this is a question i get a lot, and one i still feel unequipped to fully answer a little over ten years later. the short answer? it was like being hit with cupid's arrow. the second he came on screen i knew he was mine, you know what i mean?
the long answer... a lot of what i want to achieve, at some point, artistically is a critique of america. kent is kind of the genesis for this desire; he is explicitly a critique of mccarthyism on a micro level, and the worst aspects of all of american society on a macro level... while also being designed to embody the ideal man of the 1950s, a decade that permeates the american conscious as a golden age. i find that contrast so narratively juicy, a fruit ripe for a multitude of purposes. and yet he serves his niche in the film perfectly as is, just like everything else in it. we don't need more, but the foundation is there for it.
he's also a sniveling little worm and i love to see men grovel. 😌
i've always also loved villains more than any other kind of character, ever since i was little. (maleficent was a role model for me as a child, even; as you can imagine i do not like the jolie films...) kent is a great villain-- so of course i adore him!