Hmm. Well, to add to your question: why is there little footage or audio of either Dylan or Eric being angry or aggressive?  We have more footage/audio of Eric being somewhat sociable in the “Eric in Columbine” vid and pretty much nothing like that on Dylan. Wouldn’t that automatically make Eric seem nicer than Dylan by default since Dylan appears more unquantifiable?  As you pointed out, there’s that video snippet of Dylan behind Blackjack talking away, laughing and smiling uninhibitedly with the friend who is filming him and yes, the audio is cut. But there also happens to be another clip where Dylan is being interviewed for the Rebel News Network and the audio is cut (I hate that too! ;).  I also know for a fact that there is plenty of audio in the ‘Morning Ritual’ between Nate and Dylan and that audio all got sacked.  You can hear a portion of it as they’re driving into the parking lot and talking about trying to find a parking space in one Columbine documentary. Yet, the video the public is privy to has the Pulp Fiction music masking over what is actual mundane chit-chat conversations between two friends in the car.  So, I’m not sure I’m necessarily going to conclude that the audio was cut in the Blackjack snippet simply because Dylan was showing his aggressive, nefarious Hyde-to-his-Jekyll side and that the media was trying to downplay Dylan in comparison to Eric. I tend to think the audio got cut for the opposite reasons: TPTB does not want us to get to know Dylan better and might then possibly even like his personality.  I’d wager there is other video of the two that was opted to not be made public for that very reason (BTs aside).  Also, Dylan may have been talking about people at school or work and so the audio was cut to redact and protect people.   That said, the fact that “Eric at Columbine” and “Rampart Range” vids even got publicly released with full audio is a miracle in itself because they give us a glimpse into a ‘day in a life’ of the Columbine killers and the conversational dialog between E & D within the context of friends which potentially entreats people to like them, sympathize with them, as seemingly normal, likable dudes.

As for Dylan being more ‘bloodthirsty’ of the two, it’s your hunch, your opinion, which is valid of course, but how can you really prove it? In my own opinion, they both wanted revenge and fantasized about getting back at people but they were also coming from distinctly different places. Overall, Dylan ate his anger until he was numb.  He gradually began to disengage and care a lot less. By the time 4/20 was there, his mind was on check-out. Dylan was going along for the ride.  His apathy allowed him to embrace the mindset that it was ok to ‘have fun!“ liberally on his very last day of life. Nothing mattered anymore, so let it all go and be completely free from society’s morals.  Killing would be the ultimate act of retribution, taking back the power in having the last word in WRATH, and then to be free of this hellhole of a world.  Dylan barely spent time with his goodbyes in their last BT video. It was almost inconsequential. He was in a hurry to do the deed and be done.  By comparison, Eric tended to externalize his anger in more demonstratively empassioned ways but then began to think too much about the potential consequences for family and friends at the last minute. He was stalling and vacillating with the "I’m sorry..this is going to suck for my family. You guys can have my stuff” sentiments. Dylan didn’t even really think enough anymore to care about any of that. He was on board with the death train.  In that respect, he was more dangerous because the last vestige of caring was gone.  Conversely, with the actual start of NBK, Dylan spent a lot of time warming up to bloodthirsty kills (preferring to throw bombs) while Eric jumped right in with the cold blooded kills. So, given all that, I could not really prove one way or the other that Dylan was consistently more bloodthirsty than Eric.