I agree completely with Capricorn about the need for McKellan to be the new Dumbly-dorr. He is such a good actor! Gambon really needs to hit the books harder when he portrays Dumby. I am not getting too attached to this Dumbledore, unless he shapes up by Order of the Phoenix. I just don't like Gambon

Here's what I have to say: Sir Michael Gambon was the absolute worst person ever cast for any of the Harry Potter films... EVER! He absolutly needs to tell the director what happens when he says "calmly" because the director mad the movie really good, but this part was A-W-FUL! I absolutly was shocked on how he blew up on Harry like that. What a stupid-head! Read between the lines Gambon!

Well Sir Gambon might not be the best part for DD but i think hes useless.
I mean there have been times when his not yelling and shouting.
He actualy didnt sout anything in POA.
Now i dont hate your oppinions but i just think some off us are being a little too mad at Gambon.
How would you feel if you play a part and than everyone says that you are worthless to play that part(even if you think so).
And on the GOF dvd Dan said that MG was realy like his part.

The fact that Dan said that Michael Gambon was a lot like Dumbledore in real life makes it even more of a shocker that he's such a horrible Dumbledore. How can you be more like your character in real life than when you're acting him?

And what's more - he already a Sir, which means that he is a good actor. No-one can argue about that, but that is why is so much worse that he plays Dumbledore absolutely disgustingly. As an exceptional actor, he should take more trouble than the average guy to make his character believable. Being good does not exempt you from getting it right, but it places the burden heavier upon you. And getting a character that the whole world loves wrong because you're too arrogant to trouble yourself with it is just unforgivable...

I've just added a poll to this topic, out of curiosity more than anything else. The strength of opinion is pretty impressive here, I have to say. To the point where I'm wondering, if fan feeling is that strong, why aren't WB's doing something about it?

Probably because they don't care, so long as we still pay to see the movie. But wouldn't they rather us pay to see a movie we're happy with?

I agree with Capricorn...or rather with Dan, who said that Gambon is actually quite like Dumbledore in real life. He is, funnily enough. So I actually have no objections to Gambon staying, but what I would like to see is him trying to see Dumbledore more as Richard Harris saw him. Obviously, I'm not expecting a carbon copy because no one can replace Harris for one thing, but also Gambon has his own qualities that he brings us. But I would like a little more quiet, controlled intelligence, a sense of omnipresence, a sense of being in control, a sense of always knowing what's about to happen before it happens. A little less of the crazy old guy in a nightgown who seems just as bewildered as everyone else when things happen.

Well great that somene thinks that Gambon should stay(it means a lot).
Though i´m realy gonna leave this topic now(and thankfully for you guys i wont return here again).
But im sure DD will rock in OOTP(he cant be angry there).

Well, now that he's gone I can complain about it some more . Just kidding. He is a good actor, but he REALLY needs to read the books. Seriously, Dumbledore is not supposed to blow up so easily

I definitely blame the director and writer (most the director) for the portrayal of Dumbledore, not the actor. What happened to the grandfatherly, goofy, fun-loving, and most-importantly unshakeable DD? Instead we get a grumpy, morose old man! I definitely prefered Richard Harris, but sadly, he's passed away. I think they are going to have a tough time getting the audience (those who do not read the books and know better) to buy the idea that Harry comes to respect and look up to DD... to treat him as a mentor... like a grandfather even. How could someone as good-hearted as Harry become warm toward such and old grump!?! I was very disappointed by what they've done to DD! I'm just glad Newell's not coming back for OotP or HBP (at least not so far).

I think Gambon is fine for the role... I liked the image of DD better when played by Harris... but I think that's really just a costume and make-up issue... I think they could have done more to make Gambon look like the Harris version of DD... I agree with others that Ian McKellan would be a good actor to play DD, but I wouldn't want him to look too much like Gandalf... they'd have to work a bit at it, but I think they could make him a great DD too. I think there's not much we can do now about the actor who plays him and I think Gambon would do well at portraying DD more like the books if he had decent directing and writing. I'm very surprised the writing isn't better because it's been the same guy doing all the movies. I think I read that there's a new writer for Ootp, and then Klovis is coming back to do HBP. I hope they can redeem themselves all the way around!! They've got a lot to live up to!

