Thread:Jester of chaos/@comment-31330278-20190813233236/@comment-31330278-20191026223923

1. Still working on Walter Birkin, but overall he'll be similar to Dean Karny from "Billionaire Boys Club". Just like Dean, Walter will be worse than Jill, both more vile and more repulsive. Dean gave the phrase "I always had a thing for you, Sid!" a rather scary meaning, and Walter will make sense at doing the same. Walter is meant to be a talented and brilliant man though, so at least in this aspect, he'll be a better villain than Dean. Now, Walter might or might not be pure evil, but Dean most certainly is. I'm creating his article as we speak (obviously it's a stub right now), and will propose him as PE somewhere after finishing. If you wrote "Friends I Don't Have", which nickname would you give to Walter/Dean (ghostfaces should have a wordplay on face and a quality about the said character)? And do you see Taron Egerton as a good actor for Walter, or do you see him working better for Gaston Roberts from part 3?

2. So basically he was immune to Luther's manipulations because psychopaths doesn't have sympathy. I know he never did anything our own brothers not willing to do/had not done already, but as justified as his rage was, there's something not completely graspable about being wanting to literally kill someone since the age of 8, and being operative and serious about it. Maybe that's the reason some people see Jamal as a bad man. I know people will bring up Luther's death (and probably his PTSD after his military service) as an argument for him being a legit scapegoat. But is it possible for an MIG to kill someone worse than themselves in a way that will make the worse villain a scapegoat? And if someone told you that Jamal is a bad man (I met some people who think that), would you explain them he's actually a villainous MIG, or just consider their reasons?

3. The "Robin Hood", with Jaime Foxx as Little John and Taron Egerton as Robin, gives us a couple of characters that can be argued as more menacing versions of Prince John. The first one, and i really hope he'll turn out to be missing in goodness at the probable sequel, is Will Scarlet. This version was scary. His inferiority complexes and unrequited love for Marian led him to become the new sheriff. He isn't a psychopath like the former, but there's something scary and upsetting about a friend who gives up to his inferiority complexes and get caught up in doing bad things. The good people made the brave choice with a sequel hook. The second one is the cruel sheriff. He's more like Vaisey of Nottingham than the animated wolf from Disney's version. At least other versions, such as Prince of Thieves version, can claim they know the meaning of fighting both in the battlefield and outside of it. This version was the kind of guy who have wise guy insights about battles they never fought. I refuse sympathize the sheriff, but one of his scariest aspects is that it's hard to tell how much of him was lust for power and how much is fear from his friends in the church. Frollo would've been proud of these people. Gisborne was pure evil. It's sad, because until the part of threatening to rape Marian, part of me hoped he's missing in goodness. He was a better villain than the sheriff, and I wish he could be redeemed like his BBC Robin Hood version did. If there was a version of "Robin Hood" where Martin is menacing like a lion Joffrey was meant to be, which of the three mentioned villains in "Robin Hood 2019" do you see as more fitting to what Martin Freeman's Prince John should be?

4. Thanks :-). Casting Martin as Rumple make me think that he could also replace Peter Dinklage (a prime option for Rumple) in a possible reboot for "Game Of Thrones". Also, would you rank PL killers, from best (presumably Rumple) to lesser?