Dumbledore

[MinnyCat]

The new Dumbeldore (in movies 3-5) bothers me. He doesnt seem as wise. He just seems mean to me. I know that the books are getting darker, but I just didnt expect him to be like this. IT kinda disapoints me. But I will live. lol. Dumbledore is a hard person to portray. lol

[pinnacle]

Peter O'Toole. 'Nuff said.

[mcgonagallrocks]

Dear we already have a poll for this lol. Started it a while back actually I still vote 1 and 2 though,.

[MinnyCat]

mcgonagallrocks said:

Dear we already have a poll for this lol. Started it a while back actually I still vote 1 and 2 though,.

woops. I didnt know that. I will go and look for it now tho.

[MrCoolio]

Most obviously Richard Harris.

[StormAngel]

RICHARD HARRIS!!!! Michael Gambon as Dumbledore is so cold, he seems just mean instead of kind like he was potrayed in the books. But I can survive that. =)

[MinnyCat]

Yeah, I think that Micheal Gambon seems cold too. idk. Its hard for me to handle it. lol. I just want Richard Harris back, but thats not going to happen... it cant happen. And that makes me so sad. He was such a good actor!

Maybe he would be a little better if he at least read the books.

[beMMADfabulous]

RICHARD HARRIS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D

[MinnieQuill]

Richard Harris always made me think 'Hi, kids. Aren't I just the loveliest old man?' urgh. Sorry, that just bothered me big time. Michael Gambon has substance to him.

[MMADfan]

Just my very quick two Knuts here: Richard Harris was terrific; I always think of Gambon as the "fake Dumbledore." He's two dimensional and seems to have only two or three acting modes, none of which are appropriate for Dumbledore, IMHO. I have literally cringed when he's on-screen. And that's just the acting. The costuming and make-up for him has been dreadful. I could get past that if he played the role with any depth. I could even get past Gambon's mediocre looks if his acting were spot-on (the man was hardly attractive even in his younger days, unfortunately -- though I suppose others might differ in their taste). Harris, on the other hand, was able to switch from light-and-playful to serious-and-commanding, and he didn't act like a jerk in between times. And Harris always had a wonderful face, and he still looked great when he was old. I also think that he and Maggie Smith had great on-screen chemistry, which warms a shipper's heart. I could understand why Richard Harris's Dumbledore would inspire love and loyalty in so many people, and couldn't see it with Gambon's ham-handed portrayal.

Again, this is all just MHO, or perhaps not-so-HO! LOL! I wish they'd cast someone like Peter O'Toole in the role. He could have carried it off wonderfully. Not only is he just better looking (*grin*), he is a far better actor and I think he would have tried to live up to his friend Richard Harris's loving portrayal of the eccentric, powerful, playful, wise, yet not omniscient Albus Dumbledore from JKR's books.

So, anyway, I had to cast my vote for 1-2. ;D

Mini-rant over!

[beMMADfabulous]

I agree 100% MMADfan! I'm glad I'm not the only one who's cringed over Gambon on screen. Ick!

[Herzele]

mmadfan said:

And Harris always had a wonderful face, and he still looked great when he was old. I also think that he and Maggie Smith had great on-screen chemistry, which warms a shipper's heart. I could understand why Richard Harris's Dumbledore would inspire love and loyalty in so many people, and couldn't see it with Gambon's ham-handed portrayal.

Again, this is all just MHO, or perhaps not-so-HO! LOL! I wish they'd cast someone like Peter O'Toole in the role. He could have carried it off wonderfully. Not only is he just better looking (*grin*), he is a far better actor and I think he would have tried to live up to his friend Richard Harris's loving portrayal of the eccentric, powerful, playful, wise, yet not omniscient Albus Dumbledore from JKR's books.

So, anyway, I had to cast my vote for 1-2. ;D

Mini-rant over!

Oh yes, Harris looked so much better than Gambon ...
And his chemistry with Maggie was just perfect!!

Peter O'Toole? I have to admit I don't really know him, but I've always thought - and obviously I still do - that they should have asked Ian McKellen to take over ... I think he would've done the part justice as well ...

[Rachel]

Richard Harris. He was just exactly how I imagined Dumbledore.
And I think they should have got Ian McKellen too!I spent most of my time watching LOTR 3 going "He's Dumbledore!Why didn't they get him?"

[Hogwarts Duo]

Okay...I feel compelled to jump into the discussion today as well. I agree with a lot of what MMADfan said and here are my thoughts:

Richard Harris will forever be emblazoned in my mind as the only true Albus Dumbledore. Yes, he was the sweet older wizard who loved to behave as a child sometimes with his sweets and his genteel way. But let's not forget that he also had a very commanding side to him as well. Case in point...when everyone began to panic in COS thanks to Quirrel's troll incident, Richard's Albus raised his voice for a few well chosen words to calm the students then switched right back to his calm, well-mannered self. I dare say that had Gambon been in that scene, he would have screamed at the children and finished off the scene with a Severus worthy scowl!