Good point. Gambon could have been Aberforth if Richard harris didn't die. For me Richard harris was the best DD- he was just what i imagined DD to be like. He had the DD twinkle in his eyes and was perfect.

Richard Harris was a much better Dumbledore. I just don't see Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, I don't know if its something around the eyes but I just don't see it. I think Ian McKellen would plays Magneto on X-Men & Gandalf on Lord of the Rings would've been a great choice to replace Harris after he died.

Sorry if anyone has posted this but...
I think Michael Gambon looks really dirty....His beard is too dark and I dunno if anyone noticed in the movie, but his nails are REALLY long and gross. I think Michael Gambon's voice is just a tad too loud.
One thing I have to say however is that Michael Gambon is a little bit thinner and seems much more versatile than Richard Harris. Michael seems to show the "old but still very active" Dumbledore much more than Richard does. Otherwise, Richard defeats him in all else.

i absolutely agree!

the dumble dore in the books was awesome, like he was calm/kind and stuff, but this one in the movies is always shouting and angry! they should get a new actor, maybe a little bit older then the one they have now ...

i think micheal gambon is a terrible dumledore. like some one said, he is meant to be calm and collected not shouting and grabbing harry! mucheal gambon is a very good actor but he is not right for dumbledore

richard harris, in the first two films was amazing and they need to find some one else like him

I seriously think the trouble with Michael Gambon as Dumbledore is due to the fact that everything about his character development has been done by the clueless! I see the problem with DD as being the same problem with the whole film series!

When JKR wrote Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, she was approached almost from day one by people wanting to make it into a movie! She said no to many people, because she feared they wouldn't be true to the book. Now that everything is rolling, however, no one really seems to care how true to the books anyone is.

When the series lost Richard Harris, they also were contending with Alfonso Cuaron, who was directing PoA, the third in the series of books beloved of fans worldwide, and he had not even read the books. I remember reading an interview about this and someone said that was why his take was so "fresh." What's fresh about willful ignorance? These books do come in Spanish, he should have read them. So he told the costume and make-up people to make DD look like "an old hippie." Hence the dirty beard, the unkempt nails, the tacky silkish robes dragging in the mud....combine that with an actor who has also not read the books!, and you get a character depiction with almost none of the subtle nuances Richard Harris brought to the role. That's what, in my opinion, is missing in Gambon's performance--subtlety.

I don't know if another actor would be needed, I think Gambon needed to take his role more seriously, though, and stop thinking of HP as a 'children's book series' that doesn't deserve the proper research!

Darcy, where I don't seem to have the problem with Gambon's Dumbledore as some people do; I totally agree with you on that last point!



I actually quite enjoy his performance; but I think that this mostly comes from having mentally separated the books from the films. If I start analyzing the movie in relation to the book. . .look out! Trouble! I do think, though, as an actor with a part with this much magnitude, it is quite ridiculous on his part that he hasn't bothered to pick up the books! It's not as if he can't read. . . As an actress, I've found that to play a role properly, you have to research the role extensively if you want to come accross as legitimate! (Tatiana in "Evgeny Onegin" by Pushkin was no picnic. . .I really don't enjoy Russian Literature, but I got through that book just to learn what my character was about!) It's sad to me to think that he has lost the will or desire to properly research his role.

As a fan, I feel that I have the power to seperate the books and the films in my viewing and enjoyment of each as a seperate medium. . .however, as a director/writer/acting taking a beloved book to screen. . .I don't think they should feel the arrogance to ignore the written word. Heck, Jim Dale has nicely translated the books onto an audio format just to save us from straining our eyes. . . I don't enjoy them, but I'm told that many people do; and you can "read" a book while lying in your bed with the lights off or driving in a car. (or in Gambon's case, most likely, being driven in a car) Comparing your role to a past actors interpretation is always a fresh perspective, too. So, as I write this I find that I'm very annoyed at Gambon, though I'm still okay with his Dumbledore.

Read the books, people (actors and directors of any present/future HP film project)! We'll all be better for it!

