Are you stuck in movie logic?

I completely agree with the point, and I've made the same point myself.

However, I think "good will hunting" is a bad example.

> “I feel like you have a tremendous amount of intellectual potential that you’re wasting here — why are you getting in fights rather than trying to do something interesting?”

There is a scene where they have this conversation without words. Robin Williams is asking him without spelling it out and Matt Damon understands what the question is and dances around it. They both know what they're talking about even if they don't put it into words. In the case of this specific movie the problem isn't communication, it's just that the main character is incapable of dealing with things inside him that he doesn't understand (aka "emotionally immature"). (well, that was my interpretation anyway).

I came to make this exact comment. While I agree with the author in general I think it’s not nearly so cut and dry that you should always say directly what you mean in order to communicate clearly.

> I think "good will hunting" is a bad example.

Communication is important. But good, honest discussion is possible if people really want it. It's like bargaining/negotiation: if you really want to be at the table, you will stay at the table and try to understand the other people.

Which bring us to the single most pernicious type of "movie logic" in real life: when we see people as enemies before trying to understand them.

> the main character is incapable of dealing with things inside him that he doesn't understand

Exactly.

To get to the point where he can really believe that the abuse was "not his fault" requires time and effort. If the therapist had just told him that day 1 it would not have had the same effect.

Doesn't the conversation also happen WITH words? Like Chuckie tells him quite directly in one of the best scenes in the film: "I mean, you're sittin' on a winnin' lottery ticket. And you're too much of a pussy to cash it in, and that's bullshit. 'Cause I'd do fuckin' anything to have what you got. So would any of these fuckin' guys. It'd be an insult to us if you're still here in 20 years. Hangin' around here is a fuckin' waste of your time."

Ben Affleck's character says it to him too directly:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g_1FjDHjBM

Maybe the author's not watched the movie in a while, as it's a direct contradiction of his blog post. The entire movie is about a bunch of people desperately trying to communicate to Will he can live a much fuller life if he drops his pride or attitude or fear of failure or whatever you want to call it.

I agree with your comment, I just wanted to passingly point out that the author is female.

EDIT: Damn this movie is so great.

Chuckie is the one who can say that so plainly to his face, too. A math professor he’s only getting to know saying plainly that his life to this point is inferior, that he should leave all his friends and compatriots behind, and that he’s wasting his time with the people he loves is going to come off as condescending and arrogant.

Showing him his potential and telling him he can do great things is awesome. Crapping all over him for not having the background of the average student would just push him away.

True, however this speech finally comes in the last 15 minutes of the film, in response to Will saying something profoundly stupid, that he'd rather stick around and work construction than actually use his enormous talent.

It's also notable that this talk comes after (or near the end) of his sessions with therapist Sean and working with the professor - so he has come to terms with his past abuse (not claiming he is "healed" but he certainly is in a better place), learned a bit about structure from the professor, started interviewing, and now the final hurdle holding Will back is the intense loyalty to his friends. Chuckie not only gives him permission to leave them behind but tells him how stupid and disappointing Will would be if he didn't. He even tells him how to leave - just go, no warning, no message, no planning.

It's obvious this is something Chuckie has thought for years, but only verbalizes at the very end when Will needs (and is able to act upon) that final push.

As someone growing up with undiagnosed ADHD I have heard a version of

> “I feel like you have a tremendous amount of intellectual potential that you’re wasting here — why are you getting in fights rather than trying to do something interesting?”

for all my life and it has really hurt me. It just caused me to have this internalized guilt for having "wasted" my life. Even though it isn't really (completely) my fault.

And it really is a lie to begin with. What allows me to do crazy amounts of work in a short time is my hyper focus and that thing is not reliable. Its like seeing someone sprint and thinking they would be amazing running a marathon. Nope.

Plus intelligence is super overrated. I don't believe that having above average intelligence improves your life in any meaningful way. In fact people resent those that are more intelligent than they are so you are better of hiding it. And most work is working with other people and then you need to wait for other people to catch up with you anyway.

