The Best Dumbledore v.3

The HBP movie has been released. Michael Gambon has received postive reviews for this movie. While before HBP the majority seemed to prefer Richard Harris.

Who is your favourite?

Last post of version 2 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=113912):

Given the release of HBP, I wonder now how many people would have changed their minds on the choices.

Please be respectful of opinions that are different of yours. If you have an issue with the opinion of another member report it, but do not start an argument.

This seems a little unfair on Richard Harris, really, seeing that he's deceased. :shrug:

I liked his Dumbledore :) but I voted for Gambon.

I found the cave scene in HBP really moving.

I love both, but I voted for Gambon. From movies 3-5 I didn't really like him though. Then I saw HBP and he became my all time favorite. :) He was amazing.

It's difficult to tell what Richard Harris would have made of Dumbledore, since the character underwent some pretty crucial changes during the books. I think that Harris' Dumbledore, as we got to know him, doe sshow few hints at the rather manipulative (albeit benevolent) character we see in the last two books or so - b ut then, he couldn't really play that, since the books were not yet out at the time!

I had to give Gambon my vote, though, sicne I find later Dumbledore a lot more interesting, and I have thought for a while that he portrays that very well.

Before this movie, I never liked either of them. I thought they were both wrong for the part. But after seeing HBP, I think that Gambon really got his act together, his Dumbledore was almost perfect to me. But because I only liked him in this film, I'd have to go with "Neither."

It'll be interesting to see how this poll turns out with HBP out now, since Michael Gambon has been praised for his performance this time around in many circles.

Anyways, I've preferred Gambon's Dumbledore since he came on. His acting in HBP sealed the deal for me, and I'm excited to see what he will do in his (limited) screen time in DH 1 and 2.

I love the twinkle in Richard's eye. :) That's the Dumbledore I always imagined him to be.

However, I must agree that I can not imagine Richard in the cave scene and finding Horcruxes. Gambon suits that part perfectly.

For me, it's both. I have no preference.

I haven't posted on this thread since the first version and my opinion hasn't really changed in light of Half-Blood Prince; I still prefer Richard Harris. It does almost (but not quite) seem unfair to compare because in those first two films we - along with Harry - had a much narrower vision of Dumbledore as a character, basically just the wise old master wizard. Gambon has had the chance to show more dimensions and explore more of his sense of humor and somewhat secretive, manipulative qualities. But that's just the nature of the story, and Harris simply is much more the Dumbledore I imagined.

I think Harris was a great Dumbledore - but since he has passed, I also don't find it very fair to say who was "better." Clearly he was chosen for his superior Dumbledore skills, but if I had to choose a close second, Gambon would have done well.

As much as I loved Harris' Dumbledore, Gambon has at least done the role justice - HBP in particular, I feel like he did a fabulous job of doing the more dramatic scenes, the cave scene in particular. There were a few things missing here or there, such as the "twinkle" that Harris had downpat, but I have no overall complaints. He still did a phenomenal job. :)

I can't pick which one; it's hard to say which one because they both brought something different and unique to the movies.

Even though Gambon's portrayel was phenomenal in HBP, I still gave Harris the vote. He was the Dumbledore I always imagined in the books.

Gambon. :tu:

Richard Harris' performance made me feel like Dumbledore walked out from the book on to the screen. He was perfect. My vote goes to him.

I must also say here that inspite of not liking Gambon's performances in the earlier films (espeically GoF) I found him excellent in HBP. This movie had Dumbledore playing a more pivotal role in this movie compared to the others and I think he did a splendid job.

Probably depends. Even though it was out of character, I still loved how Gambon portrayed Dumbledore in GoF when he charged after Harry. "DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET!" I've come up with scenarios for that one. A quick slap after charging, shaking Harry, you know, stuff like that... :elaugh: Yes, I know...I have a strange sense of humor (and that side of me I can't let show here on this board :p) and tend to like physical comedy and that scene to this day still makes me :lol:.

Anyway, I felt that Richard Harris portrayed Dumbledore better. He was calm, cool, and collected...just like in the books. Gambon seems to portray Dumbledore as exasperated and high-strung.

I like Gambon a lot better. I really could not see Harris doing the Cave scene in HBP, or the DoM Battle in OotP. But he wasn't bad.

Probably depends. Even though it was out of character, I still loved how Gambon portrayed Dumbledore in GoF when he charged after Harry. "DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET!" I've come up with scenarios for that one. A quick slap after charging, shaking Harry, you know, stuff like that... :elaugh: Yes, I know...I have a strange sense of humor (and that side of me I can't let show here on this board :p) and tend to like physical comedy and that scene to this day still makes me :lol:.


:lol: I get your point. Everytime I see this scene in GoF I catch the eye of the person with whom I'm watching and both of us end up laughing.

But, yes, I also follow that by saying that is SO not Dumbledore.

Harris all the way. Why ?

He didn't bark at people at random ("don't you have studying to do ?"/DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET?!?"), didn't mutter the lines in a monotonous way 99% of the time and didn't look scared (minisiter, I beg your to use your wisdom...the evidence for the dark lord's return is overwhelming) or clueless (beyond anything I ever imagined/horcruxes are ordinary object) or interrogate Harry about his love life.

Gambon has had his moments, such as "But you know happiness can be found even in the darkest of times, when one only remembers to turn on the light" or "in our dreams, we enter a world of our own" in POA and the cave scene in HBP. He had the chance to present a more quirky, eccentric DD that he started out with in POA which would be a nice contrast to Harris' wise old "I-know-more-than-you-think" wizard portrayal, and would even be close to source material...

Gambon is definitely my favorite of the two, I did however really like Harris and the first 2 but as each movie went on with Gambon I started liking him more and more and then his performance in HBP sealed it for me, especially with the cave scene and his great comic relief...FINALLY

:lol: I get your point. Everytime I see this scene in GoF I catch the eye of the person with whom I'm watching and both of us end up laughing.

