Yay! I finally got around to making this forum that I've only been promising for the last couple of months...

And I thought this would be a good one to start us off.

Personally, I don't like Gambon's Dumbledore at all. I much preferred the quiet, omnipresent, all-knowing intelligence of Harris' Dumbledore. Obviously, the poor guy couldn't help dying, but it was a real tragic loss. Harris will always be Dumbledore to me.

So what do you think? Do you like Gambon? Do you prefer Harris? Or would you like to see someone else entirely in the role?

I'd say yes, he just doesn't have the same demeanor as Richard Harris did. I probably wouldn't have watched any of the movies past the second if they replaced Dumbledore for other reasons for what he was replaced. If ANY of the original cast from characters who have more than one line is changed throughout the movies (without good reason), its simple - I won't watch them. If the actor just didn't want to be in the movie - Nope, still wouldn't watch it.

I have to be honest and say that I didn't think that Richard Harris was the best of Dumbledores. Yes- he was better than Gambon, however the big thing that bugged me with the original Dumbledore was his voice.

It's a little funny, because I like Richard Harris normally- LOVED him in the Count of Monte Cristo (but then I like the movie in general). However I had this image on Dumbledore when I first read the books and his voice just didn't fit with me.

I'm quite an audio person. I can remember entire movie lines after one sitting. I couldn't for the life of me tell you that someone's dress was blue though unless I see it over and over. But I can hear in my head how what was said and who by. Maybe that's why is bugs me so much.

Other than that, him being the original is always going to be thought as the best. One of the great actors of the world- Ian McKellan for example- could come into the role and Harris would still probably be thought as THE Dumbledore.

The thing with Gambon's performance that bugged me is the aggressiveness of it. I don't know if this is something that is part of him, as I've never seen anything else of him, however the character of Dumbledore has changed dramatically to be much more aggressive. Especially in GOF when he was all but choking Harry. Since when did Dumbledore ever act like that?

Yeah that part of GoF made me a bit skeptical, and actually made me feel a bit put off by the director. Dumbledore didn't do that - unless i'm mistaken. He was definitely angry, but not at Harry, he was more scared for Harry's life than anything - that scene just didn't portray Dumbledore very well.

I will always prefer Richard Harris, no matter what. There was just something about him. When I saw the first movie, I had never read any of the books, and I guess you could say I sort attached myself to him as my Dumbledore. He is how I envision Dumbledore and that is how I will always see him in my head. There was something about his calmness and his knowledge that just hit Dumbledore's personality so perfectly.

But on the flipside, I really doubt that poor old Richard Harris could've done all that dueling in OotP. He was a very old guy, but unfortunately, he is not a wizard and he was not going to live till 150. I felt like I could see a real decline in his health from movie one to movie two. I will always admire Richard Harris, and he will always be my Dumbledore.

Michael Gambon was completely okay by me in Prisoner of Azkaban. I feel like I was the only one on the planet who actually liked that film. I thought it was pretty good. I thought that Michael Gambon did a pretty good job at filling in Hariss's shoes. He seemed to hit the quirky side of Dumbledore pretty well, but still had a powerful vibe to him. The only problem I had with him was when he hit Ron's leg in the hospital wing. But I think they were just trying to incorporate some humor in a sort of tense-ish moment.

Goblet of Fire though....sheesh. What a joke. I would've liked that movie a lot more if it wasn't trying to be a book I really liked. Personally, no matter how many times I watch that movie, it will never be at the top of my list for the HP movies. Never. I couldn't believe how violent Dumbledore was in that film. He would never shove Harry or shake him. And he would never strangle Mad-Eye/Crouch no matter who he really was or anything. And when he read Harry's name on the paper after it got out of the Goblet of Fire, he would never scream his name or give him dirty looks or anything. Dumbledore cares about Harry like a son. I completely hated him in this movie. I got done watching that movie and I said I can't wait until he dies in the sixth one. I don't even think I'm going to cry. You really know someone acts poorly when a person can't even cry when their character dies.

Do I believe it is Michael Gambon's (or Richard Harris for that matter) fault for a terrible performance? No.
I thought the whole Goblet of Fire movie was a big joke. And I put all of my blame on Mike Newell. I don't really think he was taking Harry Potter seriously. I pretty much think it is him because how can I like Gambon in one film and not in the next? Because I believe that the directors were solely responsible for how Gambon acted his part. Gambon has never read any of the books, so he could only go by how his directors told him. I don't care if he wanted to put his own "style" on Dumbledore. That's the most terrible thing you can ever do to a character like Dumbledore. AAARGH!! I really hate Mike Newell.

So anyway, before I get too fired up about how we a got a really terrible director, I have really high hopes for David Yates, and by the things I have heard about the next movie, he really knows what he's doing. So I'm hoping Yates can completely overshadow Newell because Newell is just....doxy droppings.

(should I join this one me being in the minority?? Oh, what they hay.)

So, I love Richard Harris. I do. I've loved his films (particularly "Gladiator," "Mutiny on the Bounty," one of the "Camelot's," "A Man Called Horse," and some of his others where his roles were a bit more minor. . .), but I was never that fond of his Dumbledore. I think he portrayed some aspects of Dumbledore better than Gambon and vice versa. (I'm with you, Pix, it's his voice that really had me irritated during these films. I kept having to rewind and turn the volume up to figure out what the heck he was saying half the time. I didn't have to do this with his other movies. Maybe it's just temporary deafness when I'm watching the first two HP films, I don't know.) I thought he played Dumbledore as a bit too unapproachable. I know that he might seem that way to some, but he really never seemed that ethereal to Harry.

Gambon, I actually kind of enjoy his rough edges. I, with the majority, don't think that throttling Harry in anger thing was good at all, but I like his overall approach to the character. I have noticed nuances in the movie that point majorly to directional errors rather than actor-intepretation errors, but that obviously can't apply to all of his actions. Do I think he would be well-served to read the bloomin' books? Definately. I'm actually a tiny bit surprised that he hasn't even expressed interest in doing so. (Heck, I made myself read "Yvgenie Onegin" just to play stinking Tatiana in the play . . . talk about a shift for me. Russion Literature, not exactly my all-time favorite.) Do I think that he's a horrible actor/Dumbledore that should be blighted from the negatives of the film? Absolutely not.


So, on the whole, I support his Dumbledore. I would have been fine had Harris survived to reprise his role, albeit sitting a little closer to the screen, but I can't really complain on Gambon's overall portrayal.

