Category: Character Enneagrams

BATMAN (2008), NULL

The second movie in Nolan’s trilogy is The Dark Knight, again with Bale. In the first story Batman is very traditional, very canon. Any changes here?

Well, for the first half of the movie Batman is nothing. He either only reacts or is characterless, just a warm body in the story. We have Heath Ledger’s performance as Joker, which steals all the oxygen, and we have Eckhart’s Harvey Dent/Two Face, which is quite good. Even Rachel, now played by Gyllenhaal, is mesmerizing. The limelight has no room for our titular hero. At this point I give him a Null Enneagram.

He has a bit of a run-in with Fox, who’s offended by Wayne’s use of the R&D department to develop an invasive sonic-based spyware. Batman flirts with a moral line in this movie, eventually landing on the side of honor. That’s his quandary, his conflict. Does the Joker — his nihilism and his malevolent genius — warrant breaking the code, taking human life, in order to defeat him? The answer is eventually no.

Any number can confront this problem. We’ve learned nothing new about Batman’s Enneagram here.

Ultimately, the story settles on sacrifice as its moral answer. Batman will take the blame, become the city’s scapegoat, in order to keep the memory of Dent clean and inspiring. It’s a very classical solution, and it’s Batman’s idea. Batman will assume the role of villain so that Dent can be a martyr.

Nope, I can’t get there. I can’t find a character in this version of the Bat. It’s hinted that he wants to be free of his alter ego, free of the responsibility of saving the city, and that he wants a chance with Rachel, but I don’t see him pursuing that desire. He’s not even really thwarted. Rachel is fridged. 

The movie is a mish-mosh and the hero is bland. The supporting work is outstanding and worth the time. And that’s that.

BATMAN (2005), EIGHT

Batman Begins is an origin story that I remember really liking when it was released. Christian Bale brings a great physical presence to the character. Director Nolan treats the comic-book world with gritty realism.

What does this interpretation bring to a Batman Enneagram, and what are the constant characteristics for Batman across all iterations?

Here are the basic facts: a rich man devotes his time and resources on training as an uber-martial artist. This speaks to a level of obsession. He’s loyal to his family, including the butler. He’s not particularly romantic or social. No dogs! He’s mostly honest, and he’s not a killer.

So, our generic Batman is no Heart Type. He’s charitable, but he doesn’t really need people in an emotional sense. The odds are he’s a Body Type. Anyone can combat train, but his dedication speaks of a larger connection to the physical. He seeks conflict and doesn’t shy from aggression. I think we’re looking at an Eight.

Does Bale’s Batman deviate from that pattern?

Wayne’s anger leads him to the edge of society. At the start of the movie he’s in prison somewhere in the cold parts of Asia. He has no interest in or connection to socializing. Alfred has to drag him to a party. He has his loyal core team — Fox, Rachel, Gordon — and that’s it. The job of being Batman is everything.

He really sticks to the traditional Batman build.

He likes living in the middle of the heat. No flinching from the dirty work. Eight.

PRINCE JOHN (2010), THREE

This John is played by Oscar Isaacs. So, John is a hottie now lol. During the movie John legitimately (rather than through trickery) becomes king after Richard’s death. His regency is not as important to this story. It’s his ultimate signing of the Magna Carta — his compact with the barons — that drives this John. We’re already in very different territory (historically and motivationally) from the classic of 1938.

John is volatile. When his queen advises him and he doesn’t like what she’s saying, he’s physically threatening and verbally abusive. Rains gave John a certain mustache-twirling villainy; Isaacs gives John something more realistic: unlimited power dictated by whim. No one, not even Hood, can stop him if he doesn’t want to be stopped.

This version’s King RIchard is no hero popping in at the end to save the realm, but he’s still a knight on Crusade and John still feels that baby-brother envy. I would say that Rains’ influence on the John portrayal is in effect. We will always have a Heart Type John, regardless of who he really was.

I want to say Three, though, rather than Four. This John, compared to Rains’, is harsher. Isn’t that funny? He doesn’t even try to have his brother murdered!  He’s a man, though, who doesn’t like to hear “No”. He hates being thwarted, he hates being wrong, and he hates being held accountable. Meanwhile, he’s a handsome young king. Life is pretty golden for John. And the kingship lands in his lap.

I mean, c’mon. So Three.

PRINCE JOHN (1938), FOUR

Claude Rains is magnificent. He’s so beautifully oily and conniving. Has he set the tone for how John will be portrayed in all the films to follow? 

