Balian ESI
Sibylla IEI
Guy de Lusignan EIE
Reynald de Chatillon SLE
King Baldwin IEI
Tiberias LIE (strange tinge of Fe from Jeremy Irons who is EIE, I think?)
Godfrey de Ibelin LSI
Hospitaller medic guy LII
Saladin LIE
Nasir ESI
Balian's brother EIE
Kingdom of Heaven
Balian ESI
Sibylla IEI
Guy de Lusignan EIE
Reynald de Chatillon SLE
King Baldwin IEI
Tiberias LIE (strange tinge of Fe from Jeremy Irons who is EIE, I think?)
Godfrey de Ibelin LSI
Hospitaller medic guy LII
Saladin LIE
Nasir ESI
Balian's brother EIE
Watch this film, you fuckers.
He is EII, you moron.Originally Posted by Ezra
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
It's an enjoyable film.
I've always thought Godfrey as an ESTj, though. And the guy who's also in the TV show Rome, maybe an SLI or LSI?
SLI/ISTp -- Te subtype
I did have great expectations for this film but I found it to be a disappointment. Not a complete disappointment as the action part was good but how the whole story and "underlying message" and how it was presented sucked. Basically I disagreed with the film. Can't remember much about the actors. There are better "epic movies" than this but it is still worth watching if you haven't seen it.
I think Jeremy Irons is EII.
Kingdom Of Heaven on general release was disappointing. But the director's cut is fantastic; that should have been the version shown at the cinema. It gives reason as to why Sibylla was being a sulky bitch towards the second half of the film.
Why am I a moron? I got one single actor's type mixed up.
Why?
The version that was first released to the cinemas was too butchered. I agree with Ezra you have too see the full director's cut to get the real version with critical scenes explaining the characters and their actions. The full version I consider to be equal to Gladiator.
The characters however are not really developed enough to be typeable imo, so I just went with the socionics shorthand.
Bailian SLI (artisan). Strange mix between man of the earth and idealist. He is Everyman really and so transcends the types
Godfrey LSI (pragmatist, Beta idealist).
The Leper King EII (humanist, Delta idealist)
Sibylla EIE (actor)
Tiberias EII (humanist - King Baldwin's identical) (from his visions of Jerusalem, and his decision to withdraw with his knights rather than fight on for Jerusalem after that vision is dead)
Guy de Lusignan SEE (negative politician)
Reynald de Chatillion SLE (negative conqueror)
Hospitaller SEI (peacemaker)
Saladin LIE (pioneer)
Balian's brother ESE (negative enthusiast)
Balian's and Godfrey's faithful man at arms -LSI (pragmatist)
Nasir - IEE (Balian's dual, reporter), or SEE (positive ambassador)
Basically Baldwin and Tiberias need an LSE (judge) to make their dream reality, but Bailian won't/cannot be their man of action (ie henchman in this scenario as Balian sees it)
INFp
If your sea chart does not match reality, go with reality (Old mariner saying)
Hmmm, I have a problem with Balian as SLI, and with Tiberias as EII. Come to think of it, I may be able to see Baldwin as EII, even though I initially thought IEI. He seems to have a better relationship with Saladin than an IEI would with his supervisor.The version that was first released to the cinemas was too butchered. I agree with Ezra you have too see the full director's cut to get the real version with critical scenes explaining the characters and their actions. The full version I consider to be equal to Gladiator.
The characters however are not really developed enough to be typeable imo, so I just went with the socionics shorthand.
Bailian SLI (artisan). Strange mix between man of the earth and idealist. He is Everyman really and so transcends the types
Godfrey LSI (pragmatist, Beta idealist).