In the first two books, the Albus we see isn’t haunted by the darkening days as much as he is in the later books. We are just getting a taste of Voldemort’s return and the gravity of the situation in the wizarding world isn’t anywhere near as serious as it becomes in POA and the later books. And don’t forget that Albus is the only wizard Riddle ever truly feared so that tells us that he (Albus) does have a very serious and commanding presence when needed. I believe if Richard Harris had lived to continue in the role he created, we would have seen his portrayal morph into someone more serious though still retaining that playful side. Albus did in the books and in my opinion Harris’ portrayal was an excellent representation of the Albus we see in the first two books and movies.

Lastly, don't even get me started on all of Gambon's disastrous wardrobe changes and his altered appearance. I understand he had to take the character and make it his own as well as listening to what the new director in POA wanted (can't stand him either...bah) but for his first outing as Dumbledore, he might have been more well received if he'd paid a little homage to Richard by trying to fit the part instead of making the part fit him. He showed a serious lack of respect to the millions of fans who had come to look at Richard Harris as their Dumbledore and if he hadn't died, I'm sure Gambon would never have been chosen for a HP part. He just doesn't fit into the HP world easily...or so it would seem to me.

Okay, off my soap box now. This isn’t meant to be an attack on anyone’s opinions nor is it posted to create a “battle” over the two actors. I’m merely stating MY opinion on the topic.

Toodles,
Ang.

[Herzele]

hogwartsduo said:

Okay, off my soap box now. This isn’t meant to be an attack on anyone’s opinions nor is it posted to create a “battle” over the two actors. I’m merely stating MY opinion on the topic.

Toodles,
Ang.

I don't think you will create a "battle", Ang ... I for one totally agree with you, and I guess most other people here do as well ...

[esoterica1693]

The "HP-related project" I've been immersed in which has kept me from finishing _Love and Wisdom_ is a close study of the spiritual themes in HP, for a class I'm teaching at my church. IMHO AD's playfulness and childlikeness are absolutely key elements in his character, as JKR is portraying him as a bit of a spiritual adept or mystic. This is also completely consistent w/ him being a great alchemist, as alchemy was, in its heyday, a spiritual discipline, not a chemical one. In the Western tradition of mysticism the most advanced mystics all retain/recover a childlike joy in life. They are often rather fond of singing and music as well.

To strip out the playfulness and childlikeness from his character is to diminish him from the figure of spiritual wisdom which JKR wrote him as, to a mere figure of great power and intelligence. A rather major shift and loss.

[MinnieQuill]

It seems my dislike of Dumbledore is shining through again. The Albus JKR portrays is, as I've mentioned before, too akin to a man I was knew, and now loathe. However, that aside, his 'playfulness' does nothing more than irritate me. To me, it's glib, and if it's one thing I hate, it's glib. As Richard Harris embodied that side of Dumbledore, I just turned the movie off.

I didn't see him as a figure of spiritual wisdom either; he plain irritates the living daylights out of me. Gambon though, to me, gives him an edge. Slightly sinister, but it's there. Am I crazy? Undoubtably. But there it is.

I can handle ADMM when the author doesn't exaggerate the playful aspect of his character; to me, that just doesn't tally with Minerva's character - I just don't see her putting up with it. That's why 'Lead Me Not Into Temptation' is great.

[tartanmin]

Richard Harris had the right looks, after Chris Columbud left and Harris died.
The style sort of changed and not for the better, It's not gambons fault but he's just not the real Dumbledore I mean he doesn't even look like him...

So definetly the forst to movies.
Perhaps I'm going to the cinema to see the fifth today;-)

[Hogwarts Duo]

Quite honestly I can’t see the Albus portrayed by Gambon to be a lover of chamber music, ten pin bowling, cockroach clusters, hot cocoa, sherbet lemons or any of the other things that JKR has said Albus Dumbledore loves. He (Gambon) comes across as a crotchety old man who had come to dislike his job and who at times wishes he could lash out at anyone who asks something from him.

That is absolutely NOT the way I believe JKR intended us to view Albus. Otherwise she would have described him as being the one dimensional character filled with bitterness that we see in Gambon’s portrayal. I do not honestly believe that Richard’s Albus would have yelled at students as Gambon’s did in this latest movie nor do I honestly believe that he has brought any depth or understanding to the character. In fact, he has seriously defamed the Albus created by Richard Harris and JKR.