In real life John was 33 when he was crowned. A grown man, was he as self-indulgent and childish as he’s portrayed? Did he machinate and plot his brother’s death? Whatever is true about John, Richard really was a warrior’s warrior, more interested in fighting than in staying home and ruling. Rains’ portrayal conveys some of the sense that being king is unglamorous and thankless. Everyone loves Richard, who’s not a great administrator. John, collecting taxes and running the country, is the villain.

Envy. This is what Rains works with. His John doesn’t just want to be king, he wants revenge against Richard on a personal level. Rains isn’t tall (as John wasn’t) but he’s playing a Four. It’s that sardonic temperament. He’s detached yet focused, hurt yet impervious. He’s winsome and deadly dangerous. Of the Heart Types, only a Four can embody such an interesting dichotomy.

MAID MARION (2010), ONE

She’s brave and bold, of course. This Maid is married, but she only had one night with her husband before he left for the Crusades with Richard. She lives now in the role of daughter-in-law, which is similar to ward. Only in the most technical terms is she a wife. Our Maids are very similar.

Blanchett’s Maid is more physical than de Havilland’s. She’s an archer and a farmer. She knows how to use a dagger if necessary. Let us completely ignore the movie’s climax when Marion pretends to know more physicality than is believable. Until that moment she was a great character, a great iteration of the Maid. I choose to erase that scene from my memory.

This Maid is no Three. She’s not particularly deft at social situations, and she has a sense of failure that swirls around her. I want to say Body Type. Her first instinct, right or wrong, is to engage physically. When her people are locked in the barn, threatened with burning, Marion uses a sword to pry the boards loose and free them. Her answers to most problems involve a physical response.

One, Eight, or Nine? She’s too feisty to be a Nine. Eight is the obvious choice, because Hollywood tends to write strong women characters as Eights. Bold and aggressive are not the same, but using confrontation is a shortcut writing technique to suggest bravery.

I kind of like a One, though. It’s her prickly shyness with Robin that turns me away from an Eight. She has a sharp, witty tongue, particularly with Sir Walter, and a managerial competence that feel very One-ish. It’s interesting! 

ROBIN HOOD (2010), NINE

Much to my surprise I liked this version of the Hood story very much. This is no Errol Flynn Robin, though. Not only is the fantasy-level wearing of tights not here, but the world feels more gritty and realistic. Also, the historical telling of King John and the negotiations around the Magna Carta are not often portrayed. I love stuff like that.

This Robin is honorable. He will return a dead man’s sword because he gave his word, even though no one would know if he reneged. He’s honest. Richard asks for his opinion and Robin gives it, regardless of the consequences of displeasing the monarch. He also has an interesting belief in fate. When he’s asked to pretend to be Marion’s husband, he agrees because this is where events have led him. It may not be a wise choice, but he has a trust in providence.

Of course he’s physically capable. On Crusade he’s an archer. At home he wields a sword. Does this mean he’s a Body Type? Not necessarily. A yeoman had to be competent in weapons. The focus of this Robin is more on his integrity. We must believe that Marion would come to trust him over a short period of time. What Enneagram number can sell sincerity?

Eh — he’s probably a Nine. He’s physically comfortable, beyond what a medieval soldier would feel. He’s a diplomat, gathering many friends (as Robin Hood does). He’s a fair judge, as a Nine can be. In his own way, as a poor man serving under a king, he is a philosopher, a seeker of truth. This is why others trust him. Crowe plays Robin with an interesting depth, but ultimately it’s the same archetype, the same Enneagram build as Errol Flynn gave us.

Good flick.

CHARLES BINGLEY, NINE

He’s not an Envy person, that’s for sure. Darcy would drive him crazy if he were. And he’s quite content to take advice from Darcy, sometimes without engaging his own feelings or thoughts. 

He’s the most easygoing person on the planet. As Mr. Bennet says to Jane, “You are each of you so complying, that nothing will ever be resolved on; so easy, that every servant will cheat you; and so generous, that you will always exceed your income.”

So, who is this pleasant, placid man? Head Type or Body?

He really isn’t a thinker in the mold of a Five or Six. Seven, possibly. He has no consciousness of money, obviously, so he’s no One. Not an Eight! Oh, that’s funny. I’d like to see some version of Bingley who tells Darcy to stuff it, but that wouldn’t be Austen.

His ability to avoid conflict leads me toward Nine. His willingness to party leads me toward Seven. Heh.

