Sign Up | Log in |

Stanley Kubrick Myers-Brigs type - MBTI, enneagram and personality type info

Stanley Kubrick MBTI personality type cover chart

has to be a master of one, jack of one type of person, so maybe those are the ISPs. Yes, I agree too. @Speed Gavroche: I agree that Eastwood isn't the "stereotypical cowboy" but is interested in making movies more meaningful and spiritual than that. I've written before here why I think Kubrick is INTJ. Strong F too; very sensitive. ISTP director Ridley Scott: writer of ZERO of his movies. Saying that photography and distaste for reading books points to Se is not a very good argument. 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. Check it out, Alex. most of which have to do with the human psyche. They are extroverted, idealistic, charismatic, outspoken, highly principled and ethical, and usually know how to connect!. 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. 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). You know the arguments are getting really good when we type based on laziness. From what I can tell there is very, very little sincere emotion in his movies. :( 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. Anyway, this is one of the reason I once thought he must have been INTJ. So, he's a P type. *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. And INFPs can love jazz, but being a workaholic who likes playing clarinet - that's a lot of Se. But that's what the critics said. 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. 1) Niels Bohr isn't even Ni-Ti loop, he is a perfectly Ni-Fe-Ti INFJ. But ISTP makes more sense than INTJ. Just look at Ridley Scott's (ISTP director) wife. I think an INTJ would make a more 'forceful' in meaning movie than that. 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. In A Clockwork Orange, he'll show the downside of free will and morality and then flip it around to show the opposite. The best I can do is to say I just fell in love with the stories. This has nothing to do with IXTPs not being talented filmakers, but photography pure and alone.

. Someone hacked my account. Most of his films are so morally ambiguous. Look, everyone can make a movie provided they have the ambition, work ethic and skill necessary. 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. And chess is, by far, more an N thing than an S thing. 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. Lower Fe and Fi can look very similar. The magic of this page happened. And he's really concerned about that. He makes his film crew and actors redo scenes about a hundred times, he makes them do everything the long and hard way. His characters will cheat a lot, but have this one person they keep coming back to or something. 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. Well that makes it easier for me. This discussion is a muddle now. It has nothing to do with Se. So because one ISTP you know doesn't like photography, what exactly are we supposed to think. "This discussion is a muddle now. *''that for him it's NOT the Ni idea/theme/concept that drives the movie''. But he's a P type anyway, so there's no point. "Then this is not the place for me. 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. 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. If you haven't already, i recommend you to watch this interview of him :. Too intelligent, creatively independent and knowledgeable to be ISTP. That's why INTJ makes more sense than INTP. Se in general IS a lot less abstract. *"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. But yeah, different types would be into photography for different reason. 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. @scotty -_- His voice, spirit and intelligence turn me on, so he must be an INTJ. As for the Playboy interview, imo Kubrick sounds very similar to Woody Allen (ISTP). 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. 2001 A Space Odyssey was like a anthropological study on mankind and human behavior. So I'd rather have us discuss things meaningfully instead of going on useless tirades. It's all about Si. I know that Kubrick doesn't use introverted thinking. It's likely the best photographers will be SP types. 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. Insn't that the coolest thing in the world. Out of Ti, Te, Ni, Ne the one function I really think that he lacks is Te. @bobnickmad "Kubrick // One-Point Perspective" https://vimeo. #butterfly, Yeah, I was thinking something thinking like that. You may have read Arthur C. But ISTPs are. But the ISTP I know never takes photographs, literally never; doesn't even like to carry stuff around. 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. The problem with this argumentation is the ‘on average’. 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. Can you at least try to respond to my post. Did my video go over your head @bobnickmad. How about we organize what we know about SK, his early life, his artistic inclination, his N-ness &/or his S-ness etc. From what I understand from his interviews, Kubrick's process is different though. They get angry and demonic but they always keep cool no matter what, unless they have a gun near lol. 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. And "Eyes Wide Shut" was criticized for not being close or authentic to emotions, kind of cold. And then I have this idea for a factory scene which also makes me feel weird. Also, yeah, he had a voracious intellect and all kind of N like interests. 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. 