an observation

[ksmith]

Richard Harris was a better Dumbledore than Michael Gambon. It's a shame he wasn't able to complete the series.

I think Peter O'Toole might have been an interesting replacement.

Comments

[seachanges.livejournal.com]

As much as I like Michael Gambon, I have to agree with you on this one. When I imagine Dumbledore, I still see and hear Harris, even though he was only in the first two films.

What really makes me sad is that Harris didn't truly "get" the Potterverse until the second film. I remember seeing interviews with him when he was cast for the first movie in which he admitted only taking the part because his grandchildren threatened to stop speaking to him if he turned it down. He hadn't read the books and didn't understand what all the fuss was about. In the interim between the first and second films, he read the series and fell in love with it, and it made a difference in his performance. Unfortunately, he was already ill at that point, and died not long after.

O'Toole would have been a fascinating choice. Gambon just seems to lack something vital, an inner strength or vision. I could buy Harris as an old, but incredibly powerful mage. Gambon has just never seemed to convey that sense of power.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

Power, and also a sense of kindness and humanity. I can imagine the Harris Dumbledore laughing, a true belly laugh. Not so the Gambon interpretation.

But after reading Deathly Hallows, I can see that Dumbledore possessed a cold streak. Does Harris give the impression of a man who passed through a certain level of...not cruelty so much as lack of empathy...and came out the other side? Gambon's interpretation conveys that a little better, I think. But I still prefer Harris.

[equesgal.livejournal.com]

I adored Richard Harris in that role. I read somewhere that (excuse my lack of real names here...I'm having a senior moment) Harry, Ron and Hermoine were gathered together and told that he'd passed on they were all completely devastated.

[technomage.livejournal.com]

Agreed. I find following the young actors as they grow is interesting. Harry is not so interesting. Hermoine's player has become a true beauty. And where did Ron get those shoulders?!?

I frankly found Part 1 flat. Yes, there were thrills, chills, and tears... but it seemed poorly knit.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

I frankly found Part 1 flat. Yes, there were thrills, chills, and tears... but it seemed poorly knit.

I've heard good and not-so-good things. Frankly, I found the book such a mess that I wondered how they would make a lucid, interesting movie out of it. When I heard they were making two movies, I wondered how they would find enough lucid, interesting material to flesh things out.

I do hope that the Battle for Hogwarts takes up at least half of Part 2, and that we see events on the screen as they happen. It seemed to me that the Battle got pretty short shrift in DH the Book, which was strange given that it was the major plot point of the series.