think Sisko in DS9 might be ENTJ...

 

[The Ü™]

I thought he was more ENFJ or INFJ.

 

[substitute]

I thought he was more ENFJ or INFJ.

F? Get away!

I mean, when Kira comes along with her drama queen F-ing, he tends to calmly analyse things, make a plan and enforce it. His judgements seem to be T-based, not value-judgements.

EDIT - but Gol Dukat might be ENTP though.

Ha, I'm watching an episode atm, typewatching the characters lol

 

[Xander]

Okay who decided to place Sherlock as an INTJ? I'm gonna have to kick your ass now. Classic INTP.

Obsessive research into his field of interest. Master of his field. Passing competency with many linked fields but no real passion for them. His house is a complete mess and the man is a disorganised slob unless his mind is engaged on a case. Oh and the quote about rather dying than being bored. All classic INTP. I'd half expect an INTJ detective to change careers as all these people were obviously not learning and all that incompetence would be annoying.

House... gotta be INTJ purely and simply cause he doesn't give a crap if you follow his thinking. He doesn't care. Oh and also the amount of self inflicted restriction has to place him as a J not a P.

Jedi cannot be typed on what part they inform someone else to balance. The only thing you can say is what they see as needing balance indicates part of the subjects type, assuming their correct. So therefore saying to your Padawan "be mindful of the present" you are indicating that they are unaware of the present (or not aware enough) and not that you are focused on the present. Ergo Obi Wan is an N. It says nothing of Qui Gon.

Other problems I've seen is where a character is being typed on what they present and not the pattern they represent. Characters like super villains and such are under stress and hence their type will shift towards their shadow more. This is not including the naked mathematics of Evil = ENTJ. I'd expect any decent ENTJ to tell you categorically that if they had tried to take over the world then by God it would be theirs already and no nancy group of y-front wearing ninnys would have stopped them.

Oh and as a perhaps.....
Cracker = INTJ ?
I can't decide if he's an INTJ or is actually more of an NF but "damaged" in some manner. The self destructive decisions just don't ring INTJ to me but the philosophy to psychology does.

 

[wildcat]

Okay who decided to place Sherlock as an INTJ? I'm gonna have to kick your ass now. Classic INTP.

Obsessive research into his field of interest. Master of his field. Passing competency with many linked fields but no real passion for them. His house is a complete mess and the man is a disorganised slob unless his mind is engaged on a case. Oh and the quote about rather dying than being bored. All classic INTP. I'd half expect an INTJ detective to change careers as all these people were obviously not learning and all that incompetence would be annoying.

House... gotta be INTJ purely and simply cause he doesn't give a crap if you follow his thinking. He doesn't care. Oh and also the amount of self inflicted restriction has to place him as a J not a P.

Jedi cannot be typed on what part they inform someone else to balance. The only thing you can say is what they see as needing balance indicates part of the subjects type, assuming their correct. So therefore saying to your Padawan "be mindful of the present" you are indicating that they are unaware of the present (or not aware enough) and not that you are focused on the present. Ergo Obi Wan is an N. It says nothing of Qui Gon.

Other problems I've seen is where a character is being typed on what they present and not the pattern they represent. Characters like super villains and such are under stress and hence their type will shift towards their shadow more. This is not including the naked mathematics of Evil = ENTJ. I'd expect any decent ENTJ to tell you categorically that if they had tried to take over the world then by God it would be theirs already and no nancy group of y-front wearing ninnys would have stopped them.

Oh and as a perhaps.....
Cracker = INTJ ?
I can't decide if he's an INTJ or is actually more of an NF but "damaged" in some manner. The self destructive decisions just don't ring INTJ to me but the philosophy to psychology does.

The question is not how you find the dot.
The question is how you find the significant dot.

The INTJs are good at it.
The INTPs fare better.

How does the negligent P find the dot before the J?
By not paying attention before the attention is called for.

 

[The Ü™]

I believe that obsession is a J trait. And I believe strict attention to physical aesthetics is an S trait, specifically SJ.

As an NJ, my physical surroundings are often quite chaotic. But to be at my best, I need a set routine. I like my lifestyle to be predictable and controlled, and I despise surprises.

Regardless, being in tune with the way your surroundings look is Sensing. So if the Intuitive is also a Judger, he/she still probably wouldn't be concerned as much with cleanliness and aesthetic surroundings, as long as they don't interfere with their ability to concentrate on their inner conceptions.

 

[Xander]

The question is not how you find the dot.
The question is how you find the significant dot.

The INTJs are good at it.
The INTPs fare better.

How does the negligent P find the dot before the J?
By not paying attention before the attention is called for.

You cannot lose me old friend. I have your stone, your Rosetta.

Just to nit pick though, you are talking about Sherlock are you not? I see the parallel in his uncanny ability to hold all of that information in his head and yet not make one predictive step until it clicks into place and hence allowing him to avoid the presumptions of the dolt inspector. I am presuming that the character of the inspector was supposed to be that of an ESTJ.

 

[wildcat]

You cannot lose me old friend. I have your stone, your Rosetta.

Just to nit pick though, you are talking about Sherlock are you not? I see the parallel in his uncanny ability to hold all of that information in his head and yet not make one predictive step until it clicks into place and hence allowing him to avoid the presumptions of the dolt inspector. I am presuming that the character of the inspector was supposed to be that of an ESTJ.

I say a correct estimation.

The difference between the P and the J is in the focus.

The J focus is from the bottom to top.

The P focus is from the top to bottom.

All the leads are to be found at the bottom.

The significant leads are to be found exclusively at the top.


The model for the ESTJ character was Charles Warren?

 

[Xander]

I believe that obsession is a J trait. And I believe strict attention to physical aesthetics is an S trait, specifically SJ.

As an NJ, my physical surroundings are often quite chaotic. But to be at my best, I need a set routine. I like my lifestyle to be predictable and controlled, and I despise surprises.

Regardless, being in tune with the way your surroundings look is Sensing. So if the Intuitive is also a Judger, he/she still probably wouldn't be concerned as much with cleanliness and aesthetic surroundings, as long as they don't interfere with their ability to concentrate on their inner conceptions.

Most Js who visit my house become stressed. I let it go when I can't be bothered. There is no reserve at which point I will fly into action. This is like Sherlock. For his time his house keeping was atrocious.

I cannot imagine an INTJ shooting the wall in his house nor covering all the chairs with fevered drawings only to wade through them to get coffee or whatever never thinking about the carnage, only the object in his hand.

Oh and a word of warning, NTs are the most mentally flexible of types. Ergo we can seem to be a lot of things but we are only one of them...well that's the MBTI theory.