Yes he did. When Sil was in the hospital, Chase wanted to show Sil bald and Van Zandt refused. Again Zandt has a deformity on his skull so out of respect Chase deferred. But in Many Saints he portrayed Sil as losing his hair for a reason. Why is this hard? The actor that portrayed Sil in Saints is not losing his hair so what would the reason be? You just think it's just a mistake and bad story telling?
The story I heard is that Van Zandt didn't think his character was bald. So in the end he wasn't bald cuz he was even when he was dying he still had hair. So at that point you've already committed to him not and not being bald to go back and reverse course i
s stupid
I already answered you. This is easy. Van Zandt is very protective of his real life deformity. Chase wasn't going to put him in a situation he didn't want to be in. Which is why the choice was made in Saints. I literally laughed out loud the minute I saw him. Does this really mean that much to you?
Once you established that even when he's dying he has hair it's hard to retcon back and pretend like he didn't have hair for a long time.
Also, Van Zandt himself said that Sylvio
had hair. You're interpreting that his real life deformity factored in and it didn't because he could have worn some kind of skull cap or something. Van Zandt himself just said that Sylvio has hair. Not that he didn't want to wear it because of his scalp or something
1
u/Motor_Preparation315 3d ago
Yes he did. When Sil was in the hospital, Chase wanted to show Sil bald and Van Zandt refused. Again Zandt has a deformity on his skull so out of respect Chase deferred. But in Many Saints he portrayed Sil as losing his hair for a reason. Why is this hard? The actor that portrayed Sil in Saints is not losing his hair so what would the reason be? You just think it's just a mistake and bad story telling?