Stanley Kubrick Myers-Brigs type - MBTI, enneagram and personality type info
check, I know, a woman signing from inside an radiator. He makes his film crew and actors redo scenes about a hundred times, he makes them do everything the long and hard way. The 'fell in love with the stories'' in the context I think indicates that for him it's mainly a question of interest firs and foremost, rather than a more pre-well thought thing. " This seems like more of an xxTP thing to say because an xxTJ would be more intent on gaining personal power (Te) at the expense of others (Fi), whereas an xxTP would be more suspicious of power (Ti) and would warn others about the dangers of power (Fe). But Lynch by comparison doesn't seem like Kubrick. In making a movie, you don't need that, because you don't need to explain stuff, you need to show it. com/2016/06/08/6th-function-of-introverts-visual-reading VIDEO: https://www. And fear of flying is very INXJ. do you know who Peter Sellers is. As such, unhealthy INxPs can get stuck in a perpetual loop of pure intuition with no sensing until their Si wakes up and snaps them out of it like a splash of cold water. I disagree with you on just a couple of instances otherwise I admire most of what you post here. There i said it. It seems like an example of just trowing crazy ideas together: chicken that bleeds when you try to eat it. 1) Niels Bohr isn't even Ni-Ti loop, he is a perfectly Ni-Fe-Ti INFJ. Photography is totally static. And then I have this idea for a factory scene which also makes me feel weird. From what I can tell there is very, very little sincere emotion in his movies. Someone hacked my account. You know the arguments are getting really good when we type based on laziness. " I think the challenge for the NP will be to balance their "idea machine"-like quality with routine (Si) and see-through (Te). But a recognition of insanity doesn’t imply a celebration of it – nor a sense of despair and futility about the possibility of curing it. If man really sat back and thought about his impending termination, and his terrifying insignificance and aloneness in the cosmos, he would surely go mad, or succumb to a numbing sense of futility. @bobnickmad And it's amazingly stupid to say let's compare SP to NP or NT director because no one can tell you they are those types. If anything, imo, he shows Inferior Fe in his last movie, Eyes Wide Shut, as I was writing before, which is his first movie that doesn't seem to be completely in quotation marks emotionally. Also too close to Nietsxzsszxzdszche. Woody Allen is not ISTP but INFP. And let's this, let's that. I didn't know about that photography example but that would show Ne, as well as how he was ideologically non-imposing with his works, leaving things more open to interpretation. Overall, I think it can be made a good case that Kubrick showed both strong Te and Ti characteristics. You're too easy to sway, which is a higher sin than having and ruling a personal stance like I do. A lot of people forget that despite his perfectionism, he liked to take his time on projects and not rush things. ARTICLE: http://leontsao. Like I had this idea about the interstellar psychedelic drive, where all the pyschedelic imagery is actually information transmitted toward Dave's unconscious, in order to prepare him for the transformation. INTPs are logically through, but the kind of rigor that's helpful in putting theories together, it's not really what's helpful when it comes to putting huge production after huge production together, while maintaining your artistic independence. You can capture the feeling ''motion'' in a photography, if you're good at it I guess, the same way you can do in sculpture, painting or other static arts. 3 days ago it was 48 votes ISTP and 44 votes INTJ. What you posted is all Se though. Obvious Ni is obvious, cunt. specifically *because* they're "crackpot ideas" with no clear answer. You can't type someone based on what they look in a partner. Kubrick also doesn't seem like the kind of person walking around day-dreaming about people heads falling and being taken to a pencil factory, and then thinking he should make a movie from this. Now, it's easy for a movie director with colossal budgets to hire the people that do all those things, but Kubrick tried to get involved in those things himself, because he couldn't afford the kind of budget someone like Nolan has. "Then this is not the place for me. When the NP starts working though, they can't keep focus and continue adding and adding new cool ideas within their cool idea. Just listen to it and change your votes:. His engineering approach, meticulosity and problem solving skills are more to do with him being very T, not with being S. Welcome to MBTIBase - PersonalityBase, here you can learn about Stanley Kubrick MBTI type.. I'm not really sure what kind of nitpick he was based on reading anything, but saying that he wanted things a certain way is not evidence for Ni at all. He truly started reading books at 19, when his Ni was growing. What are you talking about. Te requires efficiency but Kubrick seems to sacrifice efficiency in favour of rigorous perfection. Textbook ISTP. '';''“A film is - or should be - more like music than like fiction. It's mostly about how unnatural and unaccomplished the relationship between Kidman and Cruise - in the movie - was portrayed. Kubrick: "We’re fortunate, in a way, that our body, and the fulfillment of its needs and functions, plays such an imperative role in our lives; this physical shell creates a buffer between us and the mind-paralyzing realization that only a few years of existence separate birth from death. Did my video go over your head @bobnickmad. Nowadays, everyone can make a big budget movie if they're supported by a big studio and they use the same stock blockbuster formula, because you take the special effect used countless times, but in order to make something as unique at the time like 2001, you entered in unknown territory, meaning that someone like Kubrick had to involve himself at the lowest level of production and offer advice on anything, which means solving all kinds of difficult problems as they appear, something ISTP tend to be better at. Yes, I agree too. So all of that is purely anecdotal with possibility of error in perception. Se is all about action, motion, whatever. What I mean by this, it's that it's not a complete movie, but the skeleton of a movie. INTJs highly appreciate intelligence in a partner more than looks: "why you fell in love with your wife: she's intelligent". There's also this subtle irony going through all of the movie. The issue here is Ni-dom. However Ni, Ne deal with mental framework and not content so different types can be creative in their own ways. And it's not a joke because I've spent my time thinking about it and taking my time posting my thoughts here; briefs but mine after all. Who knows, maybe among INTPs, there are some who have a very strong J side developed and are much better at dealing with huge projects, but they would have to overcome many of the typical problems that come with being an INP: too many ideas but little focus. I don't think an SPs work will necessarily look coherent and an NPs work necessarily look improvised though. Nevertheless I do think Kubrick is SP, but not because his movies excel visually. I know this isn't really orthodox when it comes to functions but something I've noticed in people. Still, as I've written a lot about before, I think the total impression clicks better with ISFP. His lovely Fi shines through in his interviews. The point is: he was very resourceful. The same way Lynch is Dreamer-Aesthete-Sage I guess. @bob, what does being "good at your craft" or "craftsman" have to do with SP over NP. But yeah, different types would be into photography for different reason.
