help im addicted to making these stupid things

As game Lambert #1 fan 5ever the Nerflix Lambert sucks but not bcs of what people think? (I didnt read book of elves I love and respect myself sometimes )

As in game Lambert is kinda fun in that he got actually defined compared to Novels and Hexer where he did not exist ad character proper. He is deeply mean and sarcasric person, being willing to chew out his closest friends and enemies alike. He isnt as morally concerned abt stuff as geralt and when someone asks him to kill a monster he'd do it. Fuck he'd even go as far as use Axii to make two bandits die in horrific way. This is after all his lot in his shitty miserable life. He hates witchery and witchers and the very concept of this much suffering ("But you kept the table" he says furious to Vesemir as they stand above screaming Uma). His attitude is just such a complete 360° from Geralt' silent acceptance of what was done to them. It truly becomes the only voice of like hey fuck what happened to us, fuck it all to hell. Hes an utter fucking dickhead and hell provoke people for no reason (talkinf abt geralt and triss in front of phillipa for no reason) (i deadass dont think he would fuck up yens stuff on purpose tho #;#&#&)

His main core personal element is revenge. In his short appearence in w1 he proclaims desire to slaughter salamandra for killing Leo. In W3 he goes on massive revenge rampage spanning CONTINENTS for a guy we dont know (and thats pretty cool to me, implying he has adventures outside geralt, both him and eskel). He says his first action after he left Kaer Morhen was to find and kill his dad ( and him being sad he couldnt save his mother his life is all just empty revenges that will never fill the holes of people hell miss).

But also main Core element of Lambert is also love as cheesy as it sounds. He cared deeply for Leo and Aiden and even his own mom. After Triss. Got conked out by a mage guy in witcher 1 he cared for her and watched over her (they were hardcore inplying shipping which is funnt but whatever). He literally puts his life on line dor Ciri and Geralt. The thing is he is dickhead but he will do Everythinf for those few peoples he has left in his life.

The Point is games being games and larger allowed Lambert to have depth and nuance. He is imo one of the most interesting and coolest game characters. Netflix Lambert however did not have the time for variety of reasons to get that.

One is Lambert is very minor person in books. Second is that the show didnt...realy care abt witchers past vesemir maybe. So he wasnt a focus. In the end what we get is disappoitninf character not helped by the fact most witchers in netflix are cannon fodders for baba yaga.

ONE issue that I have is people saying Lambert was a dick to Ciri and thats OOC. While I cant speak from the POV of books (altho my friend who did read them say he is sexist), from POV of game thats untrue. In fact I believe game Lambert would VERY much be a fucking dick to Ciri fron a start. It doesnt even need to have sexist colouring to it. This dude HATES witchering. He hates the mutagenesis and the pain of it all, the destiny in it. I firmly believe he wouldnt be OK with a bew trainee and guess what? While he didnt live through instructors not giving fucks abt new witchers because like 1/20 live to become witchers he LIVED through it. On his skin. I firmly believe Lambert being DICKHEAD to ciri at first is nit only a whiff of the complex game!Lambert but a decent start of its own standalone character.

In witcher 1 also wheb tou tell him Leo died he laments he "was not ready". Leo. Just like ciri never got his mutagens (take this with grain of salt because leos whole character is weird tm). So him being an miserable instructor who will push you until you cry is in character ingame. This guys has ten layers of issue.

What Netflix misses is the fact we dont SEE lambert getting to his relationship Ciri where we see rhem albeit briefly in game (willing to fight to death for her). We just have this awkward jump from utter hostility to them beinf kinda pals after baba yaga fight. In the end netflix lambert is just. Boring.

Also hes not a balding fuck and i cant forgive that

Cole’s interview for Boys by Girls Magazine, part 3

(part 1, part 2) Sorry for every mistake and typo! It becomes quite powerful though - when you posted a picture we had taken of you, within an hour we had a significant amount of new followers. So it means your have the power to impact people and projects you feel passionate about. Sure, and to curate a kind of artistic lineage, so I think that's special. And that's the duty of mainstream artistry or someone who has received success, in my personal opinion, to curate an artistic collection and lineage that will influence society in a way that can truly bring about beneficial change. And your publication is dealing with the concept of masculinity in a way that's very important to me, and should be very important to all men in our society. I love that when you tweet, sometimes the whole world talks about it. It's funnt, I think people sometimes take my tweets too seriously. My twitter has always been a vehicle for shit-posting. I've never really taken it seriously, so when people do take it seriously, it always takes me by surprise.

We need to talk about 'Riverdale' as well. I just love talking about feelings. It's a passion of mine. Yeah, me too. I love you as Jughead. I just learned that you originally read for Archie.