Anyone can portray a bitter old man who is angry all the time but only Richard Harris could make millions believe in the fun loving, childlike, yet “serious when he needed to be” Albus. And honestly, if he was meant to be the cranky old Headmaster that Gambon creates, I think we would have seen that from the very first film as well as read it in the books, which we do not. As the books grow darker, I’m sure it would have been a necessity to put away some of the playful behavior but NEVER in the books do we see JKR’s Albus doing that so why should the movie representation do that either? It makes no sense at all.

I am an ADMM shipper because I absolutely love the pairing. For me there is no better complement to Minerva’s stern side than Albus, someone who loves her and brings out her playful side as well. Same goes for Albus. He is definitely childlike and playful at times and who better to bring out his more serious and down to earth side than his Minerva? They complement each other. I believe he shows her how to enjoy life to the fullest and she provides him with a safe haven and open arms when the weight of the world grows too much for him at times. I can’t honestly see either of them paired with someone else from canon (may have to eat my words next weekend but we’ll see… ). While I don’t ship Albus or Minerva with anyone else nor would I read a story pairing them with another (we’ve all given them past lovers, etc but a full relationship is different) I do not believe others are wrong in their ships…simply that they do not share my pov and that’s perfectly fine. However, if I don’t ship something I am certainly not going to waste my time on reading it simply b/c I happen to like either Albus or Minerva. That’s not a big enough draw for me to endure pages of watching one of my two favorite characters slobbering all over someone else when that’s not where my heart truly lies.

Again…just my very humble opinion on the matter.

[MMADfan]

I agree with 99% of what Hogwarts_Duo had to say. I may or may not read a story that ships a character with another character I don't ship them with, even if I normally want to read and/or write about a specific pairing. But I would never read (or write) a ship that paired one of my favorite characters with someone whom I didn't like and didn't want to see them with. And I wouldn't bother telling others why that pairing was bad because X character was despicable (or even just repeating that X character, i.e., half the ship, was despicable) -- not on a board devoted to that ship, anyway. I'd feel like a troll if I did that -- why on earth would I read stories of a pairing I didn't like to begin with? I just use the back button, thank you very much, and leave others to their enjoyment, even if their idea of a perfect pairing makes me gag. Nor would I write a story and take a character so far from canon he or she might as well be an original character -- for example, making Severus all Sweetness-and-Light who rescues bunny rabbits on the side and knits hats for house elves in secret, and who cries himself to sleep at night because he really actually likes Harry, was best mates with James, and is friends with Lupin and Sirius, and he just can't let Harry know it. He's just a sweet, cuddly fellow. Might as well create a new character, IMO. That's not the Snape from JKR's world.

We all play up certain characteristics more than others, emphasizing certain ones for certain fics, and so on, and there's more than one way of writing a character (I've read a number of Snape fics in which there is a huge variety of characterization, but all of them were nonetheless recognizably Snape, even if we saw him in a different light from what we're able to see in the books -- I've also read Snape fics in which he was so out-of-character as to be unrecognizable, and I hit my "back" button), but if someone chooses to write an OOC character, that should be put in the summary of the story so folks are forewarned. I know that on many archives, there's actually an "OOC" option in the menus for uploading the story summary.

Anyway, I think that Richard Harris kept Dumbledore in character and in keeping with the spirit of the books. Gambon doesn't appear to appreciate or understand Dumbledore, and it comes through. I think he's likely projecting his own character, or some other distorted image he has in his mind, onto Dumbledore, rather than looking deeply into the character JKR created and using that. If there were only movies and no books, there would be no way to tell whether one actor or the other was better at portraying Dumbledore -- there'd only be a matter of taste in which interpretation we preferred -- but since there are the books, and the movies and their characters are supposed to be based on those books, we can compare the Dumbledore from the books with the Dumbledore we see on screen and say which actor keeps him more true to the books. And I go with Richard Harris every time.

[EloquentPhoenix]

Richard Harris was beyond amazing, he was Dumbledore. Gambon, frankly, is not. He's completely useless.

[pinnacle]

There's actually a very interesting article online concerning JKR's inspiration for Dumbledore's character, here: living.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1102362007

Excerpt:

HE IS living quietly in retirement, fondly remembered for his charisma, wit and wisdom by generations of academics and students. But the chances are you have never heard of Professor Peter Wiseman.

Look a little more closely at the tall, white-bearded, 67-year-old Classics scholar and you get the first hints of a remarkable secret: Professor Wiseman was the inspiration for one of the most famous characters in modern children's literature.

Academics at Exeter University have revealed that one of their most famous graduates, JK Rowling, based her fictional creation Professor Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore on the real-life Professor Wiseman.

Dumbledore is venerated by millions of readers and film-goers around the world as the genial headmaster of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry who inspires Harry Potter to believe in himself and to confront evil.

Wiseman made a big impression on the young JK Rowling as her mentor during her time studying Greek and Roman mythology at Exeter between 1983 and 1986. In the past she has revealed she used her lecturers as the basis for characters in the Potter novels. Now, with the saga about to reach its dramatic climax, Wiseman's fellow academics have broken their silence over the provenance of one of the key characters in the series.