. Despite his perfectionism with every single aspect of his movies (more of a J trait, very common in INJ filmmakers like Cameron and Fincher and uncommon in ITPs like Eastwood and Woody ) which leads to aesthetically pleasing images, his films followed the same path of prioritising speculation. I'll give him that he has very strong Ni, but I think it's easy to underestimate how intuitive a well-read Sensor in their 40s-50s can sound. Photography is NOT Se. How about we organize what we know about SK, his early life, his artistic inclination, his N-ness &/or his S-ness etc. I remembering there was a quote in which he said he doesn't make his movies with a particular theme in my, but I can't find it. I mean, think of all the big budget SF movies and how few of them achieved what 2001 achieved. Also I think 5w4 is attracted to this kind of ambiguity as opposed to let's say a 1. i crossed the line there XDHe's pretty clearly both N and PAn ISTP could never EVER pull off a movie like Dr. There used to be comments about that, I guess he was a formalist or something. why would anyone think it's possibleI don't have any certitudes about Kubrick's type, but ISTP aren"t always "plumbers" (that's a tereotype) and if Kubrick was one, I guess he would have a very strong Ni. "This discussion is a muddle now. The point is, just because someone is ISP it doesn't mean he can make conscious use of its intuition, just that he's over the average. Also, as to the photography thing, again David Fincher (INFJ) was making films even as a little kid and he doesn't seem to have been bookish, also, anecdotal: I know a tested adult INFP who never has read books for pleasure. Bob Dylan generally wrote songs about reality. In this site you can find out which of the 16 types this character 'Stanley Kubrick' belongs to!. About your copy/pasta:. About Eastwood, keep in mind that as ISTP as he is, he doesn't relate to the cow-boy caricature he played in movies, and was interested with making movies more spiritual and meaningful than that. Stanley Cube-Brick is no squareWoody Allen is still INFP to me no matter what you say and/or accomodate. Eyes wide shut is adapted from Schnitzler's Traumnovelle. You are in the best place to test MBTI and learn what type Stanley Kubrick likely is!. While I still see Lynch as INFP (although Butterfly's arguments made a lot of sense on his page), IMO Kubrick just seems to use Ti, Ni and has inferior Fe. It's about a man wandering through New York at Christmas and seeing all kinds of ways to organize love/sex and eventually realizing that he prefers the simplicity of married life with his wife simply asking him if he "wants to fuck" as the happy ending. I know that Kubrick doesn't use introverted thinking. I think Lynch is more like, "Okay, if you eat that chicken that is going to make me feel really weird. Don't become friends with anyone who has real power. And "Eyes Wide Shut" was criticized for not being close or authentic to emotions, kind of cold. *I shouldn't have said ''any SP'', I should have said ''strong aesthetics doesn't imply Se necessary''*I shouldn't have said ''any SP'' as you didn't imply that, I should said visual proeficiencyWhile do agree that overall photography is more SP than N (and N might find it creatively restricting), saying that any SP must have strong aesthetics -potography or not- and N types not, it's just putting SPs on a pedestal. Gink has the best post in this whole page (I haven't seen him elsewhere, a true one hit wonder it seems). The reason is that there is no Fi in his films. In a way, you could say that Thinker-Aesthete-Sage explains why Kubrick made the movies he made, while ISTP explains how he made them. Even if not directly tested, public voting can provide good accuracy regarding Stanley Kubrick Myers-Briggs and personality type!. He's pretty clearly INTJ. Study ISTP Ridley Scott then. Sometimes I think you're just really young though. Also, because they have chaotic life INTPs aren't give much credit for, but there are also INTJ with chaotic life for the simple reason that they find every-day businesses platitudes. ) in spamming. There's clever Ni symbolism in there: such as the monkeys throwing the bone followed by the space ship, which in a quick sequence describes the advancement of humanity through its tools, and its used in documentaries about space or development of humanity because its makes its point so well. v=QsSV6yZZIVkI personally consider Eyes wide shut to be one of his best. "WWOOW Just chill, maaan. I think you can compare Kubrick to someone like Michelangelo for example. In the deepest sense, I believe in man’s potential and in his capacity for progress. It's not Fi, just a need for truthfulness that Ti-doms share as well. ISTP just fits perfectly. But look at this vid: https://www. People might claim Ti-dom detachment, but ISTP art is not really detached, since Se is physically direct in response, it's INTP art more likely to be that. So according to bobnick, INTPs can't make grand scale movies or something, because what exactly. A lot of people think that Ti-doms like to think in terms of algebra and stuff, but that kind of pure logic became very boring to me at a young age, and I soon became more fascinated by things that my Ti CAN'T easily explain. Kubrick isn't like that. I mean, I can't see Eraserhead being done like that. I went on the INTJ reddit and found some morally ambiguous INTJs. I have a much better imagination than that :D How do you hack everyones accounts. And it's a very faithful rendition of Schnitzler's story too (unlike The Shining). And no Ni isn't particularly associated with creativity but Fi is. And although it would logically make sense for the 3rd function to be stronger than the 6th function, many people have written about the phenomenon of having a strong/developed 6th function and relating strongly to descriptions of one's 6th function. Ti-dom but where is this Se. NP prefer shiny objects, but not as much as SP. Going by function stacks (which I abandoned anyway) ,there's no Se in 2001. There's also the thing that when you need different skills in writing a book that's a SF masterpiece, and making a movie that's a SF masterpiece. @gink, good that you brought up the photography thing. But reading for this ISFP has nothing to do with speculative thinking; it’s a compulsive activity, similar to physical exercise. @bobnickmad, if you take an ISTP and give them intellectual interests beyond what is normal for ISTP, wouldn't you kind of be talking about an INTP. After watching 2001 you remain perplexed, which seems to be more INP art. So, I guess he's Thinker-Aesthete-Sage. But a lot of that could be to something I've noticed in how the E/I nature of auxiliary functions can partially flip in stronger cases of E or I. I admit that's atypical for a N type but you can't call the S/N on that alone. Lower Fe and Fi can look very similar. There's a reason why "production designer," "set decorator," "cinematographer," and "crew" are listed in the credits of every movie. INTPs aren't able to solve all kinds of difficult problems. I think the frustration of looking for that quote messed me up or something. Look, everyone can make a movie provided they have the ambition, work ethic and skill necessary. Like I know someone who you can really just see Fi-Ni but they're definitely a P-type in every definition of the word, and thus is an INFP to me. Also, Leon Tsao explains in this video how your 6th cognitive function is strong. Some people use the "coldness" of his films as evidence that he's INTJ, but I'd argue that his films are cold in a Ti way, not a Te way. I know an INTP afraid of flying. Also, remember that Kubrick did not build his own sets himself. No person with much Se would nave made such a slow movie. For example Tim Burton (even to a fault) is someone who seems to have a pretty good handle of Si as he, almost to a fault, has developed a formula to keep himself in check. he's like the perfect man for me, all 4 INXXs blended in one perfect human being. It's like a orchestra director vs player in the orchestra thing, they don't necessary need to have the same set of skills, the director needs to have an overall view of things, the player needs to master a specific instrument. That's why INTJ makes more sense than INTP. Have you watched his stand up comedy on YT. doesn't seem much concerned with message of his films. Sure, an INTJ could think like that but in the context of some greater concept for the movie where the scene it's relevant in the context of a the overall concept, for Kubrick the method is more down-to-the-top than top-to-bottom. He just takes wildly different genres and gives them the regality of his style with careful visuals, sound and little, mysterious references like you see in a lot of painted art - like Raphael's painting of Athens where Plato is pointing up and Aristotle is pointing down, which symbolizes their philosophy. It’s true that, on average, those are more Se traits. Even a S like movie such as Barry Lyndon (who he made because he couldn't make a movie about Napoleon), compare to your typical period movie, it feels somewhat disembodied. INTP can be extremely nitpicky about wanting things a certain way, and it's from a different basis than INTJ. There could be cases -especially if we talk about visual artists where Ni is more useful than Ne- where Ne and Ni might start to be indistinguishable. * Also it should go without saying that any comments of mine in disagreement with you aren't an attack on you. Just answer the four letters. most of which have to do with the human psyche. Thinking – Feeling, represents how a person processes information. Thinking means that a person makes a decision mainly through logic.. I'am an ESTP and I'm quite bookish mmyself. After revising the MBTI function order and getting some input from Scotty, I renounced thinking in function axes, I got to the conclusion that the function most likely for an INTP to display are Ti, Ne and Ni. I am confused here. are you an iNtuitive. You can ctrl+F to find his post but Kubrick is just plain intuitive. ", "It should be a progression of moods and feelings". Hmmmm, I've never really thought about this, but it's an interesting question. Ideally it's like math/science. Also agree with Scotty that Te doesn't seem fitting with Kubrick. You could think ISTPs because of Se would like it, but no; they don't have that drive at all. He wasn't all that focused with philosophical concepts. So, Ti and Se, and by the age of 19 he started reading books and develop his Ni. But because Dave can't comprehend all that amount of information specially because of its alien origin, it's transmitted in a way that it goes straight in his unconscious mind. Si isn't about "remembering the past" or whatever. Have you really said anything. Kubrick also makes it clear in interviews that the point of 2001 is that is a visual experience that is supposed to have a visceral affect on the one watching it, not to explain stuff to the audience. The thing with people Kubrick, Jobs or Lynch, it's that they won't have the same flaws as what's expected from their type, otherwise they wouldn't have been geniuses. Not the ''depth'',''meaning'' and stuff like that, which is frankly very subjective and can make us look silly, but the way they bring all those elements that make a movie together in a whole. Se likes immediate stimulation, not slow contemplation. He failed there becaue tertiary Fi is not his forte, but he's obviousy interested in people, relationships and humankind as a whole to make those deep and political movies. It's all so complicated with him. It may seem cold at first, but there are occasional moments of Fe melodrama (e. There's no immediate impression, the point is to raise in the viewer lots of questions about what is that he's seeing. ” So, this go along the way that for him is the Ni idea that leads the movie, but rather Ni adds to the movie. Saying that photography and distaste for reading books points to Se is not a very good argument. N types, on the other hand, face activities in an opposite way. INTPs aren't able to solve all kinds of difficult problems. So, either we sub-estimate how intellectual and imaginative an ISTP can be, or we sub-estimate how an INTP with good leadership qualities + technical knowledge looks like. Any type can be bookish, as types don't define broad interests and behaviors of individuals. '';''There is no deliberate pattern to the stories that I have chosen to make into films. INTP are logical nitpicks and INTJ are nitpicky about the perception. yeah, INTPs are the most smartest most ever from the everest just that they dont like to beI don't even know where you are working from. #Bonita, No, I just didn't find it very helpful, sorry. There's no way Kubrick was unhealthy like Dick, he had his quircks but in interviews he sounds very sane. Like bobnickmad said, having aesthetic/visual interests doesn't necessarily preclude one type over the other. Except that he's not a Ni-dom, so why bring the 6th function, when you can't prove that Ni is is the first one. bobnickmad: I agree with most of what you said, except for: "INTP have a kind of strong grid through which they asses the truth quality of ideas (think Einstein) meanwhile Kubrick was interested in stuff like whether ghosts exists and all kind of crackpot ideas exposed by the kind of people who wear tin-foil hats. On the other hand, of course, you have someone like Stanley Kubrick who compares his actors to cattle and is infamous for being incredibly demanding. ''moods and feeling'' sounds indeed like higher F than inferior one on a surface reading, but you should take into account that there are ISTP musicians among other things, so they understand that moods and feeling matter in art. Are you going to keep repeating the same thing about books. Maybe we make too much of a case for how Ni should be presented in an artists work, rather than look at the artists overall goal -not by movie case-by-case but his all work. I find all this so funny because. Watch this, he is clearly INTP, Ti-Ne, intuitive, perceiving, however you want to look at it: https://www. Anyway, I read about his preparations for Napoleon, about how important is to find the right terrain and a large army and all the logistics involved etc. Again, I'm thinking Michelangelo and people like that. Moving beyond the anecdotal, I think using someone's bookishness as evidence for a particular typing is circumstantial at best. Was Kubrick more concerned with the craftmanship of his film making and thus sought perfection in film making or he sought perfection in delivery of message he meant to relay. He's going on about the fact that we're going to die and how religion can't do anything for us in a rather straightforward way. Also, Woody and Clint are ISTP which is why their focus is on aesthetic, so I don't think that goes against INTP. ISTP hate phony fake emotions as much as Fi users due to the negative relationship they have with Fe. So, his method is not top-down, but down-to-the-top: take each scene and find the best way of building it while being accurate to the time period and what you liked in the material. Than again, there are INTP inventors and INTPs who build robots and all those kind of technical things so not all are lost in theory, but if he was INTP, he was a very focused one. So, I can see a genius SP making very good use of its Ni, like in the case of Michelangelo and others. I mean people like Woody Allen (ISTP) are extremely productive, but Fe as a weakness means you're going to have trouble with the people skills part of movie-directing, I guess. "Replace "visual" with "graphic" ^_^@bobnickmad It's the visual definition of healthy Ni. Anyway, I can just make him fall on his head after the chicken since the randomness does not break from the weirdness aesthetic I'm developing. I don't think I will argue more until I have some other insight or see something truly new on this page. The issue is with lack of evidence for Ni-dom and ISTJ is out of the question, he was no N inferior. You may have read Arthur C. Well that makes it easier for me. And INFPs can love jazz, but being a workaholic who likes playing clarinet - that's a lot of Se. You mean workaholic as in insanely creative. "Oh and in my previous post when I was talking about Si and Te as a weakness for NPs, that's just for NFPs of course. The best I can do is to say I just fell in love with the stories. It's TJs rather than SPs who are seen as being responsible and in full control of everything like that. The problem with this argumentation is the ‘on average’. "I wanna know better how an SP and an NP would differ in how they approach film-making itself". Take "The Shining" for example. 3) You have been biased for NTPs on more than a few occasions which is fine but would be better if you actually argue your case instead of sour comments. Or watch Chan-Wok Park's Vengeance Yrilogy: 1st movie is as ambigous as it gets, 2nd is moralistic anti-vengeance, and the 3rd almost praises vengeance as some kind of necessary healing process. @scotty: The two most bookish people I know are INTP and ENFP, so I'm not so sure that's accurate. About the only factor at work each time is that I try not to repeat myself. 