For what it's worth, I had always pictured Dumbledore more lile a Christopher Lloyd type--you know someone people might genuiinely think is completely insane. The movies focus a bit too much on Dumbledore being the powerful wizard that they miss Dumbledore's quirks. I also think that it may be a bit harder to get a powerful person to do crazy than it is to get a crazy person to do powerful.

Of course, I'm not sure what the british equivalent of Christopher Lloyd would be, but whoever it is, I think he should at least be given a shot at the role. Too late now, of course, since the later stories don't give Dumbledore much of a chance to show of his madness.

in some ways i really do like gambon. i really did like harris dont get me wrong but he just seemed too meek and fragile to me. i know that his was ill but,i picture DD as being a strong humble leader. like if you first saw him you would think twice before messing with him but at the same time he was a humble person. and i just didnt see that in harris. Now gambon does go over the top and does get a little pushy but overall i like him. he just needs to tone down his execution of the lines. i love that i can see a fierceness in his eyes that dont mess with me look but i wish his actions were a little more humble. I think changing him or any of the main characters now would kill the final 2 movies. especially to the people that dont read the books. I have non book fans that really enjoy the movies and i have been able to persuade them to read the books from the movies. i gues with any book that becomes a movie i go in with the mindset of pushing the books out of my mind. and watch it for what it is a movie. but anyway no changes for me in the actors just changes within the actors

so i think if we could give the timeturner a spin and change the actor i think Michael caine would make a good dumbledore. In Cider house rules he plays a great mentor for toby's character but in a dumbledore way. He's quiet and humble when he needs to be but isnt pushed around. But then we see him in movies like Austin powers goldmember and i laughed uncontrollably as i also did in miss congeniality. but since all our timeturners have been destroyed we're stuck with gambon. and so i then go back to my post just before this one. its just i saw Caine in a movie last night and thought hmmmm he'd make a good dumbledore.

In my opinion Dumbledore needs to be sent to Asboban (the prison for asbo's)

When he says 'memory' in the last scene, in that really nasal voice I wanted to laugh. It completely ruined the moment.

Hi everyone - long time Potter fan but new to the forums - am simply loving these discussions and just want to add my bit.

*nervously clears throat*

When I first watched GoF I was intensely irritated by MG's portrayal of DD - thought he'd missed the point too, however, it's an intruiging performance which, now having watched and rewatched ( I'm a bit obsessed) his scenes, have come to appreciate and admire his DD. I agree with others who say he adds a more human dimension, he shows passion, compassion and anxiety which I think makes it easier for Harry to connect with him.

His scenes with Harry do show tenderness - when Harry returns with Cedric's body and is distraught over Ced's body, when DD says " You're home, you both are" - it's said with such feeling that it almost redeemed for me his throttling of Harry after his name comes out of the Goblet. In the scene showing Cedric's memorial, when DD addresses the school, I think he did capture the tragedy and enormity of the situation with sensitivity.

Having said that, I agree that his DD seems more prone to violent outbursts and does not project the calm that I imagined from the book. However in the book, there are times when DD shouts ( it's when Hagrid is trying to strangle Karakoff) and speaks sharply and curtly to the other staff. In the book, when DD, Snape and McGonagall find the fake Mad-Eye and he blasts him to the wall, DD kicks fake Moody's unconscious body so it faces the right way. I'm not saying that book DD is meant to be very physical, but that there are times when he is more forceful than I had initially perceived him to be. Clever JK - shows how complex a character DD is. Though DD would never act so aggressively with students...

I agree that Richard Harris had a certain gravitas that Gambon has not quite captured, but I also feel that Harris's DD was much more serious and less fun than the book, though that is Kloves doing too. Remember in PS, Harry's first encounter with DD is the man who says a few words : " Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!" and in HBP , he reminisces on those words at DD's funeral. That's never included in the first film, and I can't imagine RH's DD saying that anyway.

So overall I do like MG's DD although he is not perfect, bit rough around the edges, maybe could get a better wardrboe ( not from Gladrag's Wizardwear for Hobos). Yes he should read the books to better understand DD, but I'm very much looking forward to the 5th film. If MG is a shocker, I will happily eat my words, but there will be more to his performance than first meets the eye.

Sorry for a long post - had a lot on my mind. Thanks for reading

Don't worry about the long post, Goat Charmer - longer and well thought out posts are the best ones!