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. INTJ with a strong P preference. Kubrick is hard to type at the very least, and this impasse is indicative of that. That's something of a physical feat. But I'm not sure, it could be a 5w4 trait. v=GSgbjhuQ4CoSomeone uploaded "Funeral Parade of Roses" in full to YT yesterday. So, this is what I meant by ''craft''. I mean, I can't see Eraserhead being done like that. 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. So all of that is purely anecdotal with possibility of error in perception. The issue is with lack of evidence for Ni-dom and ISTJ is out of the question, he was no N inferior. check, I know, a woman signing from inside an radiator. the famous typewriter scene). are you an iNtuitive. 6) I appreciate if your replies are devoid of sourness and concern with topic at hand. I also disagree Allen's necessarily Ne, though I see how it might seem like it at first. 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. 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. 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 (. This probably explains why it's so talked about in the history of movies. So, I guess he's Thinker-Aesthete-Sage. In INxPs, this manifests as a Ne-Ni feedback loop, which is why so many INxPs are great at storytelling and worldbuilding. 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. Se is all about action, motion, whatever. A lot of people were offended by the almost childish treatment of these heavy topics. 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. 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. edu/krb5476/wp-content/uploads/sites/8471/2014/04/etc_woody26_950. I don't talk to trolls. I think an NP would be bored thinking about things that are as incredibly nonsensical as what you describe all day long. I am confused here. Moving beyond the anecdotal, I think using someone's bookishness as evidence for a particular typing is circumstantial at best. 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. 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. Because of that you may say this person is N. Reading it all, it seems that what matters for him foremost is ''accuracy''. Welcome to MBTIBase - PersonalityBase, here you can learn about Stanley Kubrick MBTI type.. 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. What I disagree is that INTP artist wouldn't be an extreme perfectionists, I think every self-respecting artist is a perfectionist. I disagree with you on just a couple of instances otherwise I admire most of what you post here. And it's a very faithful rendition of Schnitzler's story too (unlike The Shining). Next time you try to be a smart-ass, make sure you're at least smart, otherwise you're just an ass. @bobnickmad Photography has jackshit to do with Se. So, I can see a genius SP making very good use of its Ni, like in the case of Michelangelo and others. 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. I don't pretend those quotes are conclusive, but together they show a certain direction that fits with arguments give below. 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. LOL neither Kubrick or his movies are childish at all. 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. So you still think he's ISTP. Because, on typology, what truly matters is not the activity itself, but the way a person faces this activity. And a few ENFP who seem to use Fe as much as Fi, but again clear perceivers. 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. There i said it. Since he's been brought up a bit recently, thought it'd be worth rehashing this discussion. And his obsession with Napoleon the ENTJ. So are other great ISTP filmmakers like Woody Allen and Ridley Scott. Instead it's all about how the scenes are constructed. Photography is totally static. 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. Stanley Cube-Brick is no squareWoody Allen is still INFP to me no matter what you say and/or accomodate. 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. I don't know where you are getting S/Se from that. 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. It is not anything in particular. 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. He is almost certainly an ISTP. Watch the rest too. 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. Sometimes I think you're just really young though. No I am wrong. '';''There is no deliberate pattern to the stories that I have chosen to make into films. For example, think about an N who is into photography. 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. Is it true that he wanted to make the best movie and every category. He truly started reading books at 19, when his Ni was growing. 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. But depending on the type they'll approach movie making differently. He took a step by step approach, dealing with each scene in a perfectionist manner, and than arriving at the end result. 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. I think a good real-life example of an INTP in a Ne-Ni feedback loop would be Philip K. 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. ", "It should be a progression of moods and feelings". 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. 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. Look at Wong Kar-Wai films. 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. @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. You can't type someone based on what they look in a partner. Kubrick isn't like that. 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. They may not like doing it, which could be where his asshole attitude comes from, but capability. About the only factor at work each time is that I try not to repeat myself. Nevertheless I do think Kubrick is SP, but not because his movies excel visually. It does look amazing. Strong argument here.