6) I appreciate if your replies are devoid of sourness and concern with topic at hand. But then at the same time, I don't know about INTJ. But what those three have in common that Kubrick does not is a down-to-earth, adaptive attitude and flexibility/openness to others' (valuable) modification of their vision. Photography as in taking pictures of your life to commemorate it, is a very Si thing, but that wasn't what he did. Never, ever go near power. lol, so much bickering about whether an INTP is an ISTP or INTJ. Def an INXX: too muck liking of INXX writers (Nabokov, Burgess, King). #idlebody Te is focused on efficiency, not Ti who's more individualistic and thus highly perfectionistic. ") and even the visuals will tend to be very "wacky idea"-based like when you see the charmingly, disarrayed colorful visuals of for example a Dario Argento movie. It's dangerous. OoooppsI hope you won't be mad at me, Bonita^^, but I think you are focusing on small details that could be connected to almost any type. INTJs can sometimes be ridiculously black-and-white about moral and ethical issues which is why Kubrick's moral ambiguity keeps me wondering. Compare with an INTJ like, say, David Fincher. Here you can explore of famous people and fictional characters.. Never changing your opinion, your tendency to declare things without good evidence (and then refuse to learn why it is not good evidence), to not do the arguments of others any favors, even to participate (. I could see him as ISTP. Your way of arguing however insists that all creative types must be Ne types, which is true in many instances but not all. Most of his films are so morally ambiguous. Didn't read through all of the discussion so far, but I think Kubrick is ISTP. But ISTPs are. *that for him it's the Ni idea/theme/concept that drives the movie but Ni adds to itDidn't find that one but I found some to go somewhat in that direction:''I can't honestly say what led me to make any of my films. It does look amazing. has to be a master of one, jack of one type of person, so maybe those are the ISPs. And this seems to be Kubrick’s case. of personality, Enneagram with the Why. I know one ESFP afraid of flying and he has beard and bushy eyebrows just like Stanley had so I think ESFP. I think for myself, unlike you who weight other's ideas too much without pondering if they're telling you lies and scamming you at the same time. It's similar to Michelangelo style, such as God pointing his finger at Adam. Man, these sensations of weirdness are interesting. But yeah I am quite sure he is a T. *''that for him it's NOT the Ni idea/theme/concept that drives the movie''. So are other great ISTP filmmakers like Woody Allen and Ridley Scott. This discussion has turned into reiterations at this point. v=xa-KBqOFgDQI have seen the movie and I think it's quite INFJ-ish. His conclusion: "His focus seemed more to make a point with this picture than to display something physically interesting. Dick in his 1970s period. The happy ending of this movie, which otherwise has a Christmas setting to stress the family theme, ends with Kidman saying, "Do you wanna fuck. (I thought I was about to make friends with Scotty again, but I think he must really be annoyed with me now). You could argue for example that his aesthetics are very Ti-Ni, in the way they put an emphasis on Precision in shots (Ti) and a Mystical, harmonious kind of feeling (Ni). If you enjoyed this entry, find out about the personality types of Acting and Movie Industry characters list.. It's like he's going over the set saying, "Let's do this, and let's turn that around, and let's throw a bucket of paint on that wall. But depending on the type they'll approach movie making differently. It is not supposed to be warm. The more I read about Kubrick, the more INTJ he gets. 2001 A Space Odyssey was like a anthropological study on mankind and human behavior. I think an INTJ would make a more 'forceful' in meaning movie than that. And the INTP I know goes a step further and says: "I don't understand why people take photographs". Hence why I believe Stanley must have been INTP. But we can see that he was more concrete and playful. The point is, that I don't think one can make a convincing enough claim that this guy is a Ni-dom, except that his most important movies look like being made by a Ni-dom and that he said Intuitive claims at some time or another, because when it comes to how he approaches movies, it's a from the bottom to the top approach, with an emphasis on scene accuracy and scene setting over any overall theme. A lot of people were offended by the almost childish treatment of these heavy topics. His voice and spirit, I meant. This is something you would expect more from an SP because they're more hands-on, but if Lynch is an NP, he was one really well learned in the more SP aspects of film-making, one usually leaves for others (thus being able to create such a visually accomplished movie like Eraserhead without a very large budget). Also, yeah, he had a voracious intellect and all kind of N like interests. v=QsSV6yZZIVkAlso, ultra-developed Ti can sometimes seem like Ni from an external perspective. But in those 19 years, he was doing intuitive photography, exploring the world of intuitive modern art, and playing the intuitive game of chess, and like a lot of INT moreso than ISTP, a social outcast. Out of Ti, Te, Ni, Ne the one function I really think that he lacks is Te. In writing the kind of books that Arthus C Clarke (INTx, not sure if INTP or INTJ) writes, you make your world believable by writing in depth on the kind of implications of the technology etc. 4) You show clear bias against Ni in your second comment which I fail to understand. Contrary to someone like Tarkovsky, Stanley Kubrick is also someone who enjoys to pick topics that have very little to do with him as a person, like Clockwork Orange, The Shining, 2001 etc. Too intelligent, creatively independent and knowledgeable to be ISTP. jpegYeah, he just moves from one hectic production to the next. I had this idea about 2001 and wanted to share. On the other hand, you can gradually see him getting more and more socially concerned/emotional - ending with Eyes Wide Shut which is about a man trying out different forms of love, in the end finding out that what he knows (normal marriage) is best. Then he went inside the cage and took the picture of the visitors staring at the monkey outside the cage, but because he was inside, the bars appeared in front of these people. INTJs are interested in ideas and theories when observing the world.. " or something like that. I think Fullmetal Jacket is a good example, because it's a late period movie, yet devoid of most of the high caliber Ni we find in his golden period (Strangelove, 2001, Clockwork, Orange). It’s about living that moment. Se in general IS a lot less abstract. He's a very hard case. Funnily enough, I also know a really bookish ISTP. Keep reading to learn more about what goes into your Myers-Briggs personality type—and maybe discover what yours is.. I think an NP would be bored thinking about things that are as incredibly nonsensical as what you describe all day long. XDNietzsche is the posterboy of morally ambiguos INTJ for example. In A Clockwork Orange, he'll show the downside of free will and morality and then flip it around to show the opposite. Versus INtuitive Kubrick, writer of most of his movies. I'm still leaning towards ISTP for Kubrick because he seems to have too much Se (as butterfly pointed out) for it to be his PoLR, but I'm not ruling out INTP. v=GSgbjhuQ4CoSomeone uploaded "Funeral Parade of Roses" in full to YT yesterday. INTJ with a strong P preference. Check it out, Alex. Imo, all this only makes sense with Kubrick being a Inferior Fe user. That new system of you sounds so much like trolling, to hide the fact that Kubrick was an INTJ. He is almost certainly an ISTP. *"Anyway, I can just make him fall on his head after the chicken and wake up in the factory since the randomness does not break from the weirdness aesthetic I'm developing. Also, while I have Kubrick as a Thinker-Aesthete, due to his detached reasoning for choosing his