|
|
Post by MinnyCat on Jul 27, 2007 23:13:12 GMT -5
I’m going to make myself terribly unpopular here and I hope you forgive me but I really do prefer Gambon in the role. 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. For one thing, even tho your opinion is different then most peoples on here you arent going to be unpopular..... at least not with me. lol. And I watched that one thing and it made me laugh. But I do still like the other Harris better. He just seemed for warm and fuzzy to me and that is how i pictured him. I think, that if he had lived today he would be playing Dumbledore beautifly and could have made the character a little darker as the movies went on. It just seemed to be a dramatic change from movie 2 to movie 3. But thats just me. |
|
|
|
Post by pudupudu on Jul 28, 2007 4:18:38 GMT -5
Yes, I think that's true for me as well. I was slightly... intrigued... by what my friend has dubbed 'the gypsy beard look' and I think it took me a while to get used to Gambon's voice rather than Harris' which had a kind of hypnotic quality but I adapted to it soon enough. It must be awfully hard to play a character that people both know from a book and think they know from a film but I think Gambon stepped up to the challenge admirably. I'm glad you don't dislike me for having a different opinion than most- I suppose I've always liked sticking up for 'the little guy'  |
|
|
|
Post by Pingpongfreak on Jul 28, 2007 5:12:41 GMT -5
I just think that Michael Gambon took Dumbledore in a different way. While he still has SOME of the sagelike qualities, he isn't trying to be Richard Harris. That would make him even more unpopular than before. I suppose he had more of a "tough love" approach in GoF, and I'll admit, I didn't like the whole shaking Harry scene either, but it was a character choice, and it was there for a reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Drake on Jul 28, 2007 9:34:28 GMT -5
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. But no less likable. That's the kicker. *look carefully for spoilers* Even when we hear about his DARK BACKSTORY! (tm) he doesn't suddenly become Teh Ebuil!!!!1, the huge shock is that, whoa, our Dumbledore did that?
Whereas, if Gambon's Dumbledore was the Dumbledore I had know all my life, my first thought would be, "Oh, then. That makes sense."
Someone somewhere else asked if, now that we know his DARK BACKSTORY! (tm), we could accept Gambon in the role more. I'd say no. Because the reader's reaction is suppose to be one of "Hoooooly... crap...." rather than one of "I knew it." *End Spoilers |
|
|
|
Post by Pingpongfreak on Jul 28, 2007 10:27:10 GMT -5
Yeah, I can see what you're getting at. I don't like Michael Gambon half as much as I loved Richard Harris, but I still don't think he's a terrible Dumbledore. I think he's just very multi-layered. =]
|
|
|
|
Post by MinnyCat on Jul 28, 2007 10:44:24 GMT -5
pingpongfreak, I like that multi-layered thing. lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pingpongfreak on Jul 28, 2007 11:01:09 GMT -5
why thank you. :-)
|
|