. Though, it was interesting; I'm honoured to have crossed the sword with you gentlemen. He's pretty clearly INTJ. And ISTP directors like Woody Allen or Clint Eastwood are some of the most prolific directors you can think of. I think Se is more direct in effect, Se is like direct sensation, that is, ISP art leaves you a clear immediate impression. 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. This discussion has turned into reiterations at this point. v=FR-loS9MHww In his childhood, SK was playful and energetic, and also cerebral and analitycal. And let's this, let's that. A movie director is ultimately a leader kind of person. About your copy/pasta:. And it never was. 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. And SK's Ni is obvious. So according to bobnick, INTPs can't make grand scale movies or something, because what exactly. 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. 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. 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. Honestly I'm not sure if you're serious most of the time myself. Kubrick's movies aren't really like that. I have a much better imagination than that :D How do you hack everyones accounts. 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. 4) You show clear bias against Ni in your second comment which I fail to understand. 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. And it's all about trying to make the movie as accurate as possible, over being concerned with an overall view point. Like bobnickmad said, having aesthetic/visual interests doesn't necessarily preclude one type over the other. I thought this was Te, but actually it's pretty ST. Also agree with Scotty that Te doesn't seem fitting with Kubrick. 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. ISTP just fits perfectly. I went on the INTJ reddit and found some morally ambiguous INTJs. 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. It’s true that, on average, those are more Se traits. And INTPs are not less bookish than INTJs by any mean. 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. Study Kubrick alone, his persona and movies and no more. ISTP hate phony fake emotions as much as Fi users due to the negative relationship they have with Fe. Napoleon is a big historical figure and of universal interest. Clarke's (INTP) novelization, but it's not considered the same story by Kubrick. As insane as all this sounds I wanted to post it. I imagine being me. He once said, "Be suspicious of people who have, or crave, power. What I mean by this, it's that it's not a complete movie, but the skeleton of a movie. What 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. has, which requires a very imaginative kind of logic. You can ctrl+F to find his post but Kubrick is just plain intuitive. You could think ISTPs because of Se would like it, but no; they don't have that drive at all. Here you can explore of famous people and fictional characters.. It's not Fi, just a need for truthfulness that Ti-doms share as well. I heard that despite INTPs being messy, they can be very ordered when they have to, they just would rather not be. I'am an ESTP and I'm quite bookish mmyself. Watch this, he is clearly INTP, Ti-Ne, intuitive, perceiving, however you want to look at it: https://www. 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. However Ni, Ne deal with mental framework and not content so different types can be creative in their own ways. com/2016/06/08/6th-function-of-introverts-visual-reading VIDEO: https://www. 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. v=xa-KBqOFgDQI have seen the movie and I think it's quite INFJ-ish. Textbook ISTP. It's similar to Michelangelo style, such as God pointing his finger at Adam. 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. Compare with an INTJ like, say, David Fincher. INTPs aren't able to solve all kinds of difficult problems. 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. Again, I'm thinking Michelangelo and people like that. One's attitude to photography shows their preference for intuitive or sensing perception preference. I've read about it and it's complicated. R Scott is 100% ISTP tho. Also, remember that Kubrick did not build his own sets himself. "WWOOW Just chill, maaan. 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. ISTP is a very directive type, so ccan look J, and the Ti-Ni loop can make them look N. Never, ever go near power. sooooooooooooooooo @bobnickmad After all your confusing babbling what do you think his type is. It's like when a thing or place has a certain "feeling" to it. But Lynch by comparison doesn't seem like Kubrick. Funnily enough, I also know a really bookish ISTP. I still see him as a bad-tempered perciever. But management skills like that is more Te than anything. You just need to have a certain ability. It is not supposed to be warm. #idlebody Te is focused on efficiency, not Ti who's more individualistic and thus highly perfectionistic. 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. 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. 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. 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. Imo, all this only makes sense with Kubrick being a Inferior Fe user. v=QsSV6yZZIVkI personally consider Eyes wide shut to be one of his best. He tethers the line between nihilism and absurdism. he's like the perfect man for me, all 4 INXXs blended in one perfect human being. The role of the director is to figure out how to put together the input of all those people, eg. Also, Woody and Clint are ISTP which is why their focus is on aesthetic, so I don't think that goes against INTP. Just listen to it and change your votes:. I have in my computer, but I can’t find it online, so I’ll have to describe it. I told in my previous post that later I found someone else online saying the same about many other ISTPs. Making a movie like 2001 requires really having your stuff together. 