His modesty is of no help whatsoever. In some ways it keeps him from having a defining personality trait. He doesn’t break forward with a fault or a strength. He’s just the nice lad who goes where he’s told.

Nine. Although a Seven can blow with the wind, they also seek new experiences. Bingley has no appetite for grand adventure. A quiet life and amiable friends are enough to satisfy.

JANE BENNET, TWO

She’s so modest she damages her own prospects, or at least according to Charlotte Lucas. She’s handsome enough to win Darcy’s opprobrium and too beautiful for even Caroline Bingley to feel jealousy. When her heart is broken she rallies herself by keeping busy and thinking well of others.

What Enneagram number is a saint?

Just kidding. We can all be saints! Jane, though, is truly good. Is that a character trait that points to a number? 

Well, not a Body Type. Exercise is not something she seeks. Of course she’s Heart, the best kind of Heart. Her empathy for others seems like it must indicate a Heart Type. She’s a thinking person, but she’s not a Head Type.

She’s a Two. Women Two, such as (probably) Marilyn Monroe, have a sweetness that make them beautiful beyond their physical blessings. She seems almost inhuman, but then her vulnerability comes through. Bingley has hurt Jane deeply, but she keeps it inside. A Two should move to Four in strength and ask for some of what’s due her. She won’t, though.

If she’d been more forward, more demonstrative, when she first met Bingley he might have proposed then. We’d lose an entire plot line if that happened, though! Austen has created the perfect Jane: a generous person who thinks the best of everyone while completely not thinking of herself. Two.

CHARLOTTE LUCAS, SEVEN

I should immediately admit that I’m sympathetic to Charlotte. Elizabeth hates her pragmatism when it comes to love and marriage. I kind of respect Charlotte’s reasoned and harsh perspective.

Of course, she’s stuck with Collins, which is an ill fate. But, her parents! She’s a financial burden with no prospects. God, I really admire her grit.

So, what Enneagram number is so unromantic? Well, a One. A Seven. Possibly a Three. An Eight. Is Charlotte a Body Type?

She’s a Seven! Wow, I’m wonderfully surprised. Like Collins, every portrayal of her has been a different number than what she is. Imagine a Seven, the Enneagram number most associated with hedonism, as an undesirable, unmarriageable Regency woman. What a lot of possibilities for character portrayal!

She and Elizabeth have that Head Type connection as the basis of their friendship.

Seven Women are so practical, so efficient. This is how Charlotte can marry someone she can’t respect and yet live a good life. The house is segregated by Charlotte into her private parlor and his garden and office. It’s not personal, it’s business. (Charlotte would make a great mafia don.)

Yes, some aspects of her life are sub-optimal, but look at the positives. She runs her own household and she likes it. Her position and income (her nest) are secure. When she has children they will be safe and healthy.

It’s utterly unromantic, but it’s not the worst. Like I said, I don’t condemn her. Charlotte’s a boss.

WILLIAM COLLINS, TWO

Although I love the screen portrayals of Mr. Collins, I’m interested that in the novel he’s described as tall and more physically present. He’s not diminutive. The kind of cringy or bantam-like behavior I associate with him all come from the actors. 

He’s always obsequious, of course. The little attentions to the ladies, studied and prepared, is one of his ridiculous traits.

Let’s take Austen’s description as an Enneagram indicator, though. Forget about the actors. Collins is large. My first instincts — a One or a Six — are not correct. If he’s athletic, he’s a Nine. If not, he’s a Two. And he’s not athletic, regardless of how often Charlotte encourages him to enjoy his garden.

I would dearly love to see a production of P&P that casts Mr. Collins as a large Two. How does his character change? That mix of empathy and envy, how does it play out? When he comes to the Bennets after Lydia’s fall — always a scene that doesn’t quite work — how does it play if he’s a Two moving to Eight (weakness) at that moment? Or perhaps he’s a Two moving to Four (strength), looking out for himself and his own? Right now he’s portrayed as a judgmental placeholder, a mouthpiece for Lady Catherine. What if he expresses his own interests in that scene? Ooh, so exciting!

Isn’t that funny? Collins is beloved. I clap when I see him ooze onto the screen. But they’ve all been playing him wrong, and it’s deeply thrilling to imagine a production that gets him right. He doesn’t collect musical instruments or obscure tools, he collects Lady Catherine’s advice. Her attentions are the objects this Man Two places on his hobby shelf. It’s absolutely delightful.