“Don’t say anything. Don’t say anything!” These are the words running through my mind whenever I watch a movie with a friend.
One of the dilemmas that comes with being an intellectual INTJ is that I have to analyze everything —and not in the silent TiNe way that an INTP would, but in the NiTe way. Introverted Intuition (Ni) is rigged to isolate problems, and as Ni-dominants, INTJs inevitably find something wrong with everything. Te then vocalizes it.
TiNe analyses everything from a logical, but possibility based perspective. NiTe analyses everything in a let’s-look-for-the-weaknesses-and-eliminate-them kind of way. Both logical, just oriented toward different end goals.
As a result, I end up insulting loads of fandoms without realizing it, because my analysis is completely detached from any emotion and purely objective.
Of course, the people who get insulted are only insulted because their fanaticism is based off of an emotional or hormonal attachment to said fandom. Therefore, they make themselves blind to the fandom’s fallacies and feel personally attacked when anyone points them out.
I do notice Ne-doms are fairly good at predicting things in film as well, but not quite as good as Ni doms. A lot of times Ne’s will try to predict things, but be slightly off.
For instance, I watched The Amazing Spiderman 2 with an ENFP. She had no clue that Gwen Stacy was going to die, but I figured it out within the first fifteen minutes of the show… ENFP was predicting that Harry Osborn would have feelings for Gwen Stacy…
Non-Ni users trying to predict the future
INFJs are pretty good at predicting things in movies –but different things than INTJs. INTJs will logically predict the sequence of events and isolate what’s wrong with the movie. INFJs will predict the emotional character arc. INTJ says, “that person will die by the end of the movie.” INFJ says, “that person will develop (or spiral downward) by the end of the movie.”
Either way, INFJs kindly predict in a way that doesn’t ruin the movie for everyone else, whereas INTJs logically pick everything apart, telling you what’s going to happen before it does and what’s wrong with the plot etc.
For those who don’t have an INTJ friend to do this for them, let me give a few examples. WARNING: offences dealt to multiple fandoms.
And if you ever do watch a movie with an INTJ who’s comfortable enough around you to comment during movies, you will likely come away thinking something like this:
Popular fandoms: Harry Potter
When asked my opinion about Harry Potter (not sure why people still ask), I launch into my shpeel about how passionately I hate the plot –or should I say, the lack thereof?
If they don’t seem offended, then I give them a detailed explanation for all the reasons, if not, I shut up about there. In the former case, I proceed to explain my firm opinions on why all character deaths should be expressly meaningful and the rules for how to go about it (which J.K. Rowling doesn’t know about).
Hmm…are there any emotions associated with those deaths? Some of them, yes. But the majority…not really.
Then there’s the ending, which is still competing with The Maze Runner for the title of “Worst Book-Ending in History.” Honestly? The wand battle was soooo un-climactic, and the children in the train station at the end just topped it off as a failed ending.
If you’re going to lead up to an ending with seven brick-thick books, the ending has got to be good, and unfortunately, J.K. Rowling failed in that regard (sorry, no mercy for her).
In general, I tend to point out all literary fallacies to people, and it doesn’t always bode well. I’ve accidentally gotten myself into full-fledged debates about the lack of literacy in Harry Potter –usually with hard-core Potterheads (by the way, that term was supposed to cue you into the fact that I’m not a clueless outside observer of said fandom).
I have read the books. I know they’re literary crap. Would have made a nice telly series though.
And yet, just to be nice to you all, I’m typing the Harry Potter characters on this blog.
Historical films: Titanic
In any historical film, it is my natural response to analyze the history. In Titanic, I’m honestly more interested in the historical, real people that are depicted in it, than in Jack and Rose’s fake romance. You hear various names come up in the film: Thomas Andrews, John Jacob Astor, Molly Brown, Benjamin Guggenheim, Jack Phillips, Wallace Hartley etc.
The thing is, I know who all of those people are and can tell you quite a lot about them if you ask. I know because I did a massive research project on the Titanic (for my own personal interest, not school).
For instance, Molly Brown was not actually known as “Molly” until after the sinking of Titanic. Her real name was Margaret Brown, but after the event, she became known as “the unsinkable Molly Brown” for her acts of heroism.
Then I hear them say things like “six were saved from the water that day,” and all I can think is –well actually, the academics are still arguing about that.
Oh? Only one lifeboat came back to save the people in the water? Really? I read it was two…
Also, fairly certain there weren’t any Picaso or Monet paintings onboard. –And Jack dear, your comment about Monet’s use of colour is sadly lacking in artistic knowledge. Monet was known for his use of light. He suffered from an eye-condition that made it difficult for him to see his work. As a result, what comes out are all the wrong colours, impressionistic brush-strokes (because he couldn’t see to paint realistically) and a wonderful understanding of exaggerated lighting.