Yes, I was given the script for Archie, and I had read one scene with Jughead and loved him. So I said: 'wow, I've got to try for this role'. I feel like he's a bit like you. Is that a fair or unfair comparison? Like I mentioned earlier - if people are not saying that, you're not doing a good job. That's the currency of a quality role. Your ability to get into character comes from a resonation you have empathetically with the role itself. That empathy is based on your lived experiences, so I resonate with Jughead very much. I mean, I was the cringiest kid in school. Jughead, to me, is the very image of a millennial teenager that many people fear, and that's what I live about his character. I had interpreted Jughead as tremendously pretentious, and it's very funny that whe people watch 'Riverdale' now, he has become a sort of heartthrob figure. Anyone who thinks they can write about their own town as a teenager, to me, that is a really pretentious move. Striving to be unique and non-conformist, I really resonated with him. Then as I got to rea more of his content I found out that he was also te narrator of the show, shich meant that he was the perspective device, which I really enjoyed. So I went in for the audition, and didn't know if I wanted to do acting or not - I was in this strange space in my life. I had just come off watching a ton of "Twilight Zone", and my audition was the whole opening monologue, so I read it just like Rod Serling in the "Twilight Zone", which they loved. When I found out it was going to be a mix of "Twin Peaks" and these other stereotypical campy teen dramas, I thought: 'fuck, this is going to be a lot of fun', and I was fully onboard. You said in another interview that Jughead struggles with vulnerability. Totally. I think Jughead's struggle with vulnerability is something I struggle with, but that's because we are both young men. Jughead turns away from emotional connection when he gets too close to people, as  an attempt to safeguard himself from becoming hurt. Just a product of men being told they can't be weak. That's how I had grounded it: in the inability to be vulnerable in that kind of physiology. Where is Cole with vulnerability, are you comfortable being vulnerable? I am now. Or at least, I'm more comfortable. I think vulnerability is the petri dish for growth. Full vulnerability is something people work at, which I will try to work at my whole life. Every time you enter into a vulnerable state, you enter into a right of passage, in my opinion. So much growth comes from the ability to make yourself vulnerable, because you immediately clarify what makes you nervous, and what makes you feel strong in those moments. I'm a firm believer that history of human survival is essentialy a history of triumph over their vulnerabilities. I truly think that bravely stepping into vulnerability is the greatest and most effective way to grow as a human being. Now, vulnerability for men is one of those things that froma very young age is seen as forbidden or weak. Since men are quite young, we are taught that weakness and vulnerability is something we should avoid, and the truth  is that a person only becomes strong trough recognising their weakness and addressing vulnerability - especially emotional vulnerability - and coming to terms with that. I think those are very important words for young men. The truth is, I was a very socially anxious kid. I was homeschooled, so raised inside a soundstage - not knowing how to interact with the world around me. I used comedy a lot to cover up my vulnerability, as an attempt to diffuse an otherwise hostile or threatening situation to me. And then as I embraced vulnerability when I got older, my own personal insecurity, femininity and all the other concepts that I have within me - I had the condifence to walk around and truly feel like I had mastered a space that was otherwise foreign to me. Especially during puberty, when we're getting all these complicated ideas about sexuality, maturation, social standing and professional pursuit. If we sat back and took the time to analyse why those things made us uncomfortable, we would have the confidence to take the world around us by storm. What are your thoughts around masculinity and how it is changing in the young generation of today? I can only speak from my experience, but in my youth I had experienced the world around me as an intersection between the expectation of confidence in young men and the simultaneous suppression of a large aspect of that confidence, which is an embracing of a more feminine nature than men often carry. I think the definition of masculinity in a wider context nw is undoing a lot of that, which I think is great. It's much more widely accepted to be in touch with other qualities of your masculinity. I'm of a mind that the core tenancy of modern masculinity still resonates with an ancient understanding of out roles within society, whilst simultaneously accepting that society is changing, and adapting to a viw that is fresh. For me, some fundamental tendencies still exist within masculinity, which are a kind of caretaking role, respect for your fellows and an ability to provide. But I think unlike two of three generations ago when the concept of provision was a financial definition, now the concept of the provider includes a) providing and caring for yourself and b) providing and caring for people you love emotionally. I believe part of the redefinition is the ability to recognise what aspects of yourself are affecting your emotions and how can you understand that side of yourself. Understand how to resonate and become more empathetic with the people in your lif. I think sexuality for men, in the States or in the west really, still preaches a lot of elimination of weakness. I can only speak from my own experience, but I am my strongest form when I can fully comprehend why I'm thinking a certain way and what is bringing me to an action. I'm of a mind that true strenght is the ability to take care of yourself without harming other people in the  process. And I think, if your masculinity involves the destruction of anther person's masculinity, because it's an opposition to yours, we have to break down and understand that this is because you ultimately feel threatened by a version that is different to yourself. Masculinity and strenght are the products of your ability to feel secure with all sides of yourself. However you find that security, as long as it's not the destruction of another person's security, is in my opinion, the modern form of masculinity. 