Oh, I just remembered. I think I said something to this effect in another thread. . .

I'm sure this wasn't the intent, but I actually think it's not a bad thing for us to question Dumbledore and his angry responses to Harry (in the film versions of the story) at this point in time. I think this will help with the transition Harry has to make regarding Dumbledore in OotP. If we were feeling too warm and fuzzy regarding Dumbledore, our about-face might be too sudden on film and feel just as choppy as the entire GoF piece. Just my opinion, though.

If I could change one thing about the filming of Harry Potter, I'd have made it start four years later. That way, the only man I have complete faith in would have been free to play him - Ian McKellen.

He's got the eyes, for one. But I think he played Gandalf perfectly, and Gandalf and Dumbledore obviously have a lot in common. They are both more powerful than they let on, so when they do magic you know something has gone wrong. Both characters carry the weight of the world on their shoulders and deal with it by being light-hearted. Still, they become grave as things get worse - never losing hope or control.

Some things they do differently, but Sir Ian McKellen, being an excellent actor, would obviously be able to twig it. I think Gambon is a great actor as well - I loved him in Open Range (random movie), but he was playing an aggressive character there, which he of course did brilliantly. The difference between him and McKellen though, is that on the set of LOTR, it was Ian McKellen who sat with his copy of LOTR, qouting passages and referencing his book. That didn't bother anyone there, because the entire cast and crew were going for as much canon as possible. I'm convinced that if McKellen got the part for Dumbledore, he'd go through some trouble to get his Dumbledore right.

I know what you guys are saying about Harris and his voice. He sounded to me as though he could hardly breathe and that talking was an effort. He made Dumbledore a little too grave, but I still prefer that to Gambon's aggressiveness.

But like Droob, I blame a lot on Mike Newell. He made everyone more aggressive than they should have been. Fred and George would never try to strangle each other if a prank or a joke bombed - they'd be laughing harder than anyone else. I also got the feeling he wasn't taking Harry Potter seriously. He was making it too - serious.

First of all, I want to say that I have nothing personal against Gambon.I'm against the Dumbledore he's playng.

Yes, we need a new Dumbledore. Like Just The Droobles said, I couldn't cry, when this new DD dies, which is enough reason to me to want him out.

Seccondly, I think Gambon and filmmakers fail to show that special connection between Harry and DD. The only scene which I noticed it a little was the after pensive scene, but everywhere else in film DD was just a distance headmaster, to who Harry is just pupil among others.

One reason is too that he doesn't have the natural power that DD had in first two films. He had to shout to get his voice heard, when DD should only need raise hand to get pupils quiet. And that goes to fighting as well. Although Richard Harris's DD looked old, I could have well imagined him shooting spells against Voldemort easily. But although Gambon's DD is lot more agile, he doesn't fit my image to powerfull wizard who would be the only one he's ever feard. Dd looks now more like person who would flee in sight of Voldemort than person who had (almost) unlimited powers.



It's somewhat funy to me that lot of people have problem with Richard Harris voice, 'cause I have same thing for Gambon. It's sometimes very irritating as he speaks like he had cold all the time. Yes, that hasn't go to anything to do with DD, but I just had to said it.

That's kinda what I was thinking as well- Ian McKellan is a brilliant actor. He's played every possible role and been convincing in all of them. But given the timing of the first HP- there's no way he could have done that and not be thought of as 'Gandalf'. But his Gandalf- while not exact- is much more how I saw the Book Dumbledore. He's not perfect. He makes mistakes and errors in judgement. But he's soft when he needs to be, forceful at times, cares a lot for his young companion and has the deeper strength feeling to him despite looking very old. And his voice is powerful.

I also agree with you that there's been a lot more canon in the LOTR movies than HP- but then I'm going to get us off topic So I'll just say that I think if Ian McKellan had been told to strangle Harry Potter he would have thrown in a book and asked where about it said that.



Once again I agree with you. I don't know if it's Michael Gambon's character- which is sorta what I said before- or if it was just the direction and script writing. I mean, I highly doubt that Mr Gambon would have read the script and gone 'Gosh darn it, I just seem too nice! Couldn't I choke Harry at some point? What about during the scene where I pull out his name from the Goblet??'



Nope. I'd say it's more the direction and scriptwriting than blaming Michael Gambon

Hmm, I prefer Harris over Gambon, but I'm not sure if there is a better Dumbledore than Harris out there. So for now I am content with Gambon

Richard Harris was an excellent Dumbledore, I think he was softer and had an air of knowledge about him as well as sweetness. You know how in the books he cracks jokes like a sweet old senile man (lol such things like when he says the four words beforet he feast they were Nitwit Oddement and the other ones), well I think Harris is better at capturing that side of Dumbledore. When Gambon smiles he seems wicked...but that's just me. But Gambon is good for Dumbledore's mysterious side, I think he did a really good job in the 4th movie (even though he wasn't totally true to Dumbledore) and really showed off Dumbledore's perhaps, darker side.

But I have become attached to Gambon, I think he is a good change, since the change was absolute, for the way the movies are going (in my opinion they no longer have that thing that makes them Harry Potter like the first two did) I think Gambon makes a great addition, but if Mr. Harriss was still around I think his acting and the new directors might have clashed.
But this is just me rambling on, I am finished now so bye

Yes!

When i watched Goblet of Fire i was thinking how un-Dumbledore like Gambons performance was. You know the bit when Harrys name was drawn out the Goblet, well i think Gambon got just about everything he could get wrong, wrong!

Firstly he statred shouting 'Harry Pawter!' in an Irish accent! When has Dumbledore ever had an Irish accent? And then to make that worse he started shouting, like he was really angry! Dumbledore would never, ever, in a million years shout like that at a pupil.

Then when they went into that anti-chamber, Gambon practically assaulted Harry! We know from Ootp that when Umbridge grabs Marietta and shakes her, and Dumbledore goes 'I will not have you manhandle my pupils' or something like that, that he is very against this. What is the production team up to putting this in! When J.k. Rowling saw it she must have almsot been in tears!

And then to cap everything when it comes for Gambon to say the 'Dark and Difficult times' line, he completely mauls it with his Irish accent! No offence to Irish people, i usually love the Irish accent, but he massacred that line! It was really annoying because in the cinema i couldn't hear the line he said, and thought they'd kissed it out. But i went back the next day and heard it and started laughing! This is one of my favourite lines in the series, and he did it terribly!