movies, 2001 is the movie where his Sage aspect got more to the surface. Just look at the words in the first 30 seconds of documentary Kubrick INTJ A life in pictures: https://www. I'm not saying Kubrick was as unhealthy as Dick, I was just using Dick as an example of my theory. I told in my previous post that later I found someone else online saying the same about many other ISTPs. All of these things makes it hard to take anything you say seriously. Most INFPs would be horrified, lol. You can read my descriptions of Eyes Wide Shut on this page, and it was to demonstrate this "childishness" that I brought up the cheating. I don't think you have to strain your brain too much to figure out that an introverted intuitive (IN) is likely to show usage of introverted intuition (Ni). He had obsessive compulsive disorder, wanting things to be done over and over again until he felt they were perfectly organized which again hints at Te. A Ni-dom would start from his overall idea he has with the movie, what he wants to accomplish in a singular but broad stroke, and then use the most efficient means to accomplish. What I disagree is that INTP artist wouldn't be an extreme perfectionists, I think every self-respecting artist is a perfectionist. ISTP is a very directive type, so ccan look J, and the Ti-Ni loop can make them look N. com/48425421Don't know, but honestly if someone could prove he's INTJ it'd be more than happy, the whole "every great director who seems IN is actually genius ISP" started from him. 2) Witt is an Ni-dom to say the least, again not INTP for sure. Are there no moderators on this site. He once said, "Be suspicious of people who have, or crave, power. He's definitely an INTP. < I guess NTP directors, who have Ti, are a bit better than NFPs directors in seeing things through. page=5 Here he talks about Fullmetal Jacket, a very S movie compared to high N of 2001 or Clockwork Orange. @bobnickmad "Kubrick // One-Point Perspective" https://vimeo. Napoleon is a big historical figure and of universal interest. Compare with films by INTJ directors such as Robert Bresson or David Fincher, in which there's very little outward emotion even during dramatic plot points. The role of the director is to figure out how to put together the input of all those people, eg. Strong F too; very sensitive. And it never was. The theme, what's behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later. This has nothing to do with IXTPs not being talented filmakers, but photography pure and alone. I imagine being me. I think that is very telling in how he took such an absurdly Ne approach to photography even in his teenage years. But all the functions can have their aesthetics, all types can be interested in visuals the same way any type can be interested in music and thus excell at it if they develop their skill. You can hear Kubrick in The Shining "Rare Behind The Scenes Footage" saying to top actress Shelley Duvall: "IT LOOKS FAKE, IT REALY DOES. 2001: A Space Odyssey it's an ''interactive movie''. But if you buy this argument, you need to take into consideration that, when Kubrick was younger, he was as much into photography as he was into chess. So there's bound to be plenty of high-concept segments ("let's do several layers of dreams with action scenes going on in all of them at the same time. I think talking about on which types are more likely to be photographers is getting us sidetracked, since it doesn't have much to do with Kubrick as a person. The fact that by starting from the little things he managed to make something so visionary that the most acclaimed Ni-dom directors can't even hope to aspire to, it's a testament to how he managed to over-come his type limitations, more than his type, but also to how dedicated he was to each project in particular and it's own specifics. @bobnickmad Can I call you bobovska from now on. edu/krb5476/wp-content/uploads/sites/8471/2014/04/etc_woody26_950. He took a step by step approach, dealing with each scene in a perfectionist manner, and than arriving at the end result. I also disagree Allen's necessarily Ne, though I see how it might seem like it at first. They may not like doing it, which could be where his asshole attitude comes from, but capability. Also I kinda disagree with the notion that INTJ ignore details and are not through, it seems to me that a type that's focused on making his vision a reality can't afford not being through and perfectionist. And chess is, by far, more an N thing than an S thing. And SK's Ni is obvious. And ISTP directors like Woody Allen or Clint Eastwood are some of the most prolific directors you can think of. A certain color scheme or choice of lightning, a certain type a story and characters, gives a certain feel that gives that work of art it's identity, and ISTPs are fully capable of thinking of art like that. His focus seemed more to make a point with this picture than to display something physically interesting. His characters will cheat a lot, but have this one person they keep coming back to or something. What I'm sure is Ti-dom, it's clear when you read more interviews that for him what matter was accuracy in presenting one's material, and he didn't care about having an unifying theme for his movies, he just liked making movies about things he thought were interesting and wanted to present things truthfully+the whole IxxP thing about respecting viewer's autonomy. ISTP director Ridley Scott: writer of ZERO of his movies. Kubrick didn't make that many movies, it took him forever to achieve a project. I tried to say something about that earlier but you really explained it much nicer. To me, the only real immorality is that which endangers the species; and the only absolute evil, that which threatens its annihilation. I could have searched for it below but the admin deleted my older posts. Actually, you could say MBTI deals with the How. In Strangelove, I was dealing with the inherent irrationality in man that threatens to destroy him; that irrationality is with us as strongly today, and must be conquered. And I agree with impecable: INTJs (but also ISTPs) are more driven and focused than INTPs. MBTI is not politics or religion though. @bobnickmad You are my pet now. " Yes, exactly. Similar kind of perfectionism, but a much more bussiness-like attitude with more focus on efficiency. The detachment and contemplative tone of his movies is probably a 5w4 thing. "You don’t stop being concerned with man because you recognize his essential absurdities and frailties and pretensions. I think a good real-life example of an INTP in a Ne-Ni feedback loop would be Philip K. To me this is N really. NJ's are much more into pleasure reading than NP's from what I've seen. I guess it's almost like it converges aspect of MBTI and Enneagram. Since I am currently going through the process of trying to decide what film to make next, I realize just how uncontrollable is the business of finding a story, and how much it depends on chance and spontaneous reaction. , and my system tries to give some approximate answer to both. Anyway, the way he talks about movies scenes and photography seems to be a Ti aesthetic, rather than Se or Si: the way something is positioned in the picture, getting the perfect balance between the elements, stuff like that. Childish about love/human relationships. Other explanation would be that because INTPs don't like positions of leadership, we tend to not be aware of how an INTP with good leadership qualities would be like since their natural tendencies is to flee away from such things. @bobnickmad Photography has jackshit to do with Se. Just wanted to add my sweet discovery. Though, it was interesting; I'm honoured to have crossed the sword with you gentlemen. This probably explains why it's so talked about in the history of movies. Like "let's do a dream heist movie" or "Johnny Depp with scissors for hands finds love with Winona Ryder". At the same time, I'm still open to him being ISTP, but if you don't think in terms of functions axes, INTP seems more like it. What is the best option for the MBTI type of Stanley Kubrick? What about enneagram and other personality types?. And a few ENFP who seem to use Fe as much as Fi, but again clear perceivers. As insane as all this sounds I wanted to post it. If anything your first interpretation makes