Have to disagree with you, though. I don't like Gambon's Dumbledore. One of the first things about the character from the books, to me, is his gentleness. (TS Elliot's 'infinitely gentle, infinitely suffering thing'). Simply looking at him from the outside, so to speak, in terms of his role in the magical community, he is a loner, a leader, and a man who seems to have to carry most of the load himself.

That's a lot of pressure to handle, so the way in which he chooses to handle this is the first important indicator of his character. And that's where Gambon starts getting it wrong.

Dumbledore is humourous, gentle, benevolent, witty, dotty and childlike in a sense. (The sherbet lemon passwrod, for instance). This is the first and most obvious impression one has of him. However, I cannot see Gambon's Dumbledore choosing a password like 'sherbet lemon, or 'acid pops', or sitting ever so serenely while glasses of mead tap the Dursleys against their heads and slopping it all over. It's their first encounter with him too.

Of course there is a serious, and in a way, much more normal side to Dumbledore, but it's only a side that those who know him very well have seen.

Gambon gets the balance, or order wrong. At first glance Dumbledore must seem mild, gentle, benevolent, and only when things get desperate should he become a more serious character.

And he should read the books. How can an actor not read the books? *shakes head* There isn't anything more to say about that. It's just impossible for me too understand.

we all know that michale cant portray dumbledore as good as richard harris but i personaly think that michale is doing the best he can and seeing as he hade a very hard job to do replaceing richard harris as richard had already done 2 of the movies and we were all used to him being dumbledore but michale has done a very good job trying to fit into that character and we should praise him on the job he has done

richard harris was way better! gambon as dumbeldore doesnt work because he is too angry and forceful. fot example in the GoF he shouted at harry when he's name came out and was forceful towards him afterwards and i just don't think that is how dumbeldore should have reacted . . . harris would have said it really softly but worriedly because he would have been scared for harry and confused but he wouldn't have been angry. Harris was gentle and spoke in the way i thought dumbeldore should have and he looked more like dumbeldore, older and so much more wiser. but i agree with hoju_88; gambon is doing the best he possiably can . . . so ye very well done to gambon . . . i'm not sayin he's rubbish but i just thought harris was better.

And i guess it takes alot of guts and bravery to take over someone's role, especially after they dies.
R.I.P Richard Harris

Richard harris was better, he seemed perfect to me. But I think Michael Gambon portrays dumbledore really well. He was probably the best man for the job, and i suppose the whole yelling at harry thing would of been the directors decision, not Gambon's, am i right?

I voted not sure, because YES ! he is horrible in Goblet of fire when he is screaming at Harry, but I also think he would do a brilliant job in the HBP at the part where is screaming when drinking from the goblet (I could'nt really see Richard Harris doing that ) But I really don't like the Irish accent he uses ! Harris will always be Dumbledore to me !

I agree. I could actually imagine Richard doing that to be honest, he had a deep croaky voice and he could have shouted like that and also maybe edit some Mandrake cries in there too. It would be quite good. But Richard will always be better than Michael, he is just not the part.

Harry#1fan4eva spoke of Michael Gambon's actions being dictated by the director, and yes, to an extent, that would be right. But that's the trouble with Michael Gambon not bothering to read the books! If he had, he'd understand his character, instead of just accepting a director's take on how his character would react. He could question a decision like that, perhaps have the scene altered to make it more true. If Tom Felton, who didn't read the books until after he'd done CoS (at about age 14). can take the time to do that, to understand Draco better, why can't an adult do it, especially for such an important character?

But that doesn't happen. I can understand actors not wanting to get as caught up in the whole HP thing as us fans, but it still hurts when they disregard what we'd like to see. It wasn't a big thrill for me to read that Gary Oldman only took the part of Sirius because he needed a job! I got a HUGE kick out of the wonderful David Thewlis standing line to buy HBP, because he loves Lupin so much he was worried he might be killed! The store clerk even chided him for reading the book while he stood in line to buy it, checking to make sure Lupin came through OK! That was so cute!