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. His engineering approach, meticulosity and problem solving skills are more to do with him being very T, not with being S. Loyal to their peers and to their internal value systems, but not overly concerned with respecting laws and rules if they get in the way of getting something done. Detached and analytical, they excel at finding solutions to practical problems.. doesn't seem much concerned with message of his films. 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. There's no way Kubrick was unhealthy like Dick, he had his quircks but in interviews he sounds very sane. 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 think STJ are more likely to be black-and-white due to Si-Fi but Ni-dominance can give plenty of ambiguity. Woody Allen is not ISTP but INFP. ) in spamming. I think that is very telling in how he took such an absurdly Ne approach to photography even in his teenage years. There's also this subtle irony going through all of the 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. Fi: "I just fell in love with the stories. Take "The Shining" for example. 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. The more I read about Kubrick, the more INTJ he gets. @HDr have you watched the movie. I've seen a video where he is filmed with Jack Nickolson (ESTP) they actually seemed very similar, but SK just being more introvert. 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. ” So, this go along the way that for him is the Ni idea that leads the movie, but rather Ni adds to the movie. 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. 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’. I haven't yet worked out how dom-tert loops would occur in this system, but I plan to develop the theory further. He's definitely an INTP. @Speed Gavroche: I couldn't play the video. N types, on the other hand, face activities in an opposite way. Bob Dylan generally wrote songs about reality. Dick in his 1970s period. I take hundreds when on vacation. 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. Cheaters in his movies has nothing to do with him being INFP or not. 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. 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. So he's either ISTJ or INTJ. I'm not saying Kubrick was as unhealthy as Dick, I was just using Dick as an example of my theory. 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. Also too close to Nietsxzsszxzdszche. 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. 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. Just wanted to add my sweet discovery. Actually, I take my last comment back. He was striving for authenticity (Fi). In the deepest sense, I believe in man’s potential and in his capacity for progress. Versus INtuitive Kubrick, writer of most of his movies. Your way of arguing however insists that all creative types must be Ne types, which is true in many instances but not all. It should be a progression of moods and feelings. Have you really said anything. There's a reason why "production designer," "set decorator," "cinematographer," and "crew" are listed in the credits of every movie. 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. It’s about living that moment. < Anyway, I definitely agree that Lynch *may* still be an INFP. A Ti-dom would be far too lazy to achieve nearly as much as he did. 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. 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. Introverted functions are the nitpicky ones so it's Ti-nitpick vs Ni-nitpick. i crossed the line there XDHe's pretty clearly both N and PAn ISTP could never EVER pull off a movie like Dr. @scotty: The two most bookish people I know are INTP and ENFP, so I'm not so sure that's accurate. 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. Every person’s preference can be found on a spectrum, so just choose the letter you identify with most.. INTJ by letter, probably Jungian Ti type. Se likes immediate stimulation, not slow contemplation. Si isn't about "remembering the past" or whatever. @bobnickmad Can I call you bobovska from now on. I think Lynch is more like, "Okay, if you eat that chicken that is going to make me feel really weird. I don't know for sure so please share your views. Really there's no message or vision put forward with that movie, and even there's one, it's very subtle. But reading for this ISFP has nothing to do with speculative thinking; it’s a compulsive activity, similar to physical exercise. Thinking more about ISP art and INP art. You are in the best place to test MBTI and learn what type Stanley Kubrick likely is!. I also don't see why it's easier to make appeal to a 6th rather than a very well 3rd function. " or something like that. 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. But Stanley K was focused on sensory things with a distaste for books in his prime youth. 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. I had this idea about 2001 and wanted to share. v=QsSV6yZZIVkAlso, ultra-developed Ti can sometimes seem like Ni from an external perspective. In making a movie, you don't need that, because you don't need to explain stuff, you need to show it. To me, the only real immorality is that which endangers the species; and the only absolute evil, that which threatens its annihilation. NP prefer shiny objects, but not as much as SP. " No, but when at the same time you reject theory and books, that make you a Sensor. I've never been bookish, am over 19, and I'm an INP. The issue here is Ni-dom. Jung theorized that the dominant function acts alone in its preferred world: exterior for extraverts and interior for introverts.. More than Kubrick I blame ice queen INFJ Nicole Kidman for making "Eyes Wide Shut" feel cold. Eyes wide shut is adapted from Schnitzler's Traumnovelle. What is the best option for the MBTI type of Stanley Kubrick? What about enneagram and other personality types?. 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). 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. That is, you're given some basic element and you can make your own movie out of it. So Kubrick being INTJ has strong Ti (6th). '';''“A film is - or should be - more like music than like fiction. Going by function stacks (which I abandoned anyway) ,there's no Se in 2001. I admit that's atypical for a N type but you can't call the S/N on that alone. 