But i don't know if there is a better Dumbledore around. Some people say Ian McKellan, but i don't think he suits the role....I guess Dumbledores written as a charectar in such a way that we can never be wholly satisfied with the actors performance. But i maintain that yes, we need a new older, less Irish and less physical Dumbledore...

Richard Harris was a great actor and he's surely missed However, he did not make a good Dumbledore. He did not want to play DD either. He was battling with cancer, and did not like the idea that he would have to come back to make the other films (LOTR was all shot in one go ) I think they all kinda bullied him into it. Yes DD is old, but he's no frail well, not in the first 2 anyway, Harry often has to run to catch up with him and he seems very fit for his age. Alas, Harris wasn't.

This doesn't mean that I don't like him, i just don't think he was the right choice. Of course like quite a lot of people i would have loved to have seen Ian Mackellen up there, but i don't think he wanted to be type casted as the 'Wise old wizard' Another actor that i would have liked to see was Ian McDiarmid (Palpatine in Star Wars.)

However, when i found out that Gambon was replacing Harris I was happy and contet with thier choice. Gambon is a great actor! I always have this image of him in a dressing gown looking for scrambled eggs when i see him (In some BBC drama, lol)

Anyway, in PoA I loved him in it. I thought he was brilliant as DD, the distracting the minister by talking about stawberries cracked me up!! And also when Hermione and Harry tell him that they've done it, and he's 'Done what?' Oooh

Anywho. I GoF, yeah, i agree. What happened to this amazing Dumbledore that I had fallen in love with!. Like Janet, Droobles and i think everyone in the world, what was with the throttling of Harry

No! I mean.. Argh sorry, i was so upset when i saw that, he wasn't a violent man towards Harry, and no yelling, no dirty looks like others have metion, Nu uh!

But... I still do think that we should give him a chance. He's in the 5th one and he might do a better job of it there. Like Droobles, i blame the directing, he's already proved (to me at least ) that he can play Dumbledore well, and I think that we should stick with him.

Firstly, I've just got to say how much I love the Samba icon, Ygraine *chuckles* Man, David is a wicked Doctor Who....anyway...

I am really surprised at the number of people in here who had reservations about Harris. It's been quite an eye-opener reading these posts - I was under the impression that the majority of the fandom loved him, but it seems not...interesting....

I know what you mean about his voice though, but the reason it was so weak and Harris, in general, was so frail was because he was dying of throat cancer - there's a definite deterioration in the strength of his voice between PS and CoS. He knew he had it, as Ygraine said, but as it's one of the more treatable forums of the disease, maybe he thought he'd be able to fight it...poor guy... *sigh* But still, in the first film, when he was a bit stronger, I thought he wasn't a bad Dumbledore at all. The thing is that I'm faced with the same problem here as I am in getting past Alan Rickman being Snape - coming to the books through the movies, I've never seen Dumbledore any other way than as Harris played him. I liked the quiet intelligence, the feeling he gave of complete control over the situation and I don't think Gambon has that at all.

Mind you, that being said, I don't have a problem with his practically throttling Harry - that was the one part where I thought he did a fairly decent job. He wasn't angry with Harry - he was frightened for him, terrified, and that's the way it came out. Of course, it goes back to what I was saying about the feeling of being in control - Gambon never seemed in control in GoF. I always had the impression from reading the book that Dumbledore knew a lot more than he let on, but I'm just not getting that with Gambon.

I do agree with everyone who's mentioned Sir Ian McKellen though. He would have been an incredible Dumbledore. As would the guy who played the professor in the original BBC adaptation of 'The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe'...but sadly he's dead now too. I don't know....I guess we're stuck with Gambon now. I just hope that the director of OotP (who I can't recall at the moment) brings more out of him than Newell was obviously able to.

I read this and had to smack my head. . .(where is that icon, anyways?)! Duh! I even knew this, but, well, did I mention that I can't add? So, now I feel like a horrible person for still complaining about having to turn the volume up and still not being attached to his Dumbledore.

Helen, I didn't know that he didn't really want to reprise the role. . . who twisted his arm to do it?

If you want to see a couple of obvious errors by the director's direction fo Dumbledore, take a look at the scene where the names are coming out of the goblet. Dumbledore's actions are not consistent. They don't even make sense. Since the Goblet was obviously not really spitting the names out-this is a definate case of error by the director, who gives the actors their marks and responses to these "blue-screen" moments.

I was aware that Richard Harris had throat cancer and forgive me for sounding uncaring or rude, but maybe he just shouldn't have done the role in the first place.

Whether it was the director/casting pushing for him, or his decision, but something like that really does affect your performance. You wouldn't get someone who had throat cancer singing, so why put them in a high-speaking role acting?

It seem a little selfish of the casting to push him into it if that IS what happened.

Dumbledore is one of the two roles that I've always had a problem with the way that they have been portrayed. Maybe I just liked my own mental image of him too much, but everyone else managed to adjust to it a little. I just think that the could have- and can still now- have gotten it a little differently.

Oh he does doesn't he! And Sooo Pretty!! (Btw all my icons are David Tennant, the new Dr Who, also Barty Crouch Jnr in GoF )

Anywho..



I'm not too sure... This is what i've heard, that Harris didn't want to do the role, because of the long term commitments. Bullied perhaps wasn't the best word for it, pressured him is probably a better one. Of course, i could be wrong. But I really don't think he was overly keen on the idea.

Well, I doubt he had to be pushed. I mean, he's got free will and he could have said no if he wanted to. When you're as successful as he is, he could have had the choice of any role he liked. There must have been a certain amount of acceptance on his part, even if he did need a little coaxing. I really don't think that anyone would risk their health just to play a role.

I wouldn't pay much attention to the gossip columns though. I remember reading something when he was dying that said he was adament that he didn't want anyone else to play Dumbledore, which I doubt is true, especially in the light of the possibility that he had to be pushed into the role in the first place.

Maybe he's cursed the role...just like the DADA position Anyone else who plays Dumbledore is doomed to be moaned about

Well, today in my band class we watched Goblet of Fire after we had finished taking our final exams, and it reminded me of something else that really annoys me about Gambon. Again, it may not be his doing, but it still annoyed me.