But, yes, I also follow that by saying that is SO not Dumbledore.Glad I'm not the only one. I just wanted him to shake him after slamming him, after each syllable, while screaming, 'DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME INTO THE GOBLET!!" And then Harry would be too dizzy to answer or something. :elaugh:

I liked them both.

Harris for the sense of wisdom that he brought to the part. He truly embodied the Dumbledore of the earlier books.

I like Gambon for the energy that he brought to the role, even if he did go a little overboard at times. I think that he gave a marvellous performance in HBP. I look forward to seeing King's Cross in DH.

I voted that I like them both.
Harris had the wiseness about his DD, and I think he had those very subtle ways of being quite quirky. I have no complaints about him really, but he obviously plays DD different to Gambon. But I dont really think he had time to evolve into the role, maybe if he got to do PoA we might have seen something more.
I didnt like Gambon much in 4 and 5 and prior to seeing HBP, I wondered why he was ever cast as DD really. But then I watched PoA again and I actually think he was really good in that one, which makes me think that the way he played the agression he shows Harry when his name is chosen from the Goblet in 4 and when he says "dont you all have studying to do?" in 5, it just get in the way of the fact that he actually played DD quite well. Then when HBP came out and I saw Gambon I thought he finally cracked it. I think the fact lines were kept in like "I do love knitting patterns" really helped, because he had that humorous side. I also thought his relationship with Harry and even a brief part with Snape was shown really well. And I was just so pleased with the cave scene, it was really heart wrenching, which is how I felt when reading. So thats a good sign.

Richard Harris' performance made me feel like Dumbledore walked out from the book on to the screen. He was perfect.
Honestly could not have said it better myself! :tu:...For me, Harris embodied Dumbledore in everything he did. The only time he was really able to show the 'powerful side' to Dumbledore was in the first movie, when Quirrell runs into the Great Hall shouting about the troll, making the students panic and scream. When Harris shouts ''SILENCE'', that to me displayed perfectly his ability to show Dumbledores powerful side. :agree: I only wish he were still alive :sigh:.

Did Harris ever get to shoot any scenes for POA ?

Did Harris ever get to shoot any scenes for POA ?

Nope, he passed away a few weeks before Chamber was released.

After the first 5 movies Harris was way better Than Gambon. Although in the 6th installment Gambon did a lot better.

I still give the nod to Harris because he was the first and he is the Dumbledore I invision when I read the books.

Gambon is better in every way. Sure, the directors for moviews 4 and 5 might have given him bad instructions, but at least he had a spring in his step and some kind of aura. In POA and HBP Gambon was spot on. All Harris ever did was stand still and look wistful. And that finger clapping during the sorting in the first movie? Blech. Dumbledore would be applauding all the students heartily not limply congratulating all but Harry. To me that's worse than anything in GOF.

I agree that clapping in the first movie was just odd, I don't see it as something that Dumbledore would do, and that toasting repeatedly with his goblet was OOC as well.

Gambon is better in every way. Sure, the directors for moviews 4 and 5 might have given him bad instructions, but at least he had a spring in his step and some kind of aura. In POA and HBP Gambon was spot on. All Harris ever did was stand still and look wistful. And that finger clapping during the sorting in the first movie? Blech. Dumbledore would be applauding all the students heartily not limply congratulating all but Harry. To me that's worse than anything in GOF.
I do not understand why Gambon's Dumbledore in GoF and OotP can be forgiven for "bad instruction," whereas Richard Harris is blamed for his Dumbledore in SS/PS and CoS (rather than his "bad instruction"). For me, the two actors are difficult to compare as Dumbledore because they portrayed the character largely how the directors wanted Dumbledore to be portrayed; I do not blame Gambon for his angry lines directed at Harry in GoF, and I would not blame Harris for his clapping in SS/PS. In my opinion, the director and scriptwriter are more responsible than the actors.

Therefore, I do not necessarily consider Gambon a weaker Dumbledore than Harris because of his lines. I consider Chris Columbus a better director (in regards to Dumbledore) than, say, Mike Newell.

That said, I will always prefer Richard Harris's Dumbledore. No matter what his lines or instruction was, I think he captured Dumbledore's appearance, voice, and aura better than Gambon. Gambon's looks and voice are much harsher than the Dumbledore I imagine. Harris had the twinkle in his eye, the gaze that made Harry feel he was being X-rayed, and the reassuring voice that I see Dumbledore equipped with. Meanwhile, Michael Gambon, for me, does not possess these crucial characteristics that I feel are vital to Dumbledore's character, no matter the director's instruction.

I agree with, it seems, the masses that Michael Gambon gave his best performance as Dumbledore in HBP. His acting in the cave scene was absolutely chilling. However, I still do not think this "revised" Dumbledore can ever better the first two films'.

[QUOTE=yoshi2542;5374246]Gambon is better in every way.QUOTE]

I MUST disagree with you there. Gambon acts as if he has no feelings for Harry. In OOTP when Dumbledore says I care to much about you he doesn't put ANY feeling in to it. And what is this with his prison-looking robes? Richard wears those really nice robes and had a sense of humor. Gambon is so dreary. I suppose he is good for the more intense films but I think Richard could have done well. In POA I thought he was terrible but that is my opinion.

I didn't initially care for Gambon when he took over, but I think that over the films he has grown on me. He doesn't seem to fit the mannerisms and personality that the books describe, but as his understanding of the character grows, I think his portrayal of Dumbledore grows as well.

After HBP, I definitely would say that Gambon is the perfect Dumbledore. I loved the look they gave Harris (and if Gambon had been on from the beginning he probably would have been given the same look), but the attitude and energy that Gambon brought to the character fit much more in line with my interpretation of Dumbledore. I have a hard time imagining Harris during the duel in the Ministry or many of the scenes in HBP. In the books Dumbledore had a youthful spirit about him despite his age, and even in HBP after his incident with the ring Horcrux he still was an upbeat energetic man, and Gambon shows that much better than Harris did.