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. 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. It's about what typing is most reasonable and has the strongest arguments. Like "let's do a dream heist movie" or "Johnny Depp with scissors for hands finds love with Winona Ryder". Not only with his movies, but in his photographic works. have you ever met true ISTPs in REAL life. I know this isn't really orthodox when it comes to functions but something I've noticed in people. A lot of people forget that despite his perfectionism, he liked to take his time on projects and not rush things. I give up on you. I'm still leaning towards ISTP, but I could see INTP with developed 6th-place Ni. ") 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. I know one ESFP afraid of flying and he has beard and bushy eyebrows just like Stanley had so I think ESFP. I know an INTP afraid of flying. The question is if he is more S or N, and more P or J. @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. 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. 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. But yeah I am quite sure he is a T. On the other hand you will likely find plenty of INTJs who are not interested in photography. His voice and spirit, I meant. He wasn't all that focused with philosophical concepts. 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. lol, so much bickering about whether an INTP is an ISTP or INTJ. 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. And fear of flying is very INXJ. You can hear Kubrick in The Shining "Rare Behind The Scenes Footage" saying to top actress Shelley Duvall: "IT LOOKS FAKE, IT REALY DOES. 2) Witt is an Ni-dom to say the least, again not INTP for sure. 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. *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. Childish about love/human relationships. ARTICLE: http://leontsao. And no Ni isn't particularly associated with creativity but Fi is. So he from the trees to the forest (as opposed from the forest to the trees INTJ), and perfectionism over efficiency. So, Lynch could still be an NP even if they both make very well crafted movies, but just one who really learned his craft. "Replace "visual" with "graphic" ^_^@bobnickmad It's the visual definition of healthy Ni. Also I think 5w4 is attracted to this kind of ambiguity as opposed to let's say a 1. v=dobNhGq2RkEI think his most Ti-dom movie might be Barry Lyndon. Photos are good at evoking certain moods, which is why Si is good for photography. 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. :P He's just straightforwardly telling exactly what happened. 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. Kubrick started as photographer, an excellent ont. I find all this so funny because. Though I still see INTJ, thank you Speed Gavroche for your well-reasoned rebuttals. "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. Te requires efficiency but Kubrick seems to sacrifice efficiency in favour of rigorous perfection. But we can see that he was more concrete and playful. Def an INXX: too muck liking of INXX writers (Nabokov, Burgess, King). @gink, good that you brought up the photography thing. com/culture/news/the-rolling-stone-interview-stanley-kubrick-in-1987-20110307. 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. 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. Hence why I believe Stanley must have been INTP. Most INFPs would be horrified, lol. Can't refind it. 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. SJ's generally take the most photos though, then post them on Facebook as if anyone caresOmg. Nooo, but I've watched a ton of his movies, documentaries, read about his life, quotes, etc. 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. Just look at the words in the first 30 seconds of documentary Kubrick INTJ A life in pictures: https://www. @bobnickmad You are my pet now. 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). 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. His lovely Fi shines through in his interviews. And I agree with impecable: INTJs (but also ISTPs) are more driven and focused than INTPs. I also don't believe this whole "Intuitives can't have aesthetic" nonsense. 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. What you posted is all Se though. 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. That new system of you sounds so much like trolling, to hide the fact that Kubrick was an INTJ. They may not like doing it, which could be where his asshole attitude comes from, but capability. Didn't read through all of the discussion so far, but I think Kubrick is ISTP. XDNietzsche is the posterboy of morally ambiguos INTJ for example. Just answer the four letters. All of these things makes it hard to take anything you say seriously. Ti can only grow by seeking out the unexplainable, thus increasing its learning. 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). Are you going to keep repeating the same thing about books. " As an INTP myself, I tend to be interested in conspiracy theories, fringe science, etc. After watching 2001 you remain perplexed, which seems to be more INP art. Yeah, good point Butterfly. 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. 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. The MBTI questionnaire sorts people into one of 16 different personality types.. INTP are logical nitpicks and INTJ are nitpicky about the perception. 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. 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. page=5 Here he talks about Fullmetal Jacket, a very S movie compared to high N of 2001 or Clockwork Orange. It's all so complicated with him. For example, I know a ISFP who is a voracious reader. Or was it just something others said about him due to how accomplished he was. It's mostly about how unnatural and unaccomplished the relationship between Kidman and Cruise - in the movie - was portrayed. I don't think I will argue more until I have some other insight or see something truly new on this page. Still, as I've written a lot about before, I think the total impression clicks better with ISFP. 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. What it's more interesting question to me is: how does an SP approaches film-making compared to an NP. No, it's not, it's independent of MBTI, the same way Enneagram is independent of MBTI. You mean workaholic as in insanely creative. 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. 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. It's TJs rather than SPs who are seen as being responsible and in full control of everything like that. Still, I wanna know better how an SP and an NP would differ in how they approach film-making itself. But look at this vid: https://www. INTJs can sometimes be ridiculously black-and-white about moral and ethical issues which is why Kubrick's moral ambiguity keeps me wondering. But from interviews with him and people that worked with him, that's not Kubrick. And the INTP I know goes a step further and says: "I don't understand why people take photographs". The 100% certified INTJ I know is fond and somewhat talented with nature photography. His focus seemed more to make a point with this picture than to display something physically interesting. He's also a pretty cynical, pragmatic workaholic who plays clarinet as a hobby and believes in Freudian psychoanalysis (Tertiary Ni). Kubrick went to a zoo and took the picture of a monkey behind the bars of his cage. It's like he doesn't care what his movies are even about. The same way Lynch is Dreamer-Aesthete-Sage I guess. I don't think an SPs work will necessarily look coherent and an NPs work necessarily look improvised though. 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. 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. * Also it should go without saying that any comments of mine in disagreement with you aren't an attack on you. 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. 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. He's a very hard case. @bob, what does being "good at your craft" or "craftsman" have to do with SP over NP. You're too easy to sway, which is a higher sin than having and ruling a personal stance like I do. What I found in that quote it's that he said meaning and theme comes latter. And INFPs love jazz too. 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. 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. It's just me with my mental disorders. (I thought I was about to make friends with Scotty again, but I think he must really be annoyed with me now). In this site you can find out which of the 16 types this character 'Stanley Kubrick' belongs to!. 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. do you know who Peter Sellers is. 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). A true master. Even his interest in photography was expressed intuitively. Is the first 19 years of his life your only argument. 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. I mean, think of all the big budget SF movies and how few of them achieved what 2001 achieved. IT LOOKS PHONY". It may seem cold at first, but there are occasional moments of Fe melodrama (e. 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. INTP can be extremely nitpicky about wanting things a certain way, and it's from a different basis than INTJ. Actually, you could say MBTI deals with the How. 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. Hmmmm, I've never really thought about this, but it's an interesting question. 2001: A Space Odyssey it's an ''interactive movie''. 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. To be the debate remains between INTJ and ISTP with arguments weighing in favour of INTJ. I tried to say something about that earlier but you really explained it much nicer. ISTPs aRe usually laid back and seem unconcerned but when it comes to the craft or art they like, their perfectionistic instincts kick in. 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. : 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. " 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). of personality, Enneagram with the Why. Don't become friends with anyone who has real power. 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. I agree with the perceiver arguments but I'm not seeing Se at all. If former he is more likely an ISTP, if latter he can be an INTJ. This ISFP reads only for the pleasure of briefly picturing the images literally described in the book. 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. Similar kind of perfectionism, but a much more bussiness-like attitude with more focus on efficiency. When the NP starts working though, they can't keep focus and continue adding and adding new cool ideas within their cool idea. 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. It seems like an example of just trowing crazy ideas together: chicken that bleeds when you try to eat it. Me and idlebody align so much when typing people; must be our tritype even when we're different MBTI. Ti-dom but where is this Se. INTJs highly appreciate intelligence in a partner more than looks: "why you fell in love with your wife: she's intelligent". I think the frustration of looking for that quote messed me up or something. specifically *because* they're "crackpot ideas" with no clear answer. The reason is that there is no Fi in his films. 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). and then dismantle it and look at it with another angle without preconceptions. @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. Also, Leon Tsao explains in this video how your 6th cognitive function is strong. Then I fart myself to sleep. I've watched The Kill, Paths of Glory, 2001, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon and Fullmetal Jacket. And what if we talked about Fi vs Fe with Kubrick. Any type can be bookish, as types don't define broad interests and behaviors of individuals. Regardless, Kubrick's behavior seems more P than J, which is why I think ISTP is more likely. He has made about a movie every year since the 60s-70s. The theme, what's behind the emotion, the meaning, all that comes later. jpegYeah, he just moves from one hectic production to the next. Photography as in taking pictures of your life to commemorate it, is a very Si thing, but that wasn't what he did. it's a minor detail but it's very telling. 