I would gladly trade my intelligence for being prettier or having more money. Or anything really.

> Plus intelligence is super overrated. I don't believe that having above average intelligence improves your life in any meaningful way.

If you are deeply into some scientific fields (in particular mathematics, but also related areas like physics and possibly computer science (the latter in the sense of the scientific discipline, not in the sense what the work in industry is)) having a massive IQ immensely improves your life. That is why in my opinion some highly smart people feel so attracted to these fields.

On the other hand, in most other areas of society, a "slightly above average" IQ is optimal (think 120-130). Sufficient to be able to dominate most people (sorry for this dark description), but not so high that you feel isolated and don't get understood.

> dances around it

Aren't you just confirming the author's point. You can dance around only certain ways with words. Either he could have said they don't liked the lifestyle and he likes to fight. Or he could have at least given some reason or argument against the question. Incapable in dealing with things inside him doesn't mean incapable of answering a simple question.

“In fact people resent those that are more intelligent..” I’ve never seen this. Unless someone is picking another apart, but thats just generally mean.

I’d go as far as to say that Good Will Hunting is a pretty good example of writers getting it right. The equivocation and miscommunication isn't a plot device to conjure up conflict from thin air. That sort of avoidant behaviour is a classic malaptive coping mechanism in highly intelligent victim of abuse. Communication with Will fails not because people aren’t willing to speak plainly to him, but because he’s too emotionally bruised and battered to handle that communication, and he’s _way_ too clever for his own good, so he runs circles around the people trying to have those conversations with him. Sean’s successes come from being patient and not letting Will bait him.

Envy, fear, contempt, ... there's a whole bunch of negative emotion directed toward the smarter ones. Or if it isn't hateful, they try to manipulate them into doing their work for them. Very little just plain ol' accepance of them.

If you're lucky you'll get the sapiophiles.

Maybe you haven't been around people who aren't intelligent. Or maybe you aren't. But when there is a divide in intelligence it is rarely good.

I'm not sure. IQ is not really about how well or how deep can you think. Just how fast. All IQ tests are timed. A person with slightly above average IQ but a great ability to sustain motivation and good set of mental tools acquired through upbringing and education will run circles around any very high IQ person in any domain that doesn't have strict time pressure.

I don't see it that way. The author was saying he was never told it. He WAS told it, he just didn't acknowledge/pretended not understanding it, which is the step after.

In movies, the characters go through some experiences in order to learn something. You can’t just tell them the thing they have to learn.

While movies usually are not realistic, that part is often true.

Yup, good point.

I have a line that I haven't used in a long time which I crafted for a different scenario but applies here. Which is that: Very intelligent people are very good at rationally defending positions that they've arrived at for unrational reasons.

The ability to sustain motivation might just be a matter of diagnosis and medication.

Damn, that is a good line.

Personally, I don't get why he has to leave. They are in Boston, obviously there's colleges and stuff, why can't he just do smart people things and hang out with his friends too. I feel like the whole "you must leave everything behind" is more movie logic than anything else.

Thank you, I like it a lot too.

I was trying to understand why I stopped using it. I think it's because it's not really actionable. The best you can do with it is understand what might contribute to a certain situation/behavior. If you tell it to a person to whom it applies, they'll just keep creating new arguments to support their position. And it's not a good way of arguing anyway. It's not a real argument, it's closer to an ad hominem. It's not persuasive to the person to whom it applies, though it might be persuasive when told to a third person.

It goes hand in hand with the saying that "you can't reason yourself out of a position you didn't reason yourself into".

Most people don't reason themselves into maladaptiveness, and it takes substantial effort to not only identify the cycle but also to break it.

That opinion is just wrong. Anyone how knows just the basics in the field of psychometrics can see that.

Yea, well once Skylar moved to California his fate was to go chase her. You could call that movie logic, you wouldn't be wrong, but it's a lot better ending than "hey guys I got a job at <boston based tech co>, now let's go chase broads"

How is it wrong exactly?

That's rationalize, not reason.

You don't seem to be making a meaningful distinction. Moreover, both words have been used in this thread.