Oh, and the idiots could totally have worked out a way to both fit on that door…
Sci-fi shows: Doctor Who
At the request of a friend, I have watched Doctor Who and to my intense un-surprise, I love it. However…there are times when my science brain gets a bit ahead of Moffat and Gatiss.
My instant response to the Dalek’s evil plan to use a 1930s solar flare to power a massive genetic experiment:
ehmm… excuse me, but Earth’s atmosphere hardly lets any gamma radiation through at all (and no, the ozone hole doesn’t really affect that too much). The most power you could get from a solar flare storm would be disturbances to the earth’s magnetic field (i.e. power outages, the aurora borealis and problems with broadcasting systems).
Not a great plan.
Ten, I think you’ll be alright just letting the Dalek’s muse over that for a little while.
Also…three minutes away from falling into the sun –everyone on board that spacecraft should have been dead hours if not days before they got that close to the sun. It’s not just the heat that would kill them. I won’t even subject you to a rant about just how much deadly radiation comes off stars.
When the stars start dying and Rose is all like, “the shadow is coming!” I can’t help but point out the fact that it would take millions of years for the light from those stars to reach earth (or other places where the tardis happens to end up). That said, those stars would have to have died millions of years earlier.
So when you say “the stars are dying,” what you really ought to be saying is “the stars are dead.”
Fun fact about the nature of wormholes…according to current knowledge (which is limited) wormholes only go one direction. You’d have to have a black hole at one end and a white hole at the other.
The black hole end absorbs everything with a lower mass than itself (pretty much everything everything except bigger black holes). That means that a wormhole on earth would gravitationally absorb the planet. The white hole end would let everything out, but wouldn’t let anything in, so you couldn’t get back.
Besides, you’d be spaghettified (scientific term for death by black hole).
Also, Gallifrey coming back –that close to the earth….well, if that were to happen in real life, the gravity of the larger planet would tear the smaller planet apart pretty quickly. There would be no time for any of the saving that the Doctor did…
Then…we have the Eleventh Doctor, pointing to a blue star and saying that it’s “cold.” If he knew anything about stars, he’d know that blue stars are the hottest stars around. Red ones are cold, genius.
Also, not science related, but Vincent Van Gogh was not a slow painter. He typically cranked out 3-5 paintings in the time that his friend Gauguin (the one he threatened and then mutilated his ear for) could paint one. So our 11th Doctor wouldn’t really have had to wait so long and complain about how slowly time passes.
Bits and bobs etc. I’ll stop now.
Classic Who is much more scientifically accurate than the new stuff, but then…it was written by people like Douglas Adams…
Dear Moffat and Gatiss,
P.S. I hope that doesn’t discourage you from trying.
Crime shows: Broadchurch
Spoilers for Broadchurch.
I watched Broadchurch ages ago, and in the first episode my Ni was telling me that the murderer was Miller’s husband. I was right…
Can you understand how annoying it can be for me to watch shows that are extremely predictable when I easily foretell what’s going to occur in the tricky ones?
The only reason I was able to continue watching Broadchurch was the fact that the show was really well put together, and although my Ni was predicting things, I didn’t yet have any Te evidence to prove that I was right. Also, Alec Hardy is an INTJ and I like pretty much any movie about INTJs that I can get my hands on.
Also, I get this odd sort of self-depricating satisfaction from watching other people make fun of INTJs. Not sure why, british habits perhaps.
In general, I’ve been able to successfully predict the majority of crime shows that I’ve watched. I watch Sherlock and predict half of what’s going to happen before it does, but continue watching it because it’s hilarious.
Wallander is also pretty predictable for me…but I still like it for some reason. Kurt Wallander is just an interesting character…quite the crier too.
The same goes for mystery novels. I read the Da Vinci Code and predicted EVERY. SINGLE. OCCURRENCE. Possibly because I know basically everything there is to know about Leonardo da Vinci, but still –the suspense was ridiculously unnecessary.
As a result, I will never read Dan Brown again.
Obviously, I should clarify a few things.
Firstly, no, I did not have to look all of that up on google.
Secondly, I actually like some of the fandoms that I just insulted. The thing about me is that I have the capacity to still like something even when I can see it’s flaws because I there are usually good things that I can still appreciate about it.
For instance, I love the costumes in Titanic. I love the fact that most of the history was displayed correctly (even if some of it wasn’t). I love the fact that the entire movie isn’t solely devoted to the fake romance –you get little snippets of the story that belonged to the real people as well.
I love the characters in Doctor Who (and the humour). Even though they get some of the science/history wrong, when they do manage to talk about science properly, my brain gets excited and starts smiling internally. Also, Doctor who is just so elaborate and amazing that I’m willing to look past the problems in order to enjoy the fun that exists in that realm
Anyway…there’s a fast of Ni dominant watching movies for you.