He seems to mispronunciate a lot of words. Maybe it is just a difference in how we says them, but I was curious to how everyone else said these words.
He says "Boh-bat-tins" and I say it more like "Boh-buh-tawn."
He says "Durm-strayng" I say "Durm-strong."
He also says "Bartemus" instead of "Bartemius."

Those are the only ones I remember. Am I just going crazy? Is it because he's Irish? (He is Irish, right?)

Then I had to sit there and cringe at he shouted Harry's name as it came out of the Goblet and how he acted all stupid when the Goblet started to spout all crazy and then I had to watch him throttle Harry again...he's just way too...harsh.

Once you take out the GOF scene I do not think Gambon really did that bad of a job. That whole scene was such a mess for the Dumbledore character. That falls back to the director. I did prefer the mild manor soft spoken character played by Harris. That conveyed to me more the old wise confident man Dumbledore is suppose to be. While that is partially the success of Harris it is also a tribute the the director of the first two. My memory is failing me now but I believe it was Chris something who directed the first two. Between Harris and the director, the really nailed Dumbledore.

I think Gambon can play Dumbledore but he needs the right director.

Oh, that's who the new Doctor Who is? Cool... I was curious about that. I did not know... Anyway... back on topic...

I agree with those who prefer Harris as Dumbledore. I think that Harris was far from perfect as DD, but only because his health was deteriorating like that. Apart from that fact, he always played DD almost exactly as I had always envisioned him in my mind. Any qualms I ever had with Harris were in minor extremely-nitpicky line-deliveries... stuff like I would think, "Hm... I would've gone a slightly different way with that line." And those are all very minor, personal opinion issues. That having been said, though, one has to think that when it came time (as it would) for DD to get quite a bit more physical in the role (in OotP, anyway), sadly Harris just never would have been able to pull that off as it will have to be done.

With Gambon... I think that he's definately the inferior DD for all the reasons already stated (though I am among those who can see and buy his shaking of Harry and everything in GoF; it seemed clear to me that it showed through that it was a reaction from his fear and worry over Harry, rather than anger; though, at the same time, I'm bothered everytime by his angry shouting of Harry's name when it comes out of the Goblet... that just never rang true for me at all). But he's what we have now, and I myself have defended him too because while I don't think he's the best DD, I think we could have done worse too. And at least, I can believe that he'll be able to pull off the duel with Voldemort pretty well.

Then there's Sir Ian McKellen. Oh wow, wouldn't he have been a great Dumbledore! I can say with absolute confidence that he could have pulled off every aspect of the character superbly and magnificently. But there's more of a problem with him than just the initial scheduling conflicts. Type-casting aside (which I don't think would really be a problem in his case, no matter how many wizened old wizards he could play, he's got enough experience and variety, that I think he could probably avoid such an affliction as type-casting), just the fact that he did play Gandolf is enough of a factor to make him less ideal for Dumbledore. He would do a great enough job that it might be worth overlooking, but still, if I were casting the movies and I had a shot at getting Sir Ian McKellen for DD (after he had already done LOTR), I would still be hesitant just for the simple fact that after having played such a huge and memorable (and dear-to-so-many-people's-hearts) role in such a massive epic of a movie (trilogy), who could ever look up at him on the screen of Harry Potter and help but say, "Gandolf!" It's just too similar of a role, in look and acting. The comparisons are far too prevalent already even without the same man playing both roles. I think he would do an absolutely brilliant job, but... do you see what I mean? There would just be something off about him portraying both. It would overlap the two characters just a little too much more than the world can necessarily handle, I think.

I personally would never ever like to see Dumbledore switched! Not becuase I am a huge fan of Sir Micheal Gambon (I'm not!), but becuase of the mediocre apperiance it would give Harry Potter movies. I mean, come on! When have you seen a sucessful movie in a series that has different actors that in its prior prequels? Warner Brothers made the decision to cast SMG when Richard Harris died, and no matter how badly he does or how badly the public likes his performances, if it is up to me, he stays.

However, if I were to just happen to find a time turner to set me back, what, 5 years, when the decision was needed to cast a new Dumbledore, I would have supported the decision for Ian McKellen (Gandalf in the "Lord of the Rings" Trilogy) to be cast in RH place. But, this is solely my opinion, which I predict many will disagree with.

Wow, its amazing how I write my peak editorials at 11:07 at night...hmm..

great minds think alike, so I see why my opinion is so different!!
O well, MOST great minds think alike, with me as the outlier, eh?

OK, I'm done rambling,
Best regards,
-karsh-

Karsh, I completely agree with you that replacing a character cheapens the movie. Especially when they try and make it out to be the same character. I mean with tv shows and stuff where someone leaves and so they bring in a NEW character it doesn't matter so much, but when all of a sudden the character- who used to be a 6 foot blonde- is now a 5'5 red head, you kinda sit there thinking... ummm.... no..

At least they made Gambon LOOK like Harris

So I'll change the wording of my posts to fit the question at hand---

"Do we need a new Dumbledore??"

No we don't need a new one.... but the old ones shouldn't have had the part in the first place.

I agree with what, I think, most people are saying. If I had to choose which I liked better it would probably be Harris, however, neither are my 'ideal' Dumbledore. But then again, I don't expect them to cast actors that are tailor made to my expectations .

I think, ideally, I'd like a hybrid of the two. For those of you that have seen The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, I think the actor who played Father Christmas, given the right clothes, could make a very good Dumbledore.

On a related note, I think one of the main problems with the Gambon Dumbledore is that they have him dressed like he just walked off the street and was like "hey can I be headmaster of this school?" and then proceded to try to dye is own clothes purple with a do is yourself home dye kit. Rowling said in her journal that when she visited the movie site Gambon had new clothes, so maybe we'll get something a little better for OotP

I hope so, because that was one of things that bugged me about Gambon's Dumbledore.

He had his beard all tied up and he was wearing all these rings. He looked like a hippie. Albus Dumbledore is not a hippie. And it clearly says in the sixth book that when Harry notices that ring on Dumbledore's hand, he knew it was odd because he had never seen Dumbledore wear any before. So it seems silly to "hippie-out" our Dumbledore.

I think a costume change would suit him well.

It just tickles me that his clothes are on trial. At least that is something that can be easily fixed, right? Perhaps if the costumer would pay attention to the books descriptions, Gambon wouldn't annoy so many people? Perhaps not.

I'm actually not bothered by his robes or his beard. What is that little tie-thingy, anyways? Ahem. The rings were a bit of a puzzle for me. And I don't like his hat.