Likewise, Jason Isaacs claims that he's totally hooked on the series. He's even admitted to carrying the books around everywhere, reading, reading, because he can't put them down! I'd love it if all the actors were HP fans, because then they'd care about the other fans, and they'd care about how they depict their characters. From what I've read, Michael Gambon simply does not care. Dumbledore is nothing special to him, just another job.

I'm in the majority here...Gambon just doesn't cut it...at least not in GoF. I thought he was better in PoA, he was much more like the Dumbledore I imagined. While Dumbledore did get kinda tense in the book when Harry's name came out, he did NOT shout, threaten Harry or shake him. (if you've read book 5, he says to Umbridge, "I cannot allow you to manhandle my students"). Interesting. That's why I think it's partly the director's doing. If Richard Harris were still alive, for the dueling scenes in later books, they probably could have used a stuntman. Hopefully Yates's interpretation will be much closer to ours in OoP.

Although my opinions on this have been thoroughly overstated that Harris is way better than Michael Gambon, you have to admit, he was good in Prisoner, but he was way off-character in Goblet. I really think that Harris would have done a much better job.

I think a lot of Gambon's actions are because of the director and producers. They tell the actor what role they want them to play. I think they set out to create a Dumbledore different from the one portrayed by Harris. This was a horrible decision, but Gambon agreed to do it.

Personally, I still don't think he is the right man for the job. His voice is wrong and his mannerisms are not smooth. He does not display the quiet power that Dumbeldore should have.

I think Patrick Stewart would make an excellent Dumbledore. (What! Captain Picard?!?! Professor X?!?!?) Yes. With a little makeup, he would look the part of Dumbledore. His voice has that quiet, intellectual, hidden power in it. Watch him act and you will see what I mean.

okay...
when voting in this poll, i had no doubts about what i was going to vote for
the new dumbledore (michael gambon) is (in my opinion) bad!
he does not act the way i think dumbledore would act in some situations

I think hes doing a good job, but he doesnt know his character.. like he didnt even know he was going to die. I mean you have to feel it, you think your the actual person, he just acts it.

Michael Gambon is a good actor although (like i have said before) Harris was a much better. though i guess that you could argue that Gambon has done really well as Dumbeldore because he didn't just pick up from Harris' Dumbeldore, he made the character his own. Gambon didn't try and copy Harris' Dumbeldore which is good because then we can remember Harris for HIS Dumbeldore and not remember Dumbeldore as one person because he wasn't. it wouldn't be right if Gambon was like Richard Harris becuase it would be like he was trying to copy him and take credit for the character Harris created.
R.I.P Richard Harris

I could have sworn I had posted in here before! Ahh, well I'll try again.

Personally, I think Harris' apperence was 10 times better, but Gambon's personality was also better. The mix of the two would have been amazing!

I will say this in Gambon's deffense (and add to K.Lupin_werewolf's post)- Every character is interpreted different to every person. My Hermione is different then yours, same with my Harry and so on. I could see a completely different Sirius then was in the movies (and did infact ) So Gambon's interpretaition of Dumbledore was really different then Harris'. And because Harris was the first person to potray Dumbledore we all had the idea that that's who Dumbledore was "suppose" to be. Gambon potrayed Dumbledore as who he thought Dumbledore was and you can't ask for more than that. And I would be willing to bet that if Dumbledore would be replaced, yet again, then most people would say Gambon's performance was way better than so-and-so's. I think he is handling all this critizism rather well. Hang in there guys, I'm sure he'll get to your liking sooner or later!

I cant stand gambon, for one thing he dresses weird, for another his voice sucks, whenever he speaks he sounds stupid. he also reacts bad in GOF when he chokes harry after his name comes out of the goblet

He's not a bad actor. But he does need to calm down a tad bit. Well maybe a lot. He is just a little to overexcited during his role. But we cannot blame him for this. The directors have molded him into what he is. I believe if they can change his attitude then they can change it back with the right director. This is just something we have to deal with if we want to watcj the movies. It's the director fault if they don't read the books. They should be made to read the books. It really irritates the gung-ho Harry Potter fanatics when something is changed. Such as this.

I like both Gambon and Harris in different ways because they both play it in their own way, and therefor i must agree whit Hilly and K.Lupin_werewolf in there view on the matter.

hmm. I think that Richard Harris, the guy in Sorcerer's Stone and Chamber of Secrets is better. He's what I imagined Dumbledore to be like.