They point to crucial similarities between Dumbledore and Wiseman, including the fact they are both:

• Imposing, tall and thin figures with twinkling eyes and white whiskers;

• Academic leaders who are renowned for their serenity and gentle wisdom as well as their formidable intellects;

• Possessed of whimsical wit and paternal demeanour, commanding reverence and respect from generations of students;

• Have a sweet tooth and a predilection for enjoying confectionery between lectures.

Oh, and you know, now that I think about it, I was ridiculously pleased with Gambon in Prisoner of Azkaban. You have to admit, his speech about dreams, his little spiel about the strawberries that Fudge still can't see, his incredibly long name, and his reaction - or lack thereof, hee - after Harry and Hermione tell him they've rescued Sirius and Buckbeak... he did very well. Yes, that's the Dumbledore I love in the books. Then again, he did read that book (if you don't know, Gambon has only read book 3, but hasn't read the others because he was so disappointed at how different the movie was, not because he had no interest in them).

[MinnyCat]

Well a lot of us are dissapointed in how different the books and movies are, but this next movie is going to be critical or him to get Dumbledores character right. After all it is tramatic! The cave and on the tower when he is talking to Draco, he has to be calm, cool, collective... yet look sick and seem sick as he does all the calm and coolness. Its going to be very difficult and idk how its going to turn out. I cant wait to see tho.

[Drake]

The issue here, I believe, is the psycho Harry-shakage in the GoF movie. It was after this act that Gambon became dead to me. Besides, he has a napkin ring around his beard. And he thinks he's playing Gandalf. But he isn't.

See, though, I do wonder if it's really him, or if it's the script. Or the director. It seems to me that an actor such as Gambon would be given a lot of free reign by the director, so I'm prone to blame Gambon. At the same time, it could be that the director decided to make Dumbledore an old crank and Gambon had to go along with that. OR, it could be a case of bad writing. We really don't know.

Regardless, of how it happened, Dumbledore went all wrong after movie 2. And that, to me, is why the movie franchise lost it's magic. I'm a shameless Bumblebee fangirl, what can I say?

[beMMADfabulous]

lemonykittens said:

The issue here, I believe, is the psycho Harry-shakage in the GoF movie. It was after this act that Gambon became dead to me. Besides, he has a napkin ring around his beard. And he thinks he's playing Gandalf. But he isn't.

I'm a shameless Bumblebee fangirl, what can I say?

I love you, I seriously do. ;D

[Drake]

Awwww, I love you too!

[pudupudu]

I’m going to make myself terribly unpopular here and I hope you forgive me but I really do prefer Gambon in the role.

Harris was fantastic as Dumbledore in the first two movies, I admit, but I could never have imagined him battling dark wizards- he reminded me too much of Father Christmas. Gambon is a more mischievous and slightly darker Dumbledore which makes him more appropriate for the more sinister direction that the stories take.

He has been described as the actor to be most like his role (see the interview on the special features of the ‘Goblet of Fire’ DVD- may only apply to the British version) and I would have to agree with this. As a person he really is a charming, eccentric, fun loving and wholly amiable individual, making him fit the role perfectly.

I adored Harris, yes, and it was a shock to the system to see someone else in the role but it was the result of tragic circumstances and not the fault of Gambon. Watch this clip and see if you warm to him at all- youtube.com/watch?v=U3aBVmqeX70&mode=related&search= - I really hope you do, he’s a very fine actor indeed, a nice man and, I think, a great Dumbledore.

PS. I will admit that I too was more than a bit miffed by the 'Dumbledore mistakes Harry Potter for a pepper pot' scene in GoF but prefer to forget that this happened as I really do think he more than made up for it in film 5

[Pingpongfreak]

I think a lot of people resent Michael Gambon as Dumbledore because he plays more of a realistic character, a flaw person who makes mistakes. Whereas Richard Harris played the mysterious, sage-like Dumbledore. But even if Richard Harris was still alive and still playing Dumbledore, he would have to tone the likeability factor down, because as Harry gets older, Dumbledore becomes less perfect.

[kissofdeath]

pingpongfreak said:

I think a lot of people resent Michael Gambon as Dumbledore because he plays more of a realistic character, a flaw person who makes mistakes. Whereas Richard Harris played the mysterious, sage-like Dumbledore. But even if Richard Harris was still alive and still playing Dumbledore, he would have to tone the likeability factor down, because as Harry gets older, Dumbledore becomes less perfect.

Not really. Alot of people resent Gambon because his Dumbledore is meaner, angrier and a child abuser where Dumbledore is suppose to be calm, kind, and grandfatherly. I dunno about you but I'd be terrified to have Gambon's Dumbledore as my grandfather.