Aside from that; I think that if this director pays attention, Gambon pays attention, and they follow what JKR has so beautifully written as Dumbledore-then he could be redeemed in everyone's eys. Or maybe not. Change is tough!

There`s many aspects of the whole "dumbledore package" in which I believe that Harris wins my approval.

To some extent, I believe that a combination of the two would make a better Dumbledore. Putting Harris's appearance, cool-collectiveness, and character, together with Gambon's.. well, charisma. I think we`d have the dumbledore necessary to carry on in the further roles.

Aha! That's it! The perfect solution! We don't need to cast a new Dumbledore! We just need to genetically engineer or own ideal Dumbledore! I know the idea crosses a lot of moral lines and is probably not entirely legal... playing God and what-not, but I still love the idea anyway. Imagine it: movies of the future! Instead of casting roles for movies, we just create the characters from scratch! I love it! This way, we can include aspects of all the actors suggested... possibly do some brain-tampering of some sort to adjust the mindset of the engineered character exactly to the required degrees too... Hm...

See, you think I'm joking, but you underestimate how far I'd go to make the perfect Harry Potter adaptation. I like it. We should get someone on this, stat.

Harris is my dumbledore, McKellan could easily have been dumbledore for me, but he'd have to be the original, as soon as Harris entered privet drive in SS i was hooked, before then i had a foggy image of dumbledore, but when Harris implanted a picture in my mind, his voice was calm and his demeanor was exactly what i would think dumbledore would have been like, McKellan would have been great, I liked him in LOTR and i know i would have liked him in HP, but since he wasnt the first dumbledore that i saw he can not be THE dumbledore, its just one of those lasting images.
As for Gambon i think he is bad, he isnt dumbledore, too violent, not calm, worried? dumbledore isnt worried like that, concerned yes but never worried, dumbledore would have known harry could handle anything,he would just be concerned for harry. Gambon always seems angry too. or is that just me.
Harris is my Dumbledore.

I agree with what most of you say about McKellan being a good choice for DD if the timeframe had been different. As it was I thought Harris was a perfect choice. He just fit the book version perfectly. I have to disagree with Pixymajik about his voice. I think Harris had DD's voice down perfectly.

Gambon just isn't up to snuff. He is trying to make the character "his" so to speak which is fine and dandy. The problem is that he is just going by what the director's and the screenplay script says. He says himself that he has never read any of the books and apparently has no intention of doing so. A poor idea in my humble opinion. Most actors would want to learn as much as they could about who they are going to play. And I think that you need to have an actor that would actually learn the essence of the character they are portraying. For instance what was mentioned on the first page about McKellan would have thrown a book out and said "where does it say that" . That's the type of person that I would like to see playing DD. Someone that actually will take a month or so to actually do some research of the character they are playing. Gambon might could do a better job if he would put a little effort into it. Personally if he can earn what I imagine to be a good size amount to play such a character he can take just a small amount of time to have an idea of the character and make an effort to portray them more accurately.

Well besides Dumbledores outburst at harry in GoF I do like Gambon. I really liked Harris and he is what i would picture Dumbledore at least physically but he seemed to meek for me. I understand that he was ill and all but his portayal of DD was a little off for me. Now Gambon has his faults dont get me wrong but i think i read this in another post that changing again would ruin the movies. I'm looking forward for the ministry scene in OotP. I just cant picture Harris playing the intense dueling scenes. I can see Gambon playing them well. I guess for me the movies are just that movies. they will never measure up to the books but I enjoy watching the visuals. I have also used them to get people hooked on the books. So even though i would like to see some changes in Gambons DD, I dont want to see him changed completely. I do think that Gambon needs to remember that this is still a "childrens" book and needs to watch what he says in interviews and he needs to clean it up a bit.

I've been thinking about this a lot. I always liked Richard Harris's portrail of DD and knowing that he was ill made it easy for me to accept a new actor in the role. Michael Gambon has done a great job so far but he does seem a little harsh. An actor with a combination of the two would be better. I always imagined Peter O'Toole in the role. He's a great actor but maybe a little too old. He has a great quote and that's what put him in my mind. "When did I realise I was God? When I was praying and realised I was talking to myself"

I think Gambon will be better in OotP, he will have made the role his own, so I don't think it's time for a change just yet.

Incidentally, would anyone have thought that Ian McKellan was right for DD if they hadn't already seen him play a wizard?

i agree if we hadnt seen Ian McKellan as a wizard i dont think anybody would have thought about him. and honestly, i would have done a good job but i honestly think that i would see him on the screen and say hey isnt that gandolf but honestly i dont know. If i could use a timeturner and go back and pick a dumbledore i think i would pick Michael Caine.

For me, that's sort of the reason I wouldn't want Ian McKellan to play Dumbledore. He was already known in the LotR series, and I don't think the two really need to be mixed up. Gandolf is not Dumbledore, and Dumbledore is not Gandolf, and I don't think we need to be confusing that. Sure, maybe Ian would have been fine if he had played Dumbledore before ever signing on to LotR, but I think there should be a distinction between the two characters. And there are actually a lot of fans for each universe that doesn't like the other. So...yeah.

Somewhere, either in this thread or the general one, somebody suggested Patrick Stewart for the role. My initial reaction was 'What Captain Picard! Are you mad' Well the other day I watched a rerun of a programme in which he test drove a reasonably priced car!!!! The interview with him was great what a lovely man, so genuine yet strong and powerful at the same time.He has a great voice, which can sound comforting or incharge. I bet if he were to play Dumbledore he'd make a grand job of it.

Most people are not very happy with Michael Gambons attitude to the role of Dumbledore. They think he is some kind of traitor because he hasn't read the books. Or that he is too harsh in his portrayal. I have to admit he is not my favourite of the 2 actors we've had and I agree that if he took the time to read the books, he would make a better job of playing the role how we expect.

Patrick Stewart would make a wonderful Dumbledore. He has the quiet, powerful voice needed to express Dumbledore.

I think that Gambon play Dumbeldore better. I think the powers at be (director, producer, writers, etc.) want Gambon to be different than Harris. They do not want to try to emulate greatness for fear of failure. I understand this logic.

Even so, what is the point in butchering a character by making him a madman? The Dumbledore in the movies works. But he should be so much more.