'Riverdale' season two! Season ne left us with unanswered questions. What can you tell us, and what's in store for Jughead. Jughead was originally Archie's conscious, and in the final episode of season one he was revealed as the soul of Riverdale - as the moral underpinning of a society that is going to through tremendous moral fluentation. The audience can view Jughead and whatever happens to Jughead as either an enlightening or destruction of the soul of Riverdale. If the sould of Riverdale is being confrtonted with these problems, what does that mean for the town as a whole? In this season he finds himself with one foot in the north side and one foot in the south side, with an impending civil war on the horizon - shaking his previous standing, of conscientious objector and this observer, forcing his hand into play. In this season, Jughead  is very much learning that you can't make everyone happy, and that his fear of involving himself in the issues that are surrounding him was actually a fear of him suffering or making anyone displeased with him as a person. He has to address and embrace the fact that he's going to make people unhappy, and that it is part of his life. All this drama, but one thing is central throughout the show; those kids would do anything for each other in the midst of all that chaos. Yes, what 75 years of it being a comic has allowed us to do is not having to explain how deeply connected the characters are episode after episode. These characters are so well established in the comic lineage that people don't need a backstory on them, which has given us a lot of flexibility. Having taken time off from acting to live in 'the real world', now having returned and also doing your own photography - how do you feel you're developing as an artist? For the longest time I was working on projects and taking jobs that I didn't really resonate with the way I do now with my projects. My photography gave me a tremendous amount of self-confidence, which comes back to masculinity and all those things we talked about. The ability to express myself in a vulnerable way and show my eye in a curated personal gallery space, game me great confidence. That confidence has now lent itself to a personal artistic lineage taht has given me a foot in the door to the creation of passion projects that I would never have had the ability to do if I hadn't made myself vulnerable enough - which I'm very thankful for. I think, my acting and my photography are two completely different arts. acting for me is an empathetic creation of a character you're trying to breathe and weave life into, but you're essentially a cipher for other people's narratives. You are playing with the tools in someone else's toolbox. Photography allows me to express precisely what I want to express, using all the tools in my own toolbox, with the assistance of people who want to play the part of cipher for me. I think the meeting of both of those worlds will eventually culminate in a directorial professional pursuit. I'm trying to find ways of blending those two worlds, so I could come out with narratives and stories that truly resonate with people people from both an acting perspective and a photographic perspective. You mentioned that there is a certain loneliness that comes with celebrity. With the success of your return, without your brother this time, putting you right back in the limelight - how are you handling this now? I experience it in a different way now, because I made the conscious decision to return, and I understand that fanaticism is part of celebrity culture. The loneliness that comes with it now is something I'm much more prepared for after I took rim away to understand myself. When I was a child it was a much different story, because I hadn't made the choice to immerse myself in a world of fanaticism. It also had repercussions, which it took me a long time to deal with. Some people find religion, some people do drugs, some people branch out sexually - everyone has their own way of dealing with it. I chose education. That's a pretty healthy way of dealing with it. I thought it would be. Me choosing education also gave me an ability to be much more prepared for what I'm immersed in now. It feels better. What dreams are next on the agenda for you? I'd like to start doing films. I would like to act in a challenging roles, and make films as well. I think the culmination of my acting and photography is the inevitable conclussion of a sort of directorial debut.  I think you're too much of a creative to eventually not get involved in making movies. I truly believe that. You have too much to express. I hope, eventually, but I also feel like I need a lot more time and experience in other aspects. I think acting wise, my brother and I have consistently been in competition with an image of ourselves in the past, and the industry's image of us as studio money makers and our ability to pull an audience. Now that I've been trained well enough, I'm more prepared as an actor to take on the kind of challenging roles that I aspire to. What type of roles would you like to play? Just different. Every time. But human roles where each one is different from the next - something I can sit back and be proud of. I'd love to see you do some really emotive roles. Your performance as Jughead already hits me straight in the heart. Excellent, I appreciate taht. The only thing that's stopping my brother and I now is other people's perception. I think you're doing a really good job in changing that perception. That's the hope, and over time and by doing the right thing consistently, I think people will start to get it. That was the long-term grudge to bear when we were going to college and thinking about how we were going to play it right and be comfortable with this. For us, the answer was always to do something interesting, and simply: be good people. What mark do you want to leave on the world? For years and years I looked at the arts as something less than the sciences. I thought the truest way to make my mark on the world would be to push human knowledge forward in some way or shape. I started taking archaeology as a an attempt to leave a mark on the world, and I had taken a class about palaeolithic civilisation and I brought up art as a luxury - essentially I was saying that art was something that came after the bellies were full, the sleep was had and the thirst was quenched. My professor corrected me pretty firmly in front of the entire class, and said that art, storytelling, myth and oral narration was hands down the only way humans were able to survive. The ability to portray a message was redefined to me as necessary to life itself. Artistry, if we look at it historically, is always the product of its time period. The greatest artists were always the ones that had a full comprehension of the society around them, and the ability to tactfully push the edges of their society - broaden it just a bit. Now we live in an age where the boundaries of society are no longer strict and inflexible, but rather something all-encompassing. Figures like John Lennon, Gandhi and Martin Luther King JR. - all these men had one thing in common: they all preached peace and love as the fundamentals to the operation of a healthy society - and all those guys were murdered. So I've got to figure out a way to preach that without getting murdered, haha.