more sense (it being more of a J thing), but Kubrick is clearly intuitive in so many ways, and also a low conscientiousness guyThe eternal back and forth of this site, goes back to ISTP. Clarke's (INTP) novelization, but it's not considered the same story by Kubrick. Because STs are more resource oriented, while INTPs are ideas oriented (ENTJ would be the ideal combination of both), and in order to make a movie like 2001 you need to be resource oriented, that is, making best use of the budget and resolving technical problems as they appear. :( But if what you describe is accurate and there are no contradicting signs of INTJness, it's a good point in favor of ISTP, though not a dealbreaker because young children tend not to embody a single type very strongly since their brain is still maturing. But the ISTP I know never takes photographs, literally never; doesn't even like to carry stuff around. Look at Wong Kar-Wai films. It seems that he actually knew very well what he needed in his movies, which makes me think that the whole shooting a scene after scene might have been copying Bresson's method (IxTJ) whose scope is probably making the actors fully under his control like puppets, rather than him being P. I don't know where you are getting S/Se from that. He display a lot of the same childishness about love that Kubrick does in Eyes Wide Shut, for example. I also don't see why it's easier to make appeal to a 6th rather than a very well 3rd function. I thought this is a bit random; but no, because then I found someone online saying the same about ISTPs, that they never take pics. Jung theorized that the dominant function acts alone in its preferred world: exterior for extraverts and interior for introverts.. com/r/intj/comments/2zscbj/what_do_you_intjs_think_of_morality/I was leaning towards INTJ because of the themes he was attracted to. I never claimed it's anything but a personal solipsistic interpretation, it's just helps me understand this people behind the limitations and somewhat mechanical nature of MBTI. For me INTJ are Ni-Te-Ti and INTP Ti-Ne-Ni, so having strong Te and Ti characteristics fits INTJ. People who have Ti are the type who want to do things effectively for the least amount of work. I take hundreds when on vacation. It's interesting that a movie director can be a ''Jack of all trades, master of none'' type of person, while a cinematographer, set designer etc. Is the first 19 years of his life your only argument. Can't refind it. and then dismantle it and look at it with another angle without preconceptions. So, this is what I meant by ''craft''. Do ISTPs behave like that. But that's what the critics said. On the other hand you will likely find plenty of INTJs who are not interested in photography. Anyway, this is one of the reason I once thought he must have been INTJ. INTPs may be more through when it comes to theories because they're theory first, but INTJ are probably more through when it comes to making their dreams a reality. For this person, it’s not interesting to think extensively about what was said, to extract meaning of the book, to reach ‘the point’. Excuse my redaction tonight, but I was thinking this. 2001 is simply an "unclear", mysterious film, and if there is something directors like James Cameron (ENTJ) and Park Chan-wook (INTJ), even Godard (INTJ) have in common, it's clarity and directness. The question is if he is more S or N, and more P or J. Can you at least try to respond to my post. But again, I guess that's what movie directors say to all their actors lolThere is indeed a certain overall view towards humanity that might be Fi , that's one of the better comments you gave. It is not anything in particular. And it's all about trying to make the movie as accurate as possible, over being concerned with an overall view point. I agree with that, but he was still involved in all those aspects more than your typical director, and it was this involvment that can explain why he had such elaborate sets in his movies compared to the budget afforded. Not only with his movies, but in his photographic works. If former he is more likely an ISTP, if latter he can be an INTJ. Proceeding, his movies are very heavy on Se (it's all about the visuals) with lots of Ni-type mysticism like the monolith in 2001. Basically, you can have those people but it can easily resolve into chaos unless there's someone offering focus among all those people, and the best way would be for someone who knows a bit from every technical aspect of film-making in order to spot what doesn't work as it should, basically an engineer like director who assimilated every aspect of movie-making. This discussion is a muddle now. You just need to have a certain ability. It's like he doesn't care what his movies are even about. " No, but when at the same time you reject theory and books, that make you a Sensor. INTJ by letter, probably Jungian Ti type. It's like when a thing or place has a certain "feeling" to it. Yeah, good point Butterfly. He's also a pretty cynical, pragmatic workaholic who plays clarinet as a hobby and believes in Freudian psychoanalysis (Tertiary Ni). @scotty -_- His voice, spirit and intelligence turn me on, so he must be an INTJ. Because, on typology, what truly matters is not the activity itself, but the way a person faces this activity. If anything, an INTP would generate and fine-tune the ideas while the INTJ would take the ideas to the next level, as Ni is the function most focused with implementing abstract ideas. I know one INFJ and one INTJ, both afraid of airplanes. That's something of a physical feat. When he chose The Shining to film he had a lot of trouble finding the right book to film, and he kept throwing them against the walls (according to witness) frustrated, angry, AKA EMOtional. Anyway, I get the impression that Kubrick wanted to be a film-maker all along, he just thought doing photography is a good way to start, because it helps with framing the scenes of a movie later, so it's good practice. This very interesting discussion (apart from Bonita's ridiculous rant about Allen being INFP which is a joke) has led me to consider INTP over INTJ as a second choice. He doesn't at all care about doing things as quickly as possible. Because if he really set out making the best movie in every category, I can only see an NTJ having that kind of ambition, and that could be his Ni vision. If you haven't already, i recommend you to watch this interview of him :. In INxPs, this manifests as a Ne-Ni feedback loop, which is why so many INxPs are great at storytelling and worldbuilding. Then Kubrick placed the caption “How a monkey looks to people” in the first picture and placed “and how people look to a monkey” in the second. I think Se is more direct in effect, Se is like direct sensation, that is, ISP art leaves you a clear immediate impression. "mechanical nature of MBTI" HAHAAAAAA True INFPs don't see MBTI as mechanical, fake INFP. Arguments for INTJ because "not lazy" seem as bad as arguments for INTP because "genius". @Speed Gavroche: I couldn't play the video. So, Lynch could still be an NP even if they both make very well crafted movies, but just one who really learned his craft. Going beyond that is a bit like trying to explain why you fell in love with your wife: she's intelligent, has brown eyes, a good figure. Honestly I'm not sure if you're serious most of the time myself. Also, Clint E is an 8w9 Sp/Sx while SK was a 5w4 So/Sx, and that change a lot of things about how they can think, act and look superficially, even if they share the same MBTI type. But management skills like that is more Te than anything. #butterfly, Yeah, I was thinking something thinking like that. Though, being playful and energetic in his childhood point SP, not NJ. But I'm not sure, it could be a 5w4 trait. But from interviews with him and people that worked with him, that's not Kubrick. Some times I think I am 92 year old gay Armenian man. For example, think about an N who is into photography. In my opinion type doesn't become clear until roughly age 15-20 (since Erikson's identity stage isn't over until then) but that's merely speculation on my part. But ISTP makes more sense than INTJ. I have in my computer, but I can’t find it online, so I’ll have to describe it. So because one ISTP you know doesn't like