Hmmm I am going to both agree and disagree... as a Dumbledore fanatic I have many opinions on the topic. I really like Michael Gambons appearance as a whole... I think they need to clean up his teeth and nails... and make his beard just a shade lighter... but other than that.. I think he is the ideal Dumbledore... in regards to appearance. I really didnt like Richard Harris's voice... it was too.. dry... too croaky... I absolutely love Michael Gambons voice as Dumbledore... its rich.. its powerful... it has layers.... uhh it gives me chills to hear him in character.... and there in lies the problem... the directors perception of Dumbledore... I did not like the bluntness of Dumbledore is PoA... although some parts were good... I particularly did not like the scene when Harry and Hermione come back from using the Time-Turner... it was too... oblivious... he just waved his arm.. and said "Back from what?.... Good Night..."... it just wasnt Dumbledore...... and I positively jumped out my seat when he attacked Harry in GoF... how is that supposed to coincide with his "Dolores, I will not allow you to manhandle my students!"... when he manhandles them himself... that was completely off base... I lie in bed at night, and I cover my face in embarrassment for the director.. how could he have even though of doing that!!!... but on the flipside... Dumbledore's voice, played by Michael Gambon.. is perfect.... he did an amazing in the scene where he is talking to Harry at the end... very solemn.. and emotional... there is where I saw my spark of hope for the scene in the Lost Prophecy chapter... I know it will work...

On a side note.. i enjoy impersonating Dumbledore/Gambon when he storms into Impostor Moody's office.... EXXXXSPELLIARMUS!!!... ughh the chills go up my spine.. lol

~Albus

Wow. That was the most elipses filled post I have ever seen.

You basically outlined everthing I dislike about Gambon's portrayal. As I have already said, I hated him in GoF, as he did "manhandle" his students and he just seemed really stupid. Like when Hermione was in the champion tent and he was like, "What are you doing here?" and I was like...Hello? You are Dumbledore. I mean, you'd think that Dumbledore of all people would know why Hermione was in the champion tent. Even if she wasn't even there in the book.

I had no problems with Gambon in PoA. That part that you mentioned, Tom, where they come back and say "We did it." And he says "Did what? Goodnight." I had no problem with that. I just thought that was the sort of quirkiness coming out in Dumbledore. He said "Did what?" but he knew exactly what it was because he sort of had that Dumbledore twinkle. I don't know where that went in the fourth movie...but I guess not all the movies can be done as well.

And might I add I loved the scene in PoA where they go try to execute Buckbeak. Love it.

Sorry... I couldnt decide how to write it... so I decided to write it as if I was talking, hence the "..." I have a bad habit of using them very often of late, I need help breaking it! Arghh I used them twice in this post!

Somebody have compassion on me and stay my hand, it keeps straying toward the period button! haha

~Albus

Although I think that there are other actors who would perform the role of Dumbledore better than Gambon, I believe that Gambon should retain the role of Dumbledore in the films. I would still change his appearance. His beard needs to be a little longer and whiter. Other than this, I am satisfied with the costume.

Like (seemingly) everyone, I thought the scene where Dumbledore attacks Harry was frightful. This was, in my opinion, the first great departure of book Dumbledore and movie Dumbledore. Relatedly, I thought that Dumbledore should not have yelled, "Harry Potter!" in what sounded like anger when announcing Harry. Anger is an emotion that Dumbledore hides because it shows his power unleashed (as Harry saw in the Department of Mysteries).

I see hope with Gambon as Dumbledore. When he is comforting Harry at the end of Goblet of Fire, I truly saw Dumbledore and Harry together. The voice tone and hesitation was excellent. It showed Dumbledore as calm and patient, but also understanding. That was the Dumbledore that evokes confidence and trust.

Look, I know it's been a while since this thread has been active, but I just wanted to say that the original Dumbledore was actually never meant to be Harris or Gambon. As it turns out, the original actor to be cast as Dumbledore was none other than Patrick McGoohan (you may remember him as King Edward the Longshanks from the movie Braveheart). He ironically turned down the role due to health problems and the role went to Harris, but I have to say that I think McGoohan would have made an awesome Dumbledore! I'm not sure if this is widely known or not, but all three actors (Harris, Gambon and McGoohan) are Irish and it's not known whether there's a reason for that or if it's just plain coincidence.

That being said, I want to make it clear that I agree with the majority who've posted here that Harris was a better Dumbledore than Gambon could ever be. Gambon's misunderstanding of the character of Dumbledore is made all the more obvious with each movie since Chamber and what made me completely sick of him was his all the intense, stressed out, angry, loud, scared running around that he did in Goblet. His voice and his demeanor when he sits down next to Harry and says, "It's maddening!" is nothing short of... well, maddening! And did you see the Order preview when he's addressing the Wizengamot? He's saying something about how the fact that Riddle has returned is undeniable but all I could hear is "Please sir, can I have some more?"

Albus called Gambon's voice rich and powerful and I agree that it is. The problem is that while JKR did say that there was power in Dumbledore's voice, I never got the impression that she meant it was rich. There is a subtlety to the power Dumbledore has. He doesn't need a booming voice to show it, and I think Harris portrayed that perfectly. Just look at the end of Chamber when he's talking to Lucius. Try to remember the fear shown on Lucius' face after Harris speaks these words: "One hopes that no more of Lord Voldemort's old school-things should find their way into innocent hands. The consequences for the one responsible would be... severe." I'm sorry, but you don't get much more powerful than that. They didn't show it but I'm pretty sure Dobby was cleaning up a pool of something at Lucius' feet right around that point.

On a side note, I'd like to add that I agree with Aubrey in regards to Ian McKellan's would-be portrayal of Dumbledore. McKellan's voice is no less rich or powerful than Gambon's (probably more so), not to mention that overall Ian McKellan does exceedingly well in roles that involve absolute, in-your-face power, but as I said, Dumbledore was much more subtle. Nothing against Sir Ian; I adore his work. It's just that Dumbledore is not Gandalf or Magneto. Heck, half of Dumbledore's power comes from his appearance of being a brokedown, crooked-nose, skinny old man. Neither McKellan nor Gambon fit that category because they both just look too imposing. Even in The DaVinci Code McKellan simply looked like Magneto walking with a couple of canes. I don't know that he can play weak. He's sooo good at playing the unbeatably strong.

Elaine mentioned before that she'd heard about Patrick Stewart as an option should the time come for a recast (NOW! GO!) Well, I think that's a brilliant idea. He already has a great deal of practice playing a brittle yet omnipowerful old man with a quiet disposition. That's perfect! He'd be great! Besides, at this point anything's better than Gambon. READ THE BOOKS, GAMBON! JEEZ! Gambon needs to go. End of story.

