I saw Kurt Vonnegut give this presentation - apparently he ended every talk with it - and what the people who did this study missed (and which the video misses) is that he was joking! The audience was laughing the whole time he gave this speech because he was very clear during the presentation that he thought it was bad writing to use such simplistic models for how stories worked. Also, it would have saved a lot of time if the video included Vonnegut's conclusion, which was that the best stories are ones like Hamlet, which in his view is full of contradictions, so that there is never a "good" or a "bad", just a straight line just towards the bad side of the midpoint. I guess Vonnegut would find it amusing - though probably not surprising - to see that the people who wrote the original article ended up doing the exact opposite of what he intended!
The amazing thing is that they could watch the Kurt Vonnegut speech and think that he was serious! I saw him give that lecture (he ended every lecture with it) and he was dripping with distain at the thought that you could break down stories to simple "good" and "bad" arcs. Also, strangely, the video that they cite in their press release cuts out Vonnegut's conclusion (could have saved them some time) that the best stories are the ones like Hamlet where there are endless paradoxes so that there is no "good" or "bad", just life.
Don't worry, soon your boring office job will be conducted in VR, too!
This film is about the anxiety of growing up - and especially growing up sexually - regardless of the time period. They especially achieved this by making the film timeless by having the technology be a mix of all different eras - old CRT televisions mixed with people reading e-books. Just like millennials to think everything is about them! Might as well be the 70s "Me" generation.