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. 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. Kubrick didn't make that many movies, it took him forever to achieve a project. 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. He display a lot of the same childishness about love that Kubrick does in Eyes Wide Shut, for example. "being into photography doesn't make you a sensing type. You don't understand suppress Fe do you. He doesn't at all care about doing things as quickly as possible. 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. Have you watched his stand up comedy on YT. I could have searched for it below but the admin deleted my older posts. 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. I think you can compare Kubrick to someone like Michelangelo for example. 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. Are there no moderators on this site. INTPs aren't able to solve all kinds of difficult problems. I could see him as ISTP. There's no immediate impression, the point is to raise in the viewer lots of questions about what is that he's seeing. Study ISTP Ridley Scott then. 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. 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. 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. Like with the monkeys and monolith scene. 3 days ago it was 48 votes ISTP and 44 votes INTJ. 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. 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. No way he's a Ti-dom. ESFJ is a safe bet. The detachment and contemplative tone of his movies is probably a 5w4 thing. #Bonita, No, I just didn't find it very helpful, sorry. < I guess NTP directors, who have Ti, are a bit better than NFPs directors in seeing things through. 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. 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. MBTI is not politics or religion though. For me INTJ are Ni-Te-Ti and INTP Ti-Ne-Ni, so having strong Te and Ti characteristics fits INTJ. I guess it's almost like it converges aspect of MBTI and Enneagram. , and my system tries to give some approximate answer to both. Do ISTPs behave like that. 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. Though, being playful and energetic in his childhood point SP, not NJ. NJ's are much more into pleasure reading than NP's from what I've seen. His conclusion: "His focus seemed more to make a point with this picture than to display something physically interesting. Excuse my redaction tonight, but I was thinking this. 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. And this seems to be Kubrick’s case. 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. 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. "mechanical nature of MBTI" HAHAAAAAA True INFPs don't see MBTI as mechanical, fake INFP. " Yes, exactly. So, Ti and Se, and by the age of 19 he started reading books and develop his Ni. Total clusterfuck of moral ambiguity. Ideally it's like math/science. But then at the same time, I don't know about INTJ. No person with much Se would nave made such a slow movie. For example David Lynch almost feels improvised a lot of the time whereas Tim Burton movies are usually very coherent. 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. ''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. Some times I think I am 92 year old gay Armenian man. To me this is N really. What are you talking about. #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. The point is: he was very resourceful. 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. And it explains better shining Fi. Photography is NOT Se. Arguments for INTJ because "not lazy" seem as bad as arguments for INTP because "genius". 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. 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. 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. 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. And Woody Allen is playful not childish, and clearly a Ne user too. Overall, I think it can be made a good case that Kubrick showed both strong Te and Ti characteristics. "I wanna know better how an SP and an NP would differ in how they approach film-making itself". INFPs, like most introverts, are quiet and reserved. They prefer not to talk about themselves.. People who have Ti are the type who want to do things effectively for the least amount of work. Man, these sensations of weirdness are interesting. I know one INFJ and one INTJ, both afraid of airplanes. 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!. 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. " I think the challenge for the NP will be to balance their "idea machine"-like quality with routine (Si) and see-through (Te). You talk and tallk about him and I bet you haven't watched any of his movies. 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. Gink has the best post in this whole page (I haven't seen him elsewhere, a true one hit wonder it seems). Discover Array, and more, famous people, fictional characters and celebrities here!. It's dangerous. See, this is why this movie rules. 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. If you enjoyed this entry, find out about the personality types of Acting and Movie Industry characters list.. 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. I don't even know where you are working from. There used to be comments about that, I guess he was a formalist or something. 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. Obvious Ni is obvious, cunt. "You don’t stop being concerned with man because you recognize his essential absurdities and frailties and pretensions. I could go on.

Stanley Kubrick
The new website will come out in ~10 days (hopefully before New Year), and meanwhile Im collecting money for the server, so please excuse the excessive ads for a while. Also Happy Christmas and New Year, although I gotta be working. Thank you for supporting the development!

MBTI enneagram type of Stanley Kubrick Realm:

Category: Acting and Movie Industry

Log in to add a comment.

Comments

Sort (descending) by: Date posted | Most voted