That's all for now.

Ben (Z)

That is pretty funny. Probably just coincidence, but I wonder if the casting people sat down and said "Hey! Here's another Irish guy who can do Dumbledore . . .wanna cast him and see if anyone will notice?" Then you get the prize, Ben, I never paid attention.

Sometimes I feel like the only person around who isn't bothered by Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore. A few reasons, whether I'll get them in here or not once I start rambling is another story.

I think, on the whole, with the HP movies one has to have a detachment from the books in order to enjoy them. Especially now that they are redacting the novels into bare bones plot so that they can fit it all in. If we go in expecting and demanding everything given to us in the books, then we really have no hope of coming out of the movie with anything other than disappointment. I enjoy them each for what they are: the books are the books and the movies are the movies. Most of the characters, not just Dumbledore, come of very differently on screen than in the books. Hermione, anyone? I can't stand her movie version, but I love her book version. And yet, people are adamant that she remains the only Hermione possible. (Did anyone see GoF?)

Harris: I think he looked the part better, on the whole. I'll try to be sensitive to his health problems, but I always found it very frustrating that I couldn't hear/understand what he was saying! I was glad for Gambon, in spite of anything else he may have gotten/did get wrong -that at least I could hear him! I know it wasn't Harris' fault, so don't bean me over the head with a pole. Also, his Dumbledore had no flaws. Dumbledore needs flaws. Every one needs flaws! I like my characters, even the strong, impenetrable characters to have a flaw that brings them closer to my level. Something I can understand. In most characters, there are aspects that the audience/reader can relate to that makes them more human; more attainable. Without flaws, there isn't the perception that the character can be reached; they are so far ahead of everyone else. Whether this was the writing or the acting or the directing; I don't know.

I really like PoA Dumbledore.

The GoF Dumbledore: Here's where he really broke from the Dumbledore we know from the books. We see his frustrations, his uncertainty, and his flaws. I relate to this Dumbledore a little better, to be honest. Dumbledore isn't the all knowing, all powerful character we've been shown in the first three films: The man with all the answers and with the plans. This Dumbledore could show his weaknesses so that the audience could grasp the doubt and uncertain aspects of the plot-line. How much more apprehensive are we going to be when the character associated with "fixing it all" can't fathom a way out of the situation? I think, and I'm probably the only one who does, that it really drove home that point. Times are uncertain. No one knows what's going to happen. Dumbledore doesn't have all the answers. Dumbledore can grieve. Dumbledore can get angry. Dumbledore can show his emotions. I'm fine with that. Especially when we don't have as much backstory with him that we have in the books, I think that it's acceptable and works well in the medium where it is portrayed.

OotP Dumbledore: To me, it already looks better in the plot that GoF did. Incontrovertible, I think is what he says there. . .and I don't have the Oliver moment, Ben, though that's pretty funny now that you've said it! Harry isn't supposed to like Dumbledore in this movie. I wonder if we'll still grouse about it after the movie is over if that has been effectively portrayed. Harry is supposed to be angry and untrusting of Dumbledore. We'll see.

Gambon: He would be well-served to read the books. I agree. I think it's foolish and disrespectful in some aspects that he hasn't bothered to research this loved character before adapting him to screen. Some of his actions are even beyond me to justify on screen. Coulda, Shoulda played it a bit differently there. On the whole, though, I'm happy. Probably because I'm not expecting book Dumbledore, I don't know.

Patrick Stewart would be an awesome Dumbledore. It'd be interesting to see him in the wig. Ian McKlellen would have done well, too, but I'm almost glad he isn't. He steals the show!

In the meantime, while there's no rumor of change, I'll happily stand firm in my view of Gambon's Dumbledore. Happy in my staunchness.

At this point, you cannot replace Gambon. Whether good or ill, he is Dumbledore. I really believe that Gambon was cast for Order of the Phoenix. He was chosen because book five Dumbledore is very different from others. I can envision Gambon performing splendidly in the end scenes of OotP. It is the explanation and sympathy that Gambon excells at. This is what is required of Dumbledore at the end of the books. Gambon has done this well in each of the movies he has played in.

Sadly, Gambon does not seem to understand the character development. It is as if he believes the character must possess polar opposites. If he is to be kind and caring at one point, he must be harsh at another. This is not the Dumbledore from the books. Harris understood that the true character lies within the book. Gambon does not.

Going back to my original point, they have made OotP now. Can you really replace Dumbledore for HBP? In the movie that he dies, and presumably has a diminished to nonexistent role afterward? Gambon is Dumbledore now. I only hope he finds some spare time to do some leisurely reading before he steps on the set again.

You all have made some excellent points here. Michael Gambon...

Well, while I will concede that he is a very good actor, I would rather see someone else in the role of Dumbledore. JKR is always writing about Dumbledore having a "twinkle in his eye," etc., etc. Dumbledore is supposed to have an air of kindness about him at all times (even when battling Voldemort!), and I just don't see this in Gambon. He is, to quote Elaine, a bit harsh. He just doesn't seem at all kind or caring. If anything, he is intimidating, and it is reflected in his acting.

Ian McKellan... Oh, how I would love to see him in this role! He just has that old, grandfatherly aura about him. He seems to always have the beginnings of a smile on his face, and I could even swear that I see a twinkle in his eye in some of the LOTR scenes !

Richard Harris was wonderful, and had the same soft, kind features that Ian McKellan has. I just feel that Michael Gambon is too... well, harsh (to say it again). Do we see him smile at all in GOF? I can't even remember... I just picture him with a stern scowl on his face when I think of him.

Eh. I don't know. Anyone else?

I can't remember what I wrote the first time I posted in here. Something about...too late to change actors...Gambon a fine actor blah blah blah! Well I know that I mentioned Patrick Stewart for the role, and I stand by that, but and it's a big but, I should know I'm sitting on it! Sorry I digress, one actor for me always seemed to be of the same ilk as Richard Harrs and that's the absolutely fantabulous Peter O'Toole.This picture is of him in his Troy garb. Can you see what I mean? And curiously enough he's an Irishman too!!

Is that... Orlando Bloom I see in the background?

Hmm...

Note to self: rent movie.

Oh, and he looks like he would make a very nice Dumbledore. He just has a warm look about him .