I have to admit that Michael Gambon is not Dumbledore for me. He is nothing like the person I imagined him to be. When you marry the actor in the movie with the person described in the book, Michael gambon does not fit the profile. Gambon is loud, Harris was quiet. Gambon is rushing around, Harris was slow and precise. Gambon physically handled Harry, Harris never needed to because Harry responded to his requests or presence. Gambon dressed and looked different to the original Dumbledore. As far as I am concerned, when I think of Dumbledore, I think of Richard Harris. Simple as that.

mrs hagrid

RIP the REAL dumbledore. Micheal Gambon sucks a a major level! He's to eccentric and harsh. He can't play the soft, gentle, loving character that RH was famous for! GRRRRR!

Plus whats with the whole Scottish accent?! He could at least try and be realistic! duh.

I think I posted this on another thread and I am too lazy to find it to copy and paste but the jist of it was this.

In trying to be fair to Michael Gambon, I think that he missed the boat on PoA and GoF. He was indeed to harsh with Harry and a bit eccentric as many of you have pointed out. However, I think he will excel in OOTP mainly due to the fact that he has a definate gift for the dramatic. I am looking forward to seeing his energy put to good use in the duel with Voldemort scene.

I do love Richard Harris though. He did epitomize the humble, gentle nature that we all expected of Dumbledore. But it is now the day of Gambon and I for one am hoping he does justice in OOTP and HBP

[font=Arial]
[size=3]
i think sir michael gambon is a better DD. he is more funny and gives a feeling that he can stand up to the dark magic produced by Voldemort, he's more energic. the way Gambon has played Dumbledore could become crucial when he and harry go looking for the horcrux in HBP.richard harris was very old in CoS (72 years old), if you watch the first two films he makes Dumbledore feel weak and frail and wouldn't be able to stand up to the powers of Voldemort. michael gambon is the greatest dumbledore ever!!!

Hi...new to this thread...if this has been asked previously I am sorry...I looked but I didn't find my answer

I was wondering if anyone knows what were the reasons for casting Gambon as a replacement for Harris? Not that I disprove, I just wonder if there was ever an official announcement by the HP production team...

I had heard that Peter O'Tool was considered...and when I watch him as Priam in Troy he's a dead ringer for Harris (in my opinion) and both O'Tool & Harris are exepectional actors...not that Gambon is not ( I happen to think he's an amazing actor too AND human being) just that I soooo loved Harris as Dumbledore

I think we should just get used to the fact that Gambon is Dumbledore now and has been so for more films than Harris.

Ok, so Harris got the grandfatherly Dumbledore bit right

but with Gambon you can imagine that he had a bit of a dark, tragic past and is also better for the fight scenes etc.

Someone inbetween them would have been good

but we need to get over the fact that Harris is no longer Dumbledore ok??!!

I think just about anyone will agree that Richard Harris was a better Dumbledore and all around better actor. He was the kinder Dumbledore, Michael Gambon is a little bit psycho at parts like in Goblet of Fire. However, he did quite a good job in Half Blood Prince.

Well I like both of them to be quite honest. Okay don´t get me wrong I do agree that he was completley out of character in Gof but Iv´e liked Gambon in the other movies hes been in.

In fact I personally never imagined Dumbledore sounding as old as Richard did so for me that´s Gambons main strength along with some of his more funny lines(like the knitting patterns remark in HBP).

I also can´t take my mind off Gambons voice which feels just hypnostising everytime I listen too it(especially during his speeches).

Although I do agree that Richard played him kinder overall so I wouldn´t say I didn´t miss Richard at all in the part but personally Iv´e gotten used to Gambon so he dosn´t bother me anymore(besides Gambons Dumbledore design is for some reason a lot more fun for me to draw funny aint t).

I would also like to add that by this point the main problem one might have with Gambons performance is your cup off tea or not rather thán him diong a bad job because I really don´t think he did.

Also if you want to understand exactley how I feel about this whole thing check this video out it summons up my feelings on the whole issue almost perfectly: Dumbledore review 2(the sequel).