The Leper King EII (humanist, Delta idealist)
Sibylla EIE (actor)
Tiberias EII (humanist - King Baldwin's identical) (from his visions of Jerusalem, and his decision to withdraw with his knights rather than fight on for Jerusalem after that vision is dead)
Guy de Lusignan SEE (negative politician)
Reynald de Chatillion SLE (negative conqueror)
Hospitaller SEI (peacemaker)
Saladin LIE (pioneer)
Balian's brother ESE (negative enthusiast)
Balian's and Godfrey's faithful man at arms -LSI (pragmatist)
Nasir - IEE (Balian's dual, reporter), or SEE (positive ambassador)
Basically Baldwin and Tiberias need an LSE (judge) to make their dream reality, but Bailian won't/cannot be their man of action (ie henchman in this scenario as Balian sees it)
If Balian is indeed a Delta ST, there would be this whole Ridley Scott Delta protagonist thing going on. You'd have Maximus as Delta, and Balian as Delta. These "I'd rather not fight" characters, who are completely moral and upstanding, but who have complete confidence in Se when it comes down to it. You may be right, Wittmont, although I think Balian's relationship with Sibylla was far too good - he understood her Fe like no SLI would - for Balian to be an SLI.
I think Ridley Scott simply used the Gladiator shaped cookie cutter to make Kingdom of Heaven. So Balian is his knightly version of Maximus to a certain degree.
And ESI's dont appreciate Fe either really do they? Is their relationship Illusionary (EIE/ESI) or Conflicting (EIE/SLI)?
I went with SLI because of Balian's default role as blacksmith/farmer. Balian is a staunch individualist. He doesn't belong to a movement, or a cause, (which are more Beta 'gung ho - work together' themes) and he doesn't want to no matter however much he is offered for doing so. He is a reluctant knight, but he is interested in 'improving' systems and things, physical objects (objects he makes as a blacksmith, farming equipment and methods, siege engines) rather than more theoretical systems like a kingdom. “What man is a man who does not leave the world better?" Balian is also a pragmatist - "If this is the Kingdom of Heaven, let God do with it as he wishes".
LSI might work but I think an LSI would slide into the role of knight as part of a system easier. Somehow Balian never really seems to embrace his knightly role outside of doing what he must. Being a knight to him is a job, not his true vocation (which I think it was to his father Godfrey). To Balian, as for Godfrey, the Kingdom of Heaven is a Kingdom of Consciene - there is a strong element of personal Fi judgement there. Yet Godfrey truly believed it was possible to create a Kingdom on Earth, whereas Balian distances himself from the idea.
In the pivotal scene Balian is offered to become King by marrying Sibylla and deposing of Guy de Lusignan. Yet Balian turns the offer down, he is not interested in human intrigues even if he knows that his refusal will bring a murderer to the throne (on the other hand he is a murderer himself), destroy the kingdom and cause massive suffering and the deaths of thousands in war. He washes his hands from all of it. The road to hell is paved with good intentions... and Balian refuses to walk down that path to save his personal conscience. "You cannot stand before God and say that I was told to do this or that, or that virtue was inconvenient." I think an ESI in this situation may have been tempted to stay loyal to his friends, Sibylla, Baldwin and Tiberius, rather than betraying them (betray in the sense of abandoning them when they need him).
I listened to Ridley Scott's comments on Gladiator once. He said something that I think points to his type quite well. He claimed he is above all and foremost a logician. That to him the story must always make sense from a logical point of view. Yet his 'logic' is subject to his Fe! but he doesn't see it. RS gave an example where some historian was complaining that Romans did not have coloured togas, yet RS decided it was ok for Romans to wear coloured togas in Gladiator by simply rationalizing that Romans could wear coloured togas if they wished to so it was ok to have coloured togas in his movie... That's not really logical of course but RS wanted colour in his movie (for Fe reasons obviously) so historical accuracy be damned.
I suspect the writer of the script is delta. I am not quite sure what type RS is but Beta would make sense to me. I think he values(he is an expert at creating mood, see Alien, Blade Runner, Black rain etc.) and his movies have a nice
flow to them, or even an exaggerated
But Kingdom of Heaven is a movie that focuses very heavily onin various forms. All characters have a series of
INFp
If your sea chart does not match reality, go with reality (Old mariner saying)
Why are we "fuckers"? (read your second post)
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Certainly from an observer's perspective, Illusionary makes far more sense than Conflicting. I know Balian, if ESI, wouldn't appreciate Sibylla's Fe, but he sure as shit would appreciate her Ni. This would make far more sense than if Balian conflicted with her. He wouldn't at all be open to her or her methods, and, generally, he has less of a problem with them than he would if he conflicted with her.