I completely agree with etphonehome that Peter O Toole would be a great DD. As you said he has that warmness about him. In Troy he seemed very fatherly, which to me is a trait I see in DD as well. Unfortunately though, I think that if he did play it would be a rocky transition because he stands apart from the other DD actors because of his looks. I don't think he looks very similar to the other two.
Personally, I prefer Richard Harris as portrayin DD because, and I know that this sounds a little odd, but his husky voice just seems so grandfatherly to me, and that's how I imagined DD's. I know that sounds a little far-fetched but it's my wierd feeling.
The other actor I would totally agree with playing DD would be Ian McKellan. I loved his prtrayall of Gandalf, with which he did a wonderful job. I love to compare LOTR and HP, so as such I tend to compare DD with Gandalf. Ian McKellan has astounded me with some of his movies, and I would really like to see him astound me with portraying DD.

LilyPotter, deffinitely consider renting Troy, not only is Orlando Bloom in it, but Sean Bean as well.

Like most of you have said, I, too preferred Richard Harris as Dumbledore for many of the same reasons that workaholic_1231 does. As I read the books, I imagined Dumbledore to speak in that husky voice that Harris spoke in, and so when I saw the first film I thought "Wow!" because it was as if Dumbledore had literally leapt out of the book. It was very unfortunate that he died when he did as he was a great actor, and I will always remember his as Dumbledore. Even now when I re-read the books, I imagine Harris, not Gambon.

At first when I found out that Gambon was playing Dumbledore, I was excited. But now I'm not too thrilled about it. His demeanor isn't quite like Dumbledore's. He's a wonderful actor, don't get me wrong, but as far as being the warm, grandfatherly type that Dumbledore is, it just doesn't cut it for me. I agree that he is too harsh, and I don't remember him ever smiling in Goblet of Fire, now that you mention it. And, like someone before me said, the eyes don't twinkle as Dumbledore's should and as Harris' did.

However, I agree with After the Burial, as well, when it is said that it is too late to replace Dumbledore. If they did choose to find someone else to play the part this late in the series, I would be very surprised.

Although most of the excellent points have already been mentioned, I have to give my 2-cents worth as well.

To me, Harris was by far a better Dumbledore. I could feel the quiet strength pulsing from him through the tv. During certain scenes, like someone said at the end of CoS with Lucius in his office, he was so intimidating without showing anger. You could just feel it radiating from him just like in the books. That's the Dumbledore we read in the books. And at the end of SS when DD is in the hospital wing with Harry, he has that twinkle in his eyes everyone has mentioned DD should have. It was comforting and moving. I was extremely heartbroken when I found out what had happened to Harris so he wouldn't be able to finish the series.

When I first saw Gambon in PoA, I thought, he doesn't look like DD is supposed to look like. I was caught completely off guard. I can see the directors not wanting to mirror Harris because maybe out of respect to him and his character. However, his hair should have been whiter, not that dark grey. I could live with the difference of clothes and even the tie in the middle of his beard. I even liked his voice as many have already mentioned. All in all, I thought Gambon did a good job taking over DD considering the shoes he was filling in the wake of Harris.

However, when it came to GoF, I was appalled. He lost the essence of who DD was completely. I agree, he should show some emotions due to the situation of what was happening, but it was a complete 180 to how our beloved DD is supposed to be. There was no more quiet strength, no more twinkle in his eyes, gone was his impossing demeanor without the anger. The new DD is way too emotional to the point that I wouldn't be intimidated if he stared me in the eyes like he did back in CoS with Lucius. It just seems like he is falling apart.

Now, I didn't realize Gambon hadn't read the series. I agree, that is just an insult to DD. How can he understand the character he is supposed to be portraying if he doesn't even know the character on a personal level. He ought to have read the books.

What I'm most afraid about is the end of OotP when DD faces LV. When you picture that scene, which actor do you see? Do you see the quiet strength of Harris facing off with LV with his emotions in check, a twinkle in his eye, a smile on his face, while being in complete control oozing his intimidation without anger? Or do you see Gambon falling apart at the seams attacking with anger like he did Harry in GoF, no twinkle, and no smile to show his confidence. Me, I see Harris when I picture that scene. I just don't know how Gambon will be able to pull it off while doing the series and DD's character justice. Unless of course he read the books to study up on it in preparation for that scene. We can only hope.

I also agree with others that it is probably too late to replace DD again. He is there and they need to make the best of it. I can see potential for Gambon because of what I saw in PoA and at the end of GoF with Harry. He has to ability to do great if he wants to put for the effort.

I'm like you, when I read that scene I see Richard Harris. He really understood the character of Dumbledore and what he stood for. He was patient, kind, and calm tempered, a perfect example of how Dumbledore should be. And he aslo had the slight tiredness in his voice that really gave us an essence of who he really was.

The first time I saw Goblet of Fire, I was shocked. I thought Gambon did an OK job in Prisoner of Azkaban, especially, like you said, considering the shoes he had to fill. And what big shoes they were. In the scene where Harry's name has just come out of the Goblet of Fire, the only part Gambon got right from the book is where it said that Dumbledore had no twinkle in his eye. Harry enters the room, and shortly after so does Dumbledore (Gambon). He rushes upon Harry and practically shoves him against the wall and asks him if he put his name into the Goblet or if he got an older student to do it. I don't know if this has been mentioned before, I haven't come across it, but that is not a good scene at all. That is not who Dumbledore is.

I know my opinion doesn't matter, but I wonder what Jo thought when she saw that scene?

I really think the director matters in the case of Gambon. He clearly hasn't read the books and he doesn't care if he has or not. I think there was a dramatic difference between the PoA Gambon and the GoF Gambon.

I think he did well in PoA because he captured the lunacy of Dumbledore, but not ina far-out way. Like when he was pointing out the strawberries way far out when there wasn't really any there....secretly because he could sense Harry and Hermione...? He was still sort of wise too because he did well at the warnings and all that sort of stuff.

However, it was a turn around in GoF. He was just...whack. I think it had a lot to do with Mike Newell because the whole movie was a bit whack anyway. I blame nothing on any of the actors in GoF because as a whole it was really bad.

I would love to have Richard Harris back. I love that guy. But I think David Yates understand the emotional complexities a little more (even though the critics already said it was too angsty and not enough deep struggle ) and that will help Dumbledore be all dumbly the way he's supposed to be. Hopefully.