photography, what exactly are we supposed to think. I still see him as a bad-tempered perciever. If you disagree with any The down to earth anti-bullshit plumber type making one of the most abstract, forward thinking, philosophical, transcendental, slowest and ambient-like pieces of cinema which is 2001 Space Odyssey. ST-s are the best at dealing with whatever material resources they have, among the NTs, ENTJ succed as well but INTPs are far from it. And Woody Allen is playful not childish, and clearly a Ne user too. INTPs are well known for their brilliant theories and unrelenting logic, which makes sense since they are arguably the most logical minded of all the personality types.. I also don't believe this whole "Intuitives can't have aesthetic" nonsense. But the context of accuracy is bigger: he spents allot of them on researching the more concrete aspects of that movie, the whole context in which the movie is made has to be accurate. I don't remember the arguments, but the ones who argued for ISTP weren't the ones who knew him the least, as far as I remember. :P He's just straightforwardly telling exactly what happened. This in itself I think is suggestive of the same kind of detached pragmatism you see in your ISTP friend not getting the point of taking pictures. Study Kubrick alone, his persona and movies and no more. Introverted functions are the nitpicky ones so it's Ti-nitpick vs Ni-nitpick. The thing is, INTP have a kind of strong grid through which they asses the truth quality of ideas (think Einstein) meanwhile Kubrick was interested in stuff like whether ghosts exists and all kind of crackpot ideas exposed by the kind of people who wear tin-foil hats, so while his movies were shaped around his intellectual interests, it's not in intellectual throughesness that his strength lie, but in the kind of practical intelligence that is very good with using material resources to put together all those props and set designs that make a movie like 2001 put to shame productions made in. INFPs, like most introverts, are quiet and reserved. They prefer not to talk about themselves.. I've watched The Kill, Paths of Glory, 2001, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon and Fullmetal Jacket. "being into photography doesn't make you a sensing type. Whatever his type, he remains one of the most important geniuses in film-making, and an example of someone who created worlds, not just movies. So you still think he's ISTP. He's like: let's take this story/book and reduce it to its basics (Ti) + let's make this basics great through ''the language of cinema'' (Se+Ni). This might explain why many directors who otherwise seem rather clearly, imo, to be INTP (like Peter Jackson and Christopher Nolan) are still "a bit too warm to be INTPs" just like FP directors (like David Lynch and Nicolas Winding Refn) may seem a bit "too fierce" to be INFPs - successful people are usually very balanced examples of their type. Ti can only grow by seeking out the unexplainable, thus increasing its learning. My point was that he was too practical at gathering and managing resources to make the grand scale movies he did in order to be INTP. Also Enneagram type can't explain away everything related to Ni dominance, an ISTP 5w4 might have more developed Ni and perhaps even a Ti-Ni loop but will still be Ti-Dom, and I don't see Kubrick as Ti-Dom. Actually, I take my last comment back. No I am wrong. LOL neither Kubrick or his movies are childish at all. I don't even know where you are working from. I could go on. v=dobNhGq2RkEI think his most Ti-dom movie might be Barry Lyndon. Fi: "I just fell in love with the stories. It's just me with my mental disorders. Se is good at being in the moment and noticing the full picture sensory wise, but it doesn't give one aesthetic sensibility -like being Ti doesn't make one smart, or Fi doesn't make one a poet. Cheaters in his movies has nothing to do with him being INFP or not. I have a theory that the 6th function serves as a sort of "wall" between the top and bottom halves of the function stack, and as such it sometimes takes over the third function's duties. Photos are good at evoking certain moods, which is why Si is good for photography. It's likely the best photographers will be SP types. 5) On topic: I would like to see how you define Ne against Ni and how you see Kubrick as an Ne type and not an Ni type. Anyway, maybe that's one difference: both types would relay on deviations from what was intended in the beginning, but an NP work would carry its improvisational nature on its face, while an SP work will end up looking effortlesly coherent, like giving the impression there was no improvisation in the first place. But he's a P type anyway, so there's no point. But Stanley K was focused on sensory things with a distaste for books in his prime youth. I agree with the perceiver arguments but I'm not seeing Se at all. So he from the trees to the forest (as opposed from the forest to the trees INTJ), and perfectionism over efficiency. A movie director is ultimately a leader kind of person. You talk and tallk about him and I bet you haven't watched any of his movies. ESFJ is a safe bet. Kubrick is hard to type at the very least, and this impasse is indicative of that. #Scotty, It's the fact that INTPs aren't very focused, they're shooting in different directions which can very peculiar movies (Cronenberg) but would probably lead to wasting resources when it comes to making movies like 2001, and seeing that Kubrick was a full on auteur, I'm not sure he could have afforded this. So he's either ISTJ or INTJ. So I'd rather have us discuss things meaningfully instead of going on useless tirades. They get angry and demonic but they always keep cool no matter what, unless they have a gun near lol. That is, you're given some basic element and you can make your own movie out of it. And it explains better shining Fi. For example, I know a ISFP who is a voracious reader. This person will have little interest in taking pictures for aesthetical reasons, but will prefer to take ‘symbolic’ pictures, pictures that lead to speculation rather than contemplation of physical features, pictures that communicate something beyond what you see with your eyes. SJ's generally take the most photos though, then post them on Facebook as if anyone caresOmg. I've written before here why I think Kubrick is INTJ. He was striving for authenticity (Fi). Making a movie like 2001 requires really having your stuff together. I've read about it and it's complicated. There's so many different people who can be categorized as introverted, intuitive, thinking, and perceiving, and not all of them are awful at that kind of stuff. Or was it just something others said about him due to how accomplished he was. Even his interest in photography was expressed intuitively. A true master. This ISFP reads only for the pleasure of briefly picturing the images literally described in the book. Watch the rest too. So, he's a P type. And his obsession with Napoleon the ENTJ. And what if we talked about Fi vs Fe with Kubrick. On the other hand you have someone like GRRM with Si-problems (just adding and adding new stuff) and Nicolas Winding Refn with Te-problems (a nervous wreck). An ISTP who picks up a camera is also likely to be considered more "talented" than an INTJ who does, because photography is a very Se-heavy thing to be doing. However, because the Ni is externalized through another perceiving function (Ne) instead of a judging function (Te/Fe), its abstract ideas are not turned into concrete plans that can be executed, as they are in INxJs. I thought this was Te, but actually it's pretty ST. From what I understand from his interviews, Kubrick's process is different though. I've seen a video where he is filmed with Jack Nickolson (ESTP) they actually seemed very similar, but SK just being more introvert. It should be a progression of moods and feelings. com/culture/news/the-rolling-stone-interview-stanley-kubrick-in-1987-20110307. What I found in that quote it's that he said meaning and theme comes latter. the famous typewriter scene). Is it true that he wanted to make the best movie and every category. @HDr have you watched the movie. One's attitude to photography shows their preference for intuitive or sensing perception preference. Then I fart myself to sleep. You don't understand suppress Fe do you. Altough the thing with multiple takes is that it was Bresson's method (likely ITJ) and it was in order to make the actors more robotic. If we're going letter-by-letter I think it's clear that he's very J in his directorial approach and very N in that he's highly abstract and conceptual. Why, he might ask himself, should he bother to write a great symphony, or strive to make a living, or even to love another, when he is no more than a momentary microbe on a dust mote whirling through the unimaginable immensity of space. I heard that despite INTPs being messy, they can be very ordered when they have to, they just would rather not be. He cares about being emotional authentic and that sounds indeed like Fi on the surface, but I think this is just part in a bigger context of making the movie accurate: since ISTPs don't like bullshitting with emotion, yet they understand that emotion is important in a movie, so of course they don't want to bring fake emotionalism. See, this is why this movie rules. More than Kubrick I blame ice queen INFJ Nicole Kidman for making "Eyes Wide Shut" feel cold. But I even knew an ISxJ with whom I could discuss about all kinds of nerdy, science stuff, so it's impossible to have an ISTP, who are Ti-doms, really into that kind of stuff. Discover Array, and more, famous people, fictional characters and celebrities here!. R Scott is 100% ISTP tho. They may not like doing it, which could be where his asshole attitude comes from, but capability. Several years ago I downloaded a pdf with some of these works and there is one picture there that stuck with me over the years. And INTPs are not less bookish than INTJs by any mean. Next time you try to be a smart-ass, make sure you're at least smart, otherwise you're just an ass. He tethers the line between nihilism and absurdism. I give up on you.
. I don't pretend those quotes are conclusive, but together they show a certain direction that fits with arguments give below. What happened. Insn't that the coolest thing in the world. " As an INTP myself, I tend to be interested in conspiracy theories, fringe science, etc. So Kubrick being INTJ has strong Ti (6th). A lot of critics have accused it of being a childish treatment of the topic whereas I've heard it said that Kubrick thought of it as his most important movie or something. I've never been bookish, am over 19, and I'm an INP. Total clusterfuck of moral ambiguity. sooooooooooooooooo @bobnickmad After all your confusing babbling what do you think his type is. By contrast Kubrick is much more rigid, inflexible, and symbolic/mystical to the point that he's not down-to-earth or realistic, in fact he said magical realism, mythology, and fantasy capture his sense of reality better than realism does. Taking complete control from the fiscal aspects to set and ligthning to where and how the movies must be distributed is seen a sign of ST but it could rather be Te instead. Kubrick started as photographer, an excellent ont. Kubrick was obviously a very strong introvert, and he could be an INTJ whose Te has taken on traits of Ti, or an INTP whos Ne has taken on traits of Ni. Still, I wanna know better how an SP and an NP would differ in how they approach film-making itself. The magic of this page happened. I agree that aesthetics is not S over N (you'l find many SPs not giving a shit about it and N who do), for example I think Chan Work-Park is INTJ and his movies have some of the best cinematography ever, and I woul put him over Kubrick. Really there's no message or vision put forward with that movie, and even there's one, it's very subtle. I haven't yet worked out how dom-tert loops would occur in this system, but I plan to develop the theory further. IT LOOKS PHONY". Me and idlebody align so much when typing people; must be our tritype even when we're different MBTI. < Anyway, I definitely agree that Lynch *may* still be an INFP. I'm starting to appreciate the ISTP argument a bit more from a certain functions perspective (one which I don't agree with, but the reasoning is sound enough once you start there)@Ventus, I do think that his "directive" style (not directorial really) leans to J (not ISTP) Which is why I can't say he's a sure INTP. Kubrick's movies aren't really like that. I've seen you make similar arguments many times, but I think that NP's are the most likely to master a craft to be used as an outlet for creativity. I think STJ are more likely to be black-and-white due to Si-Fi but Ni-dominance can give plenty of ambiguity. has, which requires a very imaginative kind of logic. And INFPs love jazz too. I don't know for sure so please share your views. it's a minor detail but it's very telling. Because of that you may say this person is N. Strong argument here. No way he's a Ti-dom. Just look at Ridley Scott's (ISTP director) wife. I'm still leaning towards ISTP, but I could see INTP with developed 6th-place Ni. I don't talk to trolls. Kubrick went to a zoo and took the picture of a monkey behind the bars of his cage. And he's really concerned about that. @Speed Gavroche: I agree that Eastwood isn't the "stereotypical cowboy" but is interested in making movies more meaningful and spiritual than that. Reading it all, it seems that what matters for him foremost is ''accuracy''. Just speculating, and not being sure I understand the wavelength you're on here, speaking both from experience and reading about NPs - I think NPs are the ones who tend to have the great elevator pitches. The 100% certified INTJ I know is fond and somewhat talented with nature photography. What it's more interesting question to me is: how does an SP approaches film-making compared to an NP. : that person is good at this, this one is good at this, together they can help me create this scene; that is: to see how all the pieces fit best together. Regardless, Kubrick's behavior seems more P than J, which is why I think ISTP is more likely. As for the Playboy interview, imo Kubrick sounds very similar to Woody Allen (ISTP). @thedude "apart from Bonita's ridiculous rant about Allen being INFP which is a joke" If you call me ridiculous then you're calling ridiculous to everyone who has their own theories about typing. Like with the monkeys and monolith scene. Thinking more about ISP art and INP art. v=FR-loS9MHww In his childhood, SK was playful and energetic, and also cerebral and analitycal. To be the debate remains between INTJ and ISTP with arguments weighing in favour of INTJ. No, it's not, it's independent of MBTI, the same way Enneagram is independent of MBTI. In this and other interviews (such as for Barry Lyndon) the way he looks at film-making seems to be: take the material, reduce it to the essential structure by throwing away all it's irrelevant, and then find the best why of doing the movie scene by scene. For example David Lynch almost feels improvised a lot of the time whereas Tim Burton movies are usually very coherent. Since he's been brought up a bit recently, thought it'd be worth rehashing this discussion. have you ever met true ISTPs in REAL life. No, I meant with someone like David Lynch, when making Eraserhead, he was into the more ''physical'' aspects of movie-making, such as building the sets and prop, plus having an eye for how lightning would create certain effects without needing to use expensive special effects. It's about what typing is most reasonable and has the strongest arguments. You are getting smaller and smaller, I guess my INTJ arguments are winning lolISTPs don't give a fuck about emotions unless it affects them personally. And the kind of skill that requires to use the limited amount of time and use of materials that can be afforded to basically construct elaborate scenes, you need a more practical kind of intelligence. It's all about Si. Though I still see INTJ, thank you Speed Gavroche for your well-reasoned rebuttals. ISTPs aRe usually laid back and seem unconcerned but when it comes to the craft or art they like, their perfectionistic instincts kick in. A Ti-dom would be far too lazy to achieve nearly as much as he did. Instead it's all about how the scenes are constructed. It has nothing to do with Se. He has made about a movie every year since the 60s-70s. Nooo, but I've watched a ton of his movies, documentaries, read about his life, quotes, etc.