Personally, I don't see how any of this would point towards SLI or even conflict with ESI.I went with SLI because of Balian's default role as blacksmith/farmer. Balian is a staunch individualist. He doesn't belong to a movement, or a cause, (which are more Beta 'gung ho - work together' themes) and he doesn't want to no matter however much he is offered for doing so. He is a reluctant knight, but he is interested in 'improving' systems and things, physical objects (objects he makes as a blacksmith, farming equipment and methods, siege engines) rather than more theoretical systems like a kingdom. “What man is a man who does not leave the world better?" Balian is also a pragmatist - "If this is the Kingdom of Heaven, let God do with it as he wishes".
If he was an LSI, he would've gone to Jerusalem the first time his father asked him to, and not later, when his reasons were completely personal.LSI might work but I think an LSI would slide into the role of knight as part of a system easier. Somehow Balian never really seems to embrace his knightly role outside of doing what he must. Being a knight to him is a job, not his true vocation (which I think it was to his father Godfrey). To Balian, as for Godfrey, the Kingdom of Heaven is a Kingdom of Consciene - there is a strong element of personal Fi judgement there. Yet Godfrey truly believed it was possible to create a Kingdom on Earth, whereas Balian distances himself from the idea.
I see this as a lack of Te practicality. He doesn't recognise that Guy is only an aid to the kingdom when he's dead. And what's holding him back? His Fi, and lack of Te. (He's also a One in the Enneagram, IMO.) If he was an SLI, he would've realised that it was entirely practical and flawless to kill Guy. But his moral principles got in the way.In the pivotal scene Balian is offered to become King by marrying Sibylla and deposing of Guy de Lusignan. Yet Balian turns the offer down, he is not interested in human intrigues even if he knows that his refusal will bring a murderer to the throne (on the other hand he is a murderer himself), destroy the kingdom and cause massive suffering and the deaths of thousands in war. He washes his hands from all of it. The road to hell is paved with good intentions... and Balian refuses to walk down that path to save his personal conscience. "[FONT=Verdana][SIZE=2]You cannot stand before God and say that I was told to do this or that, or that virtue was inconvenient." I think an ESI in this situation may have been tempted to stay loyal to his friends, Sibylla, Baldwin and Tiberius, rather than betraying them (betray in the sense of abandoning them when they need him).
I personally think Ridley Scott is an LSI. His attention to historical detail, as you mentioned, is phenomenal. He's not particularly innovative as a director, but damn! does he know how to recreate a battle scene; he's a master of epics. Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven are loaded with spine-tingling Fe techniques to rouse you up, which is why I love his film-making so much. The soundtracks of each film, from Hans Zimmer and Harry Gregson-Williams respectively are immense.I listened to Ridley Scott's comments on Gladiator once. He said something that I think points to his type quite well. He claimed he is above all and foremost a logician. That to him the story must always make sense from a logical point of view. Yet his 'logic' is subject to his Fe! but he doesn't see it. RS gave an example where some historian was complaining that Romans did not have coloured togas, yet RS decided it was ok for Romans to wear coloured togas in Gladiator by simply rationalizing that Romans could wear coloured togas if they wished to so it was ok to have coloured togas in his movie... That's not really logical of course but RS wanted colour in his movie (for Fe reasons obviously) so historical accuracy be damned.
I suspect the writer of the script is delta. I am not quite sure what type RS is but Beta would make sense to me. I think he values
It may have something to do with the lack of Ridley Scott's Fi, and your misinterpretation that he "has a nice feel" for them. In fact, what you could be pointing out is actually Scott's Ti! Eventually making - what he deems to be - the right decision.But Kingdom of Heaven is a movie that focuses very heavily on
I have in the past considered Scott to be a Gamma (although now I think this is unlikely), and what he seems to do is kind of nod to Delta's ability to rise up when the time is necessary, as in the case of Maximus (LSE).
You're not. I was jut trying to get conversation rolling. And it worked.
I know what you were trying to do and I know you didn't mean what you said literally. I didn't mean what I said either, I was just playing, responding to your calling us "fuckers". Did you honestly not see that?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
No, sorry. Now I see why a lot of people don't get my jokes.
Why? For the same reasons you didn't get mine? Or are you implying that you made a joke I didn't get?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote