Delta Quadra Movies and TV Shows

Beauty and the beast.

http://dettoldisney.files.wordpress....7-1280-720.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Park

Beauty and the beast.

http://dettoldisney.files.wordpress....7-1280-720.jpg

---

Not cool to call all IEE beasts, i mean, yes we're that in bed, and yes we're shitty with our Si but that DOESNT MEAN WE'RE HAIRY AND OR ABUSIVE!!! Wait, we probably are hairy....


;-)

The beast is SLI (or LSE). Belle is IEE.

I always thought the green mile was delta. Hard hitting and very uncomfortable to watch but delta.


http://images6.fanpop.com/image/phot...4-1024-768.jpg



The Green Mile is a 1996 serial novel written by Stephen King. It tells the story of death row supervisor Paul Edgecombe's encounter with John Coffey, an unusual inmate who displays inexplicable healing and empathetic abilities.

There Will be Blood.

dr quin medicine woman

ultra delta, very delta NF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Birdie

There Will be Blood.

---

straw in the milkshake?

Eh Jane Eyre (Fi-Te duality), movies by Bergman, possibly also Kurosawa. And some Westerns a la John Wayne (hottest LSE ever alive) .... vs. Eastwood, aka Beta ST. Rio Bravo, Stagecoah, Red River ...


:lol: at Dr Quinn. Dances with Wolves, Lassie, Black Beauty ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UDP

straw in the milkshake?

---

Drainage Eli! you boy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by suedehead

Eternity and a Day
Ulysses' Gaze
El Sur
Spirit of the Beehive
Midnight at Maud's
Love in the Afternoon
Les Cousins

---

yes, Love in the Afternoon by Rohmer, too --- the protagonist is kinda EII-Ne


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5OeJ6VPIro


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_in...281972_film%29

In the Mood for Love could also be Delta ... at least one of the characters seems to be EII-fi (the woman).

Breakfast at Tiffany's - Holly IEE...? She has the unpredictability, "vulnerability" and the sense of entitlement of a Ne base type anyway...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

i'm kind of cheating because i'm only halfway through watching this. i'm taking a break because its streeetttchhed out, but it has an interesting story so far with fascinating characters. i think the theme is delta from what i've gathered. the potential of people to change for the better morally.

http://images.moviepostershop.com/th...1020437084.jpg

---

As lungs probably knows (and she must also intensively think about this in her lunch break), I really dig the movie. The story is a hardass Ti-Fi problematic though ...and the main character is LSI-Ti imo. The whole focus on a pet ideology and the "system-control" atmosphere is Beta, while the more evolved issues of personal morality that contradicts an adopted "systemic logic" basically ring Ti at its finest.

Green Mile must be delta. It's one of my favourite movies.

Don't know if this has been suggested before, but Community? It strikes me as a show about humbling an EIE (Jeff) into using his powers for Delta values, although the only Delta character in the show (Britta; EII imo) was made into a caricature of herself after her romantic arc with Jeff ended. In general it's very Ne-heavy. An argument for Alpha could be made as well, but all the character flaws they tackle throughout the show in order to flesh everyone out reminds me of Fi-based character judgements I would make wrt other people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1Dj-v7L7RI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLts830aLlw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIcrCFh0aM8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9brMfU0OGU

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

i'm kind of cheating because i'm only halfway through watching this. i'm taking a break because its streeetttchhed out, but it has an interesting story so far with fascinating characters. i think the theme is delta from what i've gathered. the potential of people to change for the better morally.

---

I can see where you would get this from, but I think that theme was overshadowed by the beta-esque system control and overriding oppression. one could make the argument that this only augmented it, but overall I feel like the delta commentary was more subtle and in the background. with scenes like the one where he's reading brecht or crying while watching dreyman play the piano, the vibe seems less a morally progressive, idyllic delta outreach than a kind of subtle NiFe evocation, a faint testament to the human element that manages to permeate the discourse; if anything a delta perspective would be more of an unspoken anchor, where the morals are weighed down and somehow defined by the system. overall I don't think people changed that much, just moved through roles and revealed their ethical substance in various ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sienna

As lungs probably knows (and she must also intensively think about this in her lunch break), I really dig the movie. The story is a hardass Ti-Fi problematic though ...and the main character is LSI-Ti imo. The whole focus on a pet ideology and the "system-control" atmosphere is Beta, while the more evolved issues of personal morality that contradicts an adopted "systemic logic" basically ring Ti at its finest.

---

I pretty much agree with this. I basically saw it as an attempt to bridge the gap between Fi and Ti... where the former was somewhat subsumed and controlled by the latter, but precisely because of that in some twisted way served to further define it. the discourse was definitely beta, but not in the cheesy, stereotypical way that you would normally get with a movie that dealt with themes of systematic oppression and social control; it had more of a nuanced TiSe feel, like every character had their place and the evolution possessed a very keen, determinate order.

Delta 1950s cartoon depicting EII-Fi / LSE-Te duality. Kind of funny that the dude dies when she's an hour late.

"You looked into my heart and loved me when I appeared to be a beast. Now see and love me for the human I really am."

(click cc for english subtitles)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O8UcNfHLyI

Hahaha^

There is something memorizing and hypnotic about this cartoon. Maybe its duality? I'd buy that.

this film is about as delta as it gets, in a good way.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-_9AFwMDmQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strrrng

this film is about as delta as it gets, in a good way.

---

Oh my so many delta suiters what will poor Ms Everdeen doooo?

IMO Delta movies

Princess Mononoke
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkWWWKKA8jY


Nausicaa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wSba9hwCaU


The virgin suicides
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbz4-du3Ayg

Le jouet (1976)

Lolita

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BabelFish

Lolita

---

amoral sex has least relation to delta. alpha, beta without Fi valued - more typical

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sol

amoral sex has least relation to delta. alpha, beta without Fi valued - more typical

---

I was thinking about the movie (1997) more than the book... I agree with you though.

i thought lolita (the book) was pretty :Fi: - the character of lolita herself comes out gradually and the contrast between what others say about her and humbert's own views of her reveals the amount of damage the sexual abuse caused her and lets us see her as a person rather than as humbert's sexual fantasy (the nymph). so we have a biased/delusional/dissociated-from-reality narrator in humbert, and there's enough there (by which i mean, *a lot*) of his feelings and thoughts to understand why he does what he does (it invites some sympathy). then later in the story lolita's real character (not just humbert's version of her) starts becoming more and more apparent and this clashes even more terribly than before with the sympathy the story invites the reader to experience for humbert. i thought that the story made it fairly clear, in the places where the clouds of humbert's suffocating perspective part, that this has destroyed lolita. beneath all of humbert's complicated fairy tale musings, the story is simply that of a child predator and his victim, and the destruction caused, especially to her. although by the end i still felt for humbert's character because he's mentally ill, those small glimpses of the real lolita pulled at me much more strongly. since humbert denies lolita her humanity, the reader in a way has to find it for him, to give it back to her. even in the end, he doesn't get it - he never understands what he did to her or what he took from her. i hope my memory hasn't embellished too much, since it's been a long time since i read the book.

also, i thought there was a lot of :Si: in the book. humbert has a real eye for beautiful landscapes, which his narration often describes in detail; and he of course links it all to his "wonderful" fantasies of nymphs and childhood and sexual pleasure. <--i see him as the worst 9w1 ever, btw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inumbra

i thought lolita (the book) was pretty :Fi: - the character of lolita herself comes out gradually and the contrast between what others say about her and humbert's own views of her reveals the amount of damage the sexual abuse caused her and lets us see her as a person rather than as humbert's sexual fantasy (the nymph). so we have a biased/delusional/dissociated-from-reality narrator in humbert, and there's enough there (by which i mean, *a lot*) of his feelings and thoughts to understand why he does what he does (it invites some sympathy). then later in the story lolita's real character (not just humbert's version of her) starts becoming more and more apparent and this clashes even more terribly than before with the sympathy the story invites the reader to experience for humbert. i thought that the story made it fairly clear, in the places where the clouds of humbert's suffocating perspective part, that this has destroyed lolita. beneath all of humbert's complicated fairy tale musings, the story is simply that of a child predator and his victim, and the destruction caused, especially to her. although by the end i still felt for humbert's character because he's mentally ill, those small glimpses of the real lolita pulled at me much more strongly. since humbert denies lolita her humanity, the reader in a way has to find it for him, to give it back to her. even in the end, he doesn't get it - he never understands what he did to her or what he took from her. i hope my memory hasn't embellished too much, since it's been a long time since i read the book.

also, i thought there was a lot of :Si: in the book. humbert has a real eye for beautiful landscapes, which his narration often describes in detail; and he of course links it all to his "wonderful" fantasies of nymphs and childhood and sexual pleasure. <--i see him as the worst 9w1 ever, btw.

---

You share my exact same thoughts!
Also, in some russian-speaking sites, I've seen Lolita typed as either IEE or SEE.

Joy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR-2TiQVY-k

Joy (Jennifer Lawrence) - SLI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MaSK3POHI0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by April

I was just going through my list of Netflix movies that I've given 5 stars, because maybe I have a bias for Delta movies. The Fisher King and Sling Blade stood out to me as having Delta themes, but I haven't thought about the types of the characters.

---

I just watched sling blade and it felt delta to me too.
karl as delta st and the gay friend of the mother as delta nf are types that came to mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Birdie

There Will be Blood.

---

Anybody have thoughts on this? I thought it had a gamma feel but maybe the main character was LSE (he didn't fit my overall mental prototype of an LSE but I thought he had strong Te, Se, & weak and valued Fi which didn't leave other options, any of that can be up for debate though). I liked it a lot.

for @oldwhiskey

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY1EnLD4XjE

Quote:

---

Anybody have thoughts on this? I thought it had a gamma feel but maybe the main character was LSE (he didn't fit my overall mental prototype of an LSE but I thought he had strong Te, Se, & weak and valued Fi which didn't leave other options, any of that can be up for debate though). I liked it a lot.

---

I always thought of Daniel Plainview as LIE-Te. I also think he is a good fictional example for an self-preservational 8. I was torn between LSE and LIE, too and went with LIE because I thought he was Si-Polr.

 

Si: One aspect was, that the overall vibe was that everything he did, went counter to any holistic, subjective sensing. Si as sensing fxn is tied to you/is internal. It perceives, and the distinction between Se vs Si is not that Se is devoid of a filter (but that filter could be Ni), but that Si strives more to build up sth. internally, subjective, impressionistic and in taking in something, it also affects you, because it is your sense of how you perceive the world and this can bleed into your decisions/how you go about your life. It deals with the subject (your perception of sth.) and when you disrupt/influence that, you influence the person who carries that sense vs. when you deal with the object, you apply something to that object and therefore you alter it (Se and buzz word ‚force‘?). This bridges over to Si ‚buzz words‘ like ‚aethetics‘ ‚comfort‘ ‚internal sense of body‘ ‚health‘ ‚homeostasis‘, for me.

Quote:

---

Interaction in space is essentially the response of one object to another. Objects respond to other objects, creating certain sensations in each other [...] This element determines the ability to recreate previously experienced aesthetic sensations — to recreate an object that provides one with aesthetic sensations that the author chooses. These people are able to distinguish previously experienced aesthetic sensations from new ones and are able to "collect" and remember them.

---

Then I read an interesting thread about Si and skills. If you have an holistic inner impression of experience, then you can jump around and chime into your impressions and compare it to what is going on now . Here you can make the bridge in trying to understand how Ni vs. Si experience past or time in general, because it’s bollocks with all these buzz words and tying Ni to time. Every person experiences time, but maybe by the way how they take in, experience/time makes for interesting differences. Sometimes these differences come up extreme in people, sometimes it’s only something very very subtle. Now they always go all the way with ‚aethetics‘ (and general sometimes it‘s always the same old buzz words). But why not apply it for everything. So now let’s say you underwent a life situation and gained your impressions from it and then go through this again you can apply whatever insight/skill you gained to this new situation. So you can ‚manipulate‘ the flow of the situation with ‚past skills‘. Now I think with Si, it’s that they are chimed into the sensing world, so their skills will ‚manipulate‘ the flow in the sensing realm? Now in trying to tie this together with Ne. Ne can be the wrench thrown into Si holistic flow. It’s more dealing with the object and it’s external. It’s new, it abstract, so there might be sth. that was never there before and now you have to determine how it might affect you/how to deal, and through applying universal/holistic Si insight/wisdom/skill you can get sth. new and widen your internal world. So one perceiving fxn flows into the other.

Decisive: You could try to spin the thought further and try to make an distinction between Decisive (Se/Ni) vs. Judicious (Ne/Si). Idk.... I kind of saw Decisive as sometimes giving more of an workaholic, struggling, striving vibe (which would fit Plainview). But then you could say in this society everybody has to work. So maybe you have to cut deeper. Like striving for something doesn't necessarily has anything to do with your perceiving fxn. But then again the perceiving fxns take things in and that can affect peoples outlooks in a situation in time. This could flavour the overall vibe (hence maybe Se affecting the object, hence more this struggle with your will and the object?). To speculate around further, Decisive types chime into Ni, they want to keep the flow of their abstract holistic, individual sense of sth. intact. Like they think they have an overview or a direction they want to go. They might chime into Ni. They concern themselves with the abstraction of something and if you do that, you don‘t have to pay attention to sth. sensational. You can chime out of Sensation. In the abstraction realm you can also alter your subjective impression/perception, like the sense of time. Outside of it time is definite (clocks, days etc.) but inside your head this doesn‘t exist like that, you can completely forget about it. So they can be like arranging their time how they see fit and therefore feel more at home in keeping doing sth. forgetting all about anything else to get to their goal. The great minus of this is when you chime out too much of sensation, you don‘t reckognize bodily needs or you don‘t see what’s going around and don‘t take in new experience.

With Si and ‚skills‘. Your internal holistic sensing world can be all encompassing. You can go back in your mind and experiencing sth. again (makes me think of Swanns way and Madelines). With comparing and going back, or with wanting to keep it ‚harmonious‘ in the sense of holistic, you can go and let everything come back and with that you can enrichen and deepen your internal experience. But this takes time in the ‚real world‘ and you move away from being in time. So I belive when you are chimed into this mindset you can deepen your skill/your insight/your experience of the world and if sth. new comes up or you reckognize sth. old coming again you can apply your skill. But the ‚waiting,going through things again‘ takes time in the real world. The great minus is when you always stay in this. You might again not take in new experience not gain sth. new and just ruminate around with the skills/epxerience you already have (I know this is again going down the road, that Si is past and stuff and that Si users critisize, idk... it's probably better explained in that thread). Maybe that’s why ESTJ buzz words are more like ‚pragmatic‘ ‚down to earth‘ and the Hidden Agenda is Ne, so that they have this desire to apply skills to new things to enrichen their perceptiom, so that they don't stagnate and don’t stay where they are, so you can see how both things work in Si/Ne users. Ni is the Polr, because when you are immersed in an sensational holistic flow, idk you are not chimed into an abstract flow.

Note: this is all not complete, just some ruminations, because for example how is it with Ne and time? I believe they can chime out too, but then I belive them to be still more in time and more ‚improvising‘, maybe drawing from their Si in the sense of skills and master the situation that way, like when a new problem they conern themselves comes up. Ni draws from Se in the sense of like immersing themselves into the Sensing world and taking it at face value, so then we may be back at the the distinction that Se bleeds into Ni and Si into Ne. (also disclaimer, I think I'm not that god with explaining Si in this natural, maybe organic way, I always had problems to really got to the core, this is the best I could manage for know, and after having read it through, yes I know it's still probably not very good and idk... like tying Si to much with past or sth...)

So all in all I think Daniel Plainview shits on Si. He amps up aspects in himself (pefers them over Si) that in the end are totally antagonistic towards Si. That guy goes counter to everything that is harmonious holistic in the sensing realm. He lives and sleeps in a pit. I could not see him starting to talk about Si in nuance and shade, like in Swanns Way with the Madelines (never read it btw), like that I get the sense we are tapping into his internal sensing world. The whole oil industry is a metaphor for the destruction of environment. He is detached from sensing somehow, like not nature grasping. He is more Decisive in my eyes. He is more ‚manipulating‘ his internal sense of time. Condensing it. Like working, working, working just for his goal not to idk manipulating external time, moving ahead of objective time, idk sci-fi ideas, revolutionizing the state of sth. in the world, creating sth new, sth Ne.

I read this one article after I saw the film. About the themes of greed and about the whole oil area in America (Rockefeller etc). It was about how some men sacrificed everything. Their families broke apart. They didn’t really spent time with their kids. I mean his boy turned against him in the end to build up his own oil company and therefore turned into competition. Why all this? Why don’t stop when you have enough money to live? I think maybe it was not the money what was important in the end (or it only is to a certain point) but the fight. The struggle. To be self made with this intense undercurrent of proving, of fighting (I have a competition in me, I don‘t want anybody else to suceed). And I thought that was textbook self preservational with E8 energy. http://reichandlowentherapy.org/Content/Challenges/survival.html I think it was also about greed, which is for me sth. like a hunger, but then Daniel was probably never sated.

Si and skills: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/showthread.php/51026-Describing-Si-as-skills-which-are-modular-and-can-be-applied-to-any-situation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lungs

Anybody have thoughts on this? I thought it had a gamma feel but maybe the main character was LSE (he didn't fit my overall mental prototype of an LSE but I thought he had strong Te, Se, & weak and valued Fi which didn't leave other options, any of that can be up for debate though). I liked it a lot.

---

I had generally thought of him as LSE, but I've never been sure between LSE and LIE. Nymeria could be right. I believe the director, P.T. Anderson is SEI or maybe SLI, but definitely Si ego.

I had read an analysis of the movie that I liked a few years ago, but, after looking for it, it looks like it got taken down. Anyway, one interesting fact is that (I believe) all of the lines spoken by Plainview are put into the Indicative mood (i will do this, it will be that way-- statement of fact) hence the name There Will Be Blood (also a metaphor for oil).

But here is a new analysis i just found that looks interesting: https://philosophynow.org/issues/74/There_Will_Be_Blood

dr quinn medicine woman

I love all of you for knowing the movie.
@Contra @lungs @Nymeria

Mr. Church

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wySiVNV71IQ