[QUOTE=yoshi2542;5374246]Gambon is better in every way.QUOTE]

I MUST disagree with you there. Gambon acts as if he has no feelings for Harry. In OOTP when Dumbledore says I care to much about you he doesn't put ANY feeling in to it. And what is this with his prison-looking robes? Richard wears those really nice robes and had a sense of humor. Gambon is so dreary. I suppose he is good for the more intense films but I think Richard could have done well. In POA I thought he was terrible but that is my opinion.


I MUST disagree with you. As far as Gambon acting as if he has no feelings for Harry especially in the line you give, I feel he gives the perfect emotional response needed given the circumstances. Harry just lost Sirius, what way would you want that line delivered? Also you can't blame Gambon in anyway for the outfits he wears, most actors have very little say in what outfits are to be worn, don't you think if they wanted Gambon to wear the same robes Harris wore they would?

Definitely Richard Harris. Gambon wasn't too bad in HBP, but I really hated the way he portrayed Dumbledore in the previous films. He was far too aggressive, he seemed to be angry all the time. Harris was a lot more.. tranquil, which fits my idea of Dumbledore way better.

Gambon. Is. Too. Energetic. I've always said that. In HBP he's not as bad as he was in GoF, but I still find things lacking from his acting. He doesn't have the genuine For-further-preferences-Harry-It's-Raspberry-quality, which in my opinion defines Dumbledore.

I do not understand why Gambon's Dumbledore in GoF and OotP can be forgiven for "bad instruction," whereas Richard Harris is blamed for his Dumbledore in SS/PS and CoS (rather than his "bad instruction").

I don't think anyone is blaming Harris. I'm just saying it was Harris' Dumbledore doing those things. It was bad direction from Columbus (combined with the idiocy of casting someone so frail in the first place) that resulted in the awful Old Father Time version of Dumbledore, just like it was bad direction from Newell that led to Gambon's off-kilter Dumbledore in parts of GOF.

Gambon. Is. Too. Energetic.

Well, Dumbledore in the books is constantly described as being energetic, having the energy of a much younger man. Gambon's acting is consistent with that. A little spring in his step is well within the limits of the book character.

Well, Dumbledore in the books is constantly described as being energetic, having the energy of a much younger man. Gambon's acting is consistent with that. A little spring in his step is well within the limits of the book character.

Perhaps "energetic" was a wrong choice of words. :whistle: I was more like referring to scenes like the "Why-did-you-put-your-name-in-the-goblet-Harry"-scene in GoF, where he's noisy, angry and overall very un-Dumbledore-ish IMO. But as for the springs in his step, I'm perfectly okay with that. :tu:

I prefer Gambon's Dumbledore. Like others, I think he portrayed Dumbledore almost perfectly in PoA and HBP.

The poll is kind of unfair though seeing as Harris was only in the first two movies and was more of a distant character while Gambon has been in the last 4 during which Dumbledore has played a bigger role.

I think if Gambon actually read the books (:grumble:) he would've captured his character perfectly in each film.

I liked them both. Gambon has really come into his own in HBP though -- he really fit into the whole full of energy thing that Dumbledore had to be full of this time around. And Richard Harris... he was good as well in his own way. He exuded the power needed along with the trustworthyness that Dumbledore was supposed to have.

I voted for neither, but I suppose I like Michael Gambon slightly more. At first I really disliked him, and wished with all my heart that Richard Harris was back...and then I watched the first couple of movies again and realized that I was quite glad he wasn't playing Dumbledore anymore.

Harris's Dumbledore didn't seem to me to have the energy that Dumbledore ought to have, and Gambon put a little more of that into his portrayal -- but then Gambon feels far too Gandalf-y. To me, neither of them will ever be anything close to Dumbledore (though from this point on, that shouldn't really be too much of a problem...not until the end of DH 2), but Michael Gambon feels a little bit closer than Richard Harris.

Still Harris for me, even more now after this movie!! He had the quirkiness of Dumbledore, my most favourite aspect of him, down to a Tee!! Gambon just comes across as a creepy old man (I cringed at the knitting line) and that's not how a perceive Dumbledore at all!!

Still Harris for me, even more now after this movie!! He had the quirkiness of Dumbledore, my most favourite aspect of him, down to a Tee!! Gambon just comes across as a creepy old man (I cringed at the knitting line) and that's not how a perceive Dumbledore at all!!

That line was from the books.

I do not understand why Gambon's Dumbledore in GoF and OotP can be forgiven for "bad instruction," whereas Richard Harris is blamed for his Dumbledore in SS/PS and CoS (rather than his "bad instruction"). For me, the two actors are difficult to compare as Dumbledore because they portrayed the character largely how the directors wanted Dumbledore to be portrayed; I do not blame Gambon for his angry lines directed at Harry in GoF, and I would not blame Harris for his clapping in SS/PS. In my opinion, the director and scriptwriter are more responsible than the actors.

I think the difference is that Gambon has had a very hard time fitting into the role because he's had such a switch up of directors. Three directors have resulted in three very different interpretations.

The best performance as Dumbledore, hands down, has been Gambon in Prisoner of Azkaban. He came across as a total crackpot in his mannerisms and presence, but he was filled with a whimsical wisdom and energy (I love the scene of him running up the stairs along with the kids when the Fat Lady is attacked). Definitely the best. The next best is Harris in Philosopher's Stone, then Gambon in HBP, then probably Harris in COS, then Gambon in OOTP and finally Gambon in GOF.

Gambon in GOF is - by far - the worst interpretation of Dumbledore and I think it's purely because of Newell that it happened. The change in between POA and GOF is too big for it to have been Gambon. How could he go from someone so benign and whimsical into someone so cranky and erratic in one movie if it wasn't Newell?

I agree with Googlie and mactheknife. Richard Harris, in my opinion, was everything I expect Dumbledore to be. He had that twinkle in his eye and that naturally calm nature about him, yet also seemed to be the type of person that could instantly quiet the room. I think his role would have been continuously perfect for HBP, because I can still envision from COS when he was speaking to Tom Riddle harshly. That anger and fierceness would still have been perfect in HBP.

That being said, however, I still have great respects for Gambon. I think he has been doing a great job. It's just hard to beat perfect.

That line was from the books.

It matters not, for me he delivered the line in an imperfect and creepy fashion!! Just my personal interpretation!!

Richard Harris, in my opinion, was everything I expect Dumbledore to be. He had that twinkle in his eye and that naturally calm nature about him, yet also seemed to be the type of person that could instantly quiet the room. I think his role would have been continuously perfect for HBP, because I can still envision from COS when he was speaking to Tom Riddle harshly. That anger and fierceness would still have been perfect in HBP.

Well said my friend! I truly believe that Harris would have been perfect throughout these movies! :)

It's quite disappointing to find Michael Gambon with the role of Dumbledore.

We've found out from Daniel's interviews, that Michael is a very comical person, flinging jokes most of the time in the set off-screen... and that some jokes cannot be mentioned. That's the good side of Michael to set the cast at ease. He plants his wit into the movie, but then his real persona is also indicated into his character. I'm not saying his acting is lousy, but where's his calmness and composure?... i see the lot of you comply to this point. He seems to be more energetic as well as intelligent, than having the grandfather-like or elderly quality. Once i look at him, i say, that's not Merlin!

Although I was a big fan of Mr. Harris in his younger days, I absolutely LOVED Mr. Gambon, no joke, I thought he did Dumbeldore very well by showing the faintest bit of humor necessary during some serious moments, in addition to other things.
Cheers

It matters not, for me he delivered the line in an imperfect and creepy fashion!! Just my personal interpretation!!

This line is from the books too! :lol:

Up until HBP I would've said I preferred Harris but Gambon's portrayal in HBP was excellent, it felt so close to the Dumbledore I read into the book and especially the cave scene - that was so moving.

Having said that I've seen alot of posts suggesting that Gambon is best because they couldn't imagine Harris acting some of the more powerful and combatitive parts, like duelling Voldemort in OotP or the cave scene in HBP: let me remind you that Harris was not only an accomplished actor with vast experience but when he was younger he was quite rowdy in his roles, playing many aggressive characters (Oliver! - Bill Sykes, Mutiny on the Bounty - John Mills, etc.) so he definitely had it in him to play those more martial scenes.

This line is from the books too! :lol:
I'm pretty sure SunXia knows that a similar line was said by Dumbledore in the book. I think what shes getting at is the delivery of the line, and not the line itself. :)
let me remind you that Harris was not only an accomplished actor with vast experience but when he was younger he was quite rowdy in his roles, playing many aggressive characters (Oliver! - Bill Sykes, Mutiny on the Bounty - John Mills, etc.) so he definitely had it in him to play those more martial scenes.
Quite right my friend! :tu: Harris would have been perfectly capable of showing Albus' powerful side! :D

There is no way Harris could have done any of the things Gambon did in the OOTP duel or in the cave sequence (or any scene where Gambon glides around or hops up/down stairs). They had to literally prop him up and film around him during COS, he was that frail, any kind of constant movement was out of the question. It was painful seeing him shuffle around his desk during Chamber. It would have taken 5 minutes for him to walk from the door to Umbridge when Trelawney got sacked in OOTP, especially with the weight of that costume.

As much as I like Harris in the first two films, Gambon has my vote. Now, I wasn't a huge fan of him in either the third, fourth, or fifth movie. He wasn't bad at all, it's just that he didn't leave much of an impression. However, I was completely blown away by his performance in HBP, which automatically makes him my favorite Dumbledore. Virtually every part of his performance, especially during the cave scene, was so well done that I'm not even sure if I could see Harris in the role at this point.

Harris played Dumbledore perfectly in the first 2 movies, and I was never really a fan of Gambon's portrayal. His performance in HBP was a huge step up from his past ones, but some of the little things he said didn't come off as being 'Dumbledore-esque' to me.

Harris is still the best, but Gambon greatly improved from where he was to the 6th film.

I'm not saying his acting is lousy, but where's his calmness and composure?... i see the lot of you comply to this point. He seems to be more energetic as well as intelligent, than having the grandfather-like or elderly quality. Once i look at him, i say, that's not Merlin!

You've got to remember, though, that Gambon was working under different director's to Harris (and ones who weren't as concerned with the source material). If you listen to Gambon describe Dumbledore, he always describes him as someone who is polite, courteous and gracious - and I agree with you that Gambon's portrayal hasn't always been like that. Some of the blame - obviously - should lie on Gambon, but a heavy load must also lie on the director. I've heard Gambon talk about his role in GOF and he said that Mike Newell kept telling him that Dumbledore was "losing his grip" and that he needed to act "frustrated". When a director tells you to act in a certain way, that's how you need to act.

I maintain that Mike Newell was the worst thing to ever happen to the Harry Potter franchise. He made a fairly decent movie, but ravaged many of the characters. What Cuaron did in Prisoner of Azkaban was that he got Gambon to play the side of Dumbledore that Richard Harris didn't - the quirky, non-chalant Dumbledore who does do the oddest things in the world and does act in incredibly strange ways. It worked for Prisoner of Azkaban because there wasn't anything truly serious for Dumbledore to do or deal with. In fact, I'd argue that Gambon is almost too placid at some points (particularly with the Dementors at Quidditch).

Then Newell came along - truly lacking in any sort of vision for the series - and tried to do a copy and paste job of the brilliant work that Cuaron had done on POA and it just didn't work. The humour didn't translate, the characters didn't translate and it was a mess IMO. Dumbledore suffered the worst in this transition and while I do blame Gambon (he should have read the books - as should all of the adult actors), the blame has to ultimately land with Newell for his not understanding the books.

I also disagree that Dumbledore has ever had a 'grandfather' quality, and I think you're letting Harris influence the way you read the books a little too much. I think he's always been described as quite the opposite. There's a small scene in Goblet of Fire which comes to mind where Harry, briefly, thinks of Dumbledore as an old man for the first time.

(from POA) "Professor Dumbledore, though very old, always gave an impression of great energy."
(from GOF) "The silvery light from the Pensieve illuminated Dumbledore's face, and it struck Harry suddenly how very old he was looking. He knew, of course, that Dumbledore was getting on in years, but somehow he never really thought of Dumbledore as an old man "

I can't say I disagree with you, though. What has always been missing from Gambon's portrayal and wasn't even present in Half-Blood Price is the quiet dignity that Richard Harris had.


Having said that I've seen alot of posts suggesting that Gambon is best because they couldn't imagine Harris acting some of the more powerful and combatitive parts, like duelling Voldemort in OotP or the cave scene in HBP: let me remind you that Harris was not only an accomplished actor with vast experience but when he was younger he was quite rowdy in his roles, playing many aggressive characters (Oliver! - Bill Sykes, Mutiny on the Bounty - John Mills, etc.) so he definitely had it in him to play those more martial scenes.

I don't think anyone is questioning Harris' acting ability, what they're questioning is the fact that he was old and quite sick. Harris was about ten years older than Gambon, and suffered terribly from Hodgkin's Disease. I don't think it's has anything to do with Harris as an actor, just the timing and circumstances the franchise had arrived in.

Had Harris been ten years younger, I think he truly would have given the perfect Dumbledore performance. He certainly looks the part more than Gambon - but unfortunately was only able to play one side of the character (I'm still up in the air as to whether or not Gambon ever actually played the side which was done by Harris). If Harris were still alive, though, I would assume that any 'action' scene he couldn't perform would have simply been done by a stand-in.

Richard Harris, he just had the right vibe, he fit the old wise man image perfectly, to me Michael acts too young to fit in the image of DD in the books!...that's just me, I think Richard Harris could have done all these parts of DD's character perfectly fine, with abit more wiseness and beauty.

Gambon does a much better job at playing DD than Harris did. Harris' DD always seemed about to fall over, underpowered and overly played to show DD's great age rather than as Rowling wrote DD to be.

Gambon at least has a deeper voice, but is a touch stout where DD is supposed to be tall and thin. The light blue robes suit him better than Harris' cartoony starred robes although they aren't canon. Gambon certainly plays his character with more energy and vigor than Harris did which is canon.

In Harris' defense, he was quite ill when filming CoS and it is too bad that he passed on. It can be difficult for viewers to get used to replacement actors and I would guess more so for kids.

There is no way Harris could have done any of the things Gambon did in the OOTP duel or in the cave sequence (or any scene where Gambon glides around or hops up/down stairs). They had to literally prop him up and film around him during COS, he was that frail, any kind of constant movement was out of the question. It was painful seeing him shuffle around his desk during Chamber. It would have taken 5 minutes for him to walk from the door to Umbridge when Trelawney got sacked in OOTP, especially with the weight of that costume.The frail quality of Richard Harris is honestly I think a very minor sin. Yes, I do imagine Dumbledore trotting through the corridors of Hogwarts with a spring in his step and a tune to whistle, but honestly even with Harris' frail nature I can see him doing that more then Gambon.

You see in spite of him being somewhat frail, I never saw Harris' Dumbledore as being weak or without energy. Remember when the troll broke in and he yelled "SILENCE!" with such power in his voice? Honestly I can't imagine Gambon doing that. He would be more like to yell silence a few times without any effect until one of the teachers (lets say Snape) screamed out in anger or gave a high pitched whistle and Gambon would nod and say "thank you Severus", before giving them their instructions. Because within Harris' serene and increadibly kind nature there was somthing else which cemented him as perfect for me. He was confidant. He didn't get himself worked up because there was no reason to, because he could handle ANYTHING. There would no reason for him to race up the staircases when the fat lady was attacked, because to him it wouldn't be nessicary. Gambon had to push his way through the crowd, grunting "Out of my way! Out of my way!", because he doesn't have that feeling of being in control of the situation. Harris would just call out "What is going on here!?" and the students wouldn't make him have to push through them, because they would just part and make room for him, and then watch in awe as he walked up to the picture and made sence of the whole terrible situation and made them all feel much more at ease. Gambon never gives you a feeling of being in control of the situation. He has to push himself to assert his position and power. Harris was calm and serene because he didn't need to get himself worked up. Because everything was always under his control and he could still eat a few lemon drops on the side.

Everyone always says that Harris could never have done that fight scene with Voldemort in OoTP, to which I say, it is amazing what they can do with stunt doubles and computer manipulation. It would have been very easy I am sure. And what would have been so great about it is that Harris always (to me) gives you this feeling of being ABLE to do those things, but he doesn't because he doesn't need to. Then when he is going up against Voldemort, who is his match, and who he does need to bring his game on to fight, then he would show an enery that was always there, but that was only hinted at. Harris' Dumbledor alway struck me as being immensly powerful but without the need to showboat it around, because he is so confidant in himself that he doesn't need to prove his strength.

As for Gambon...well he was terrible in my opinion on so many occasions. He did have his good moments, but he always felt like he was just barely keeping a grasp on things. Everything was so close to all unraveling underneath him because he was just an ordinary wizard. A powerful wizard yes, but nothing extraordinary. Dumbledore was magical even to the magical world, somthing beyond and above, who could not be fully comprehended by ordinary people, only adored and appreciated. You cannot adore Gambon's Dumbledor really. You can respect and admire him to a point, but it is very hard to love him. In each movie he had serious problems.

In PoA (which I think was his best preformance, tied with HBP), he had some really good parts, such as when he seemed to know that Harry and Hermione were getting Buckbeak even though he hadn't yet seen them or had any way that we could see of knowing what they were doing or even that they were there (pointing to the strawberry bushes and noting that he should sign his name too although it is "quite a long name" :lol: ). But then he pats Ron's damaged leg without any apperant realization that it is hurting him, and if there is ANYTHING that Dumbledore would NEVER do, it is do anything to hurt one of his students without extremely good reason. Then when he had to push students out of the way to get to the fat lady. He really did a decent job in this one, but he never had that twinkle in his eye and he never did anything that made you feel uplifted. His quirkyness ("We did it Professor!" "Did what? Good night.") was much more strange and droll rather then charming and uplifting.

That is the word that I have been looking for. Harris was charming. He made you laugh and smile and feel good. Dumbledore is supposed to be charming. Gambon was never charming.

Anways, then he went to GoF, which was without a doubt his worst preformance. His manhandleing Harry was gutwrenching to me. It would be rediculous how un-Dumbledor it was, twere it not so painful and insulting to Dumbledore's character. But that wasn't all that there was. When he finds Hermione in the champion tent and seems so surprised ("Ms. Granger what are you doing here!?), even though she had been standing next to him for a few moments, where as Dumbledor is supposed to be able to see through invisibility cloaks. Then when he comes blasting in to stop Crouch Jr. Professor Snape and one other person (in the book it was McGonagall but I am not sure if it was still her in the movie) who seemed to genuinely be backup for him. Dumbledore doesn't need backup! In the book you felt like they were there because they were worried or wanted to just be there themselves, but here it was like they were worried that Dumbledore might actually need their help. It was rediculous :grumble: Then to cement how stupid everything about him in this movie was, he told Harry that he remembered setting fire to the curtains as a child, "on accident of course". Even as a child, Dumbledore does not do anything accidentally. His magic and the control of that magic is unparalleled. It's like Gambon and the director don't know the character at all.

OoTP had him get a little better, but again he had his problems. He seemed imploring when he wanted Fudge to believe him that Voldemort was back, and almost desperate again. The scene where he was saying that he was missing somthing and he was so upset that he couldn't figure out what it was. The total emotionlessness of how he told Harry that he kept the prophecy from him because he cared for him (he was supposed to be sad there, crying even, but this was just blank, like he was just stating a fact). It was all stupid. But then he wasn't so terrible that it made me disgusted with the whole preformance like in GoF.

Gambon in HBP was good again, but still nothing on Harris. He had bad moments here as well. When Dumbledor comments on liking kniting patterns in the book, it is supposed to be quaint and somewhat goofy, but with the look that Gambon has while he says it, he just seems deranged, even manic. It was creepy. He did have a bit of the confidance that he had been lacking in all his other preformances that made it seem like he didn't need to get himself worked up, such as when Harry asks him how they are going to apparate out of Hogwarts, when it is supposed to be impossible, and he says "being me does have it's advantages". But he still lacked the benevolence of Dumbledore. I didn't like when he joked about the scorns of young love, as to Dumbledore love is supposed to be a sacred thing. Him saying somthing like that is akin to sacrilege.

So that is my two cents...or...two grand...on both Dumbledores. In case you coudn't tell, Harris definately has my vote.

I like Gambon. I think he captures the quirky or as Ron would say, mental side of Dumbledore better. Of course it could be the material he was given to work with but Harris seemed a bit too serious all the time.

My take on the GoF scene that everyone takes as being out of character is that he is not angry with Harry, but afraid for him.

I like Gambon. I think he captures the quirky or as Ron would say, mental side of Dumbledore better. Of course it could be the material he was given to work with but Harris seemed a bit too serious all the time.

My take on the GoF scene that everyone takes as being out of character is that he is not angry with Harry, but afraid for him.

Harris wasn't serious :huh: he was serene. And yes, he might not have been quite mental, but he was charming and whimsical. Very whimsical. I seriously disagree with you here.

Richard Harris still gets my vote, however, HBP completely changed my opinion of Michael Gambon. He did well in my book. :D :tu:

Harris was by far my favourite. I believe he captured everything about Dumbledore perfectly, though I must admit I don't see him doing all of the action scenes in the later films, though...we'll never know if he could or not.:(
I don't paticularly like Gambon as Dumbledore, something about him just isn't right for me. His best performance was probably PoA although there were definetly major faults in that too. After that I thought he just got worse, paticularly in GoF, though that was probably just due to bad writing. He has his comic moments, but most of his lines I judge to be OOC. I just don't feel he captured the essence of the character, not surprising when you discover he's never read the books.
I'm probably the only one, but I didn't think his performance in HPB was good at all. During the death scene I bust out laughing, there was nothing emotional in it for me at all, it just looked riduculous. Anyways...this is just my own take on things :)
Harris all the way!!

I'm probably the only one, but I didn't think his performance in HPB was good at all. During the death scene I bust out laughing, there was nothing emotional in it for me at all, it just looked riduculous. Anyways...this is just my own take on things :)
Harris all the way!!

Well, it wasn't Gambon's job to portray emotion in the death scene; he just had to lay there and be dead.

Well, it wasn't Gambon's job to portray emotion in the death scene; he just had to lay there and be dead.
I mean the parts leading up to it. It didn't have such a huge impact on me as it did in the book, I think partly because I've never really been drawn in by his interpretation of Dumbledore.

Harris, Harris!
Although I've started to quite like Gambon (I hated him after PoA, because of these horrible robes he wore... ;p )

I like both. Gambon doesn't decide what robes he wears, so we can't blame him for that.

Harris' Dumbledore always felt warm and kind. He gave out a vibe of power, yet he always looked so weak. He was the stereotypical image of an old, great wizard. His image didn't really fit with the book Dumbledore, though. Book Dumbledore was whimsical, humerous, enegetic and generally cheerful. With Harris, we get one side of Book Dumbledore's personality, which would be the powerful headmaster and the twinkling blue eyes. Harris didn't really have an opportunity to develop the character, with him only being in two movies, under the same direction.

Gambon's Dumbledore was always 'youthful'. He portrayed Dumbledore as energetic, kind and whimsical in POA. His personality in POA fit closer to Book Dumbledore than Harris'.

Then Mike Newell came along. Under his direction, Gambon was told to act troubled and as a 'man under pressure', due to the strange things happening in the Wizarding World during GOF. He did that well.

David Yates took over from Newell. I can't really say a huge deal here, as Book Dumbledore was so distant from Harry and was not featured as much in previous books. However, what I did see was Gambon playing Dumbledore alot calmer from his previous films.

Lastly, HBP. Gambon really excelled his performance here. I saw the true, Book Dumbledore for the first time in the series. He was quick on his feet, whimsical, happy, loving, caring and easy going. That was the Dumbledore from the books.

So, to conclude, both actors did extremely well but the performance cannot be judged purely on the actor himself. Direction and script come into effect too. Due to the switch of direction through the films, the character of Dumbledore didn't have a continued personality, but each side of him was explored in each film and that is what is important. He is a complex character and it shows in the films.

I liked them both.

I thought both performances were flawed, but Gambon was more like the Dumbledore I imagined. He was more funny and energetic. Even though Harris brought more wisdom and eye-twinkling to the role, he just seemed too weak in his voice and demeanor... So I voted for Gambon. And you have to admit the cave scene was impressive!

Edit: I just thought this was funny...even though they cut Dumbledore swimming out of the movie, I just got the image of Richard Harris in his enormous Dumbledore costume trying to take a swim. Sorry...I'm quite sleep-deprived. :lol:

I've grown to like Gambon as Dumbledore. His performance in HBP was fantastic. I didn't like him in GoF -- way too gruff and physical. I'm sorry they didn't allow either Harris or Gambon to play up the more whimsical side of Dumbledore ("Nitwit, blubber, oddment, tweak."), but, they might have made him sound more crazy than whimsical, huh?

The thing I liked most about Harris' Dumbledore was that he seemed to "grandfatherly," but, always with a hint of the powerful wizard beneath the white beard and half-moon glasses. It was like, "I know how powerful I am. I don't have to show it unless I need to."

The best Dumbledore in my opinion is Richard Harris. To me he always seemed to act the part of Dumbledore better than Michael Gambon. I like Gambon, just not so much as Dumbledore. I mean in the 3rd movie he's like a hippie pretty much the whole time. Then in the 4th movie he acts like he's out of his mind, and he's some guy that wants to attack people all the time. It was a tad odd in my opinion.

I am not familiar with either's other work besides Dumbledore.

I'd say that Harris was good for the movies he was in. The first two books, we saw Dumbledore as the kind, old headmaster of a school. While he was strong, we didn't see his strength in the book. We saw him as wise. Harris fit that.

Gambon was in the books where we find out more about Dumbledore, and he takes a more active route in front of Harry. We finally see his magical strength. Having only known Harris for his Dumbledore role, I can't see him doing things like escaping from the Ministry when the DA is found, fighting Voldemort in the Ministry, the Cave incident, etc.

Both were good Dumbledores for the movies they were in.

I like both actors. Dumbledore was a complex wizard, gruff, serious, whimsical, etc. As for being rough, I have watched the first five movies again and all the characters are rough. Teachers grab students by the hand or arm, students grab each other.

I am not familiar with either's other work besides Dumbledore.

I'd say that Harris was good for the movies he was in. The first two books, we saw Dumbledore as the kind, old headmaster of a school. While he was strong, we didn't see his strength in the book. We saw him as wise. Harris fit that.

Gambon was in the books where we find out more about Dumbledore, and he takes a more active route in front of Harry. We finally see his magical strength. Having only known Harris for his Dumbledore role, I can't see him doing things like escaping from the Ministry when the DA is found, fighting Voldemort in the Ministry, the Cave incident, etc.

Both were good Dumbledores for the movies they were in.

I agree with your judgment. I liked Harris' performance in the two films he was in, but then again the two first books were much simpler in every way, with Dumbledore seeming like a more typical archetypical wizard than what he proved to be later on. I always thought that as the series progressed Dumbledore was a character who grew much more complex than what we saw in Harris' performance. Gambon's more varied performance fits the development of the character throughout the series.

I thought both performances were flawed, but Gambon was more like the Dumbledore I imagined. He was more funny and energetic. Even though Harris brought more wisdom and eye-twinkling to the role, he just seemed too weak in his voice and demeanor... So I voted for Gambon. And you have to admit the cave scene was impressive!

Edit: I just thought this was funny...even though they cut Dumbledore swimming out of the movie, I just got the image of Richard Harris in his enormous Dumbledore costume trying to take a swim. Sorry...I'm quite sleep-deprived. :lol:
Agreed... especially after HBP. Both actors did a good job as him, but in the end... Gambon really has grown into the part well.

:rotfl: Yea that would be funny to see... and wouldn't it be almost impossible to swim in that thing :p?

:rotfl: Yea that would be funny to see... and wouldn't it be almost impossible to swim in that thing :p?
Exactly! I was thinking it would all just float up over his head and he would sink. :lol:

Like the titanic.

Okay, I'm done now. :lol:

Exactly! I was thinking it would all just float up over his head and he would sink. :lol:

Like the titanic.

Okay, I'm done now. :lol:
Yea and that certainly wouldn't be pretty :lol:.

What was your favorite Dumbledore moment?

For me, it would be almost anything from HBP -- he had me (Gambon) laughing almost every time he was on screen :).

I love the twinkle in Richard's eye. :) That's the Dumbledore I always imagined him to be.
Exactly! That's my first impression of Richard and it's a good one. For me, Richard portrayed the wise, calm, and quirky side of Dumbledore. He was whimsical and funny.
But there are many sides of Dumbledore.

Gambon captured the energy that I always imagined Dumbledore having. He was often described as having the energy of a much younger man, in the books. I loved Gambon's performance in the Prisoner of Azkaban and the Half-Blood Prince. The scripts and directing gave him the opportunity to show that quirky, energetic side of Dumbledore that was lacking in GOF and OotP.

As it's been said, many of our problems with both of their portrayals are the faults of the directors and screen writers, not the actors themselves. They both did great jobs with the script and directing that was given.


If only they could have been morphed together to become the perfect Dumbledore! :lol:

What was your favorite Dumbledore moment?

For me, it would be almost anything from HBP -- he had me (Gambon) laughing almost every time he was on screen :).
Yeah, I think Michael Gambon is hilarious! The knitting patterns line was great. And when he says his entire name at the hearing in OotP! I also love the first 30 seconds or so of HBP. It's sweet... :)

What was your favorite Dumbledore moment?

For me, it would be almost anything from HBP -- he had me (Gambon) laughing almost every time he was on screen :).

I'm going to have to say the first time we see Dumbledore at the opening of the Sorcerer's Stone. "I should've known you would have been here... Professor McGonagall." His eyes are twinkling, his stare is x-raying.. It's so Dumbledore haha

Harris epitomized what I pictured DD to look like, sound like and be.

I am not good with change, so at first I really did not like Gambon's DD. But he has grown on me and I think if he had been the only DD, I wouold have liked him from the beginning.

I do not find that I can really vote on this. Neither is better; they are each better suited to each film, given the moods. And to be honest, though I hate the idea of saying it, I think the change in actor came at the best possible movie. Both would excel in some of the films and both would be terrible in others; therefore, I cannot say I like or dislike either.

The way I see it, the 1st and 2nd are much like their books: child-centered, forming a "world of wonder," where Dumbledore is like a mythical, eternally nice, safety-granting, peace-loving grandpa sort of man. Richard Harris' deeply compassionate, earwax-munching Dumbledore is what was needed for these films. Starting with the 3rd, the story begins to take on a more pseudorealistic tone with dark environments that necessitate a stronger Dumbledore, one who gets angry and who unleashes the Fury of the Seven Stars, then in the next moment has some witty bit of camp to add to the proceedings. Michael Gambon's performance fits here. I cannot picture Richard Harris' Dumbledore raging in the fight with Voldemort in OotP or threatening Barty Crouch Jr. in GoF any more than I can picture Michael Gambon's Dumbledore comforting Harry in front of the Mirror of Erised.

Richard Harris really was Dumbledore! He had the voice, the twinkle in the eyes, the connotation, everything. Gambon didnt become Dumbledore until HBP. It took him FOREVER to really nail the role. I do love aspects of Gambon's Dumbledore though. I love some of his lines in PoA. HBP, he became Dumbledore in full. I was really pleased to see that. I voted Harris but Gambon did eventually become the wizard!

I personally really enjoy Gambon. I dont think Harris did a bad job at all, however. I just think Gambon embodies that whole goofy, weird aspect that Dumbledore has. I see him as being way more silly and strange than Harris. I feel like Harris was TOO perfectly an old wise wizard. While its true this is what Dumbledore is, he's also a bit off his rocker. I think Gambon did that well.

I do hate the part in GoF though when he yells at Harry. Its so out of character and thats clearly not how it was in the book.

I loved Harris as Dumbledore but I think the problem was that by the time Cos was filmed he was frail in real life.
I have just watched PoA again and pinpointed the moment I disliked Gambon. He put his hand up to the portrait of the Fat Lady and his hand and nails were disgusting more like I would imagine on Fenrir Greyback but that's just my quirk.
I hated the roughness in that GoF scene, it was a real shock but as the films have come out I've realized that Richard wouldn't have had the physical strength to portray Dumbledore.

Richard Harris WAS dumbledore when the movie came out I wasn't even 9 and so I didn't have a CLEAR definition of what he would look like but I had a good general idea, and when I seen him um on the screen so calm so precise but still so wise, he just I cannot explain enough how this man perfectly represented Dumbledore, nothing against Gambon personally, but Harris was just brilliant.

I really preferred Harris.

Although, some of what I don't care for with Gambon's version may be the fault of the writing, not the acting.

I agree with your judgment. I liked Harris' performance in the two films he was in, but then again the two first books were much simpler in every way, with Dumbledore seeming like a more typical archetypical wizard than what he proved to be later on. I always thought that as the series progressed Dumbledore was a character who grew much more complex than what we saw in Harris' performance. Gambon's more varied performance fits the development of the character throughout the series.

Although we are seeing Dumbledore through Harry's eyes in the first 2 books. So the initial characterization was correct. If Richard Harris had not become ill, I have no doubt that his portrayal would have become more complex as the story progressed.

When I first saw Gambon as Dumbledore, I was very dissapointed. Harris had a sort of internal magic that he seemed to exude in his performance. Like alot of you already said, he had that classic old wizard feel , and the twinkle in his eye. Gambon seemed almost cold in comparison (and I'll never quite get over his beard scrunchie)
But as I watched the movies get darker and more complex, I knew that Dumbledore would as well. Gambon did an awesome job during the dramatic scenes (HPB) and still managed to act a little nuts. He had an anger in him, a passion when talking to Harry about defeating Voldemort. I question whether Harris could have pulled that off with his soft spoken voice (although more Dumbledore like) and his jovial demeanor. Was he just acting the part like he was supposed to (since the first two movies are a bit more Disney-ish?) Would he be able to step up his game in the later ones? I guess we'll never know...:sad:

I agree with The Scarecrow and Jonny7003. I think Richard Harris's rendition was what was necessary at the time. When Harry is first getting to know Dumbledore, that's how he sees him: the old, wise, quiet, large but gentle presence man.

But by the time POA came along, even though it is very sad that Harris died, the time for a new portrayal had come. Richard would not have been able to pull off Dumbledore's comically allusive and interestingly unique presence and demeanor that was shown in POA. Jo's Dumbledore had changed by know. He was much more active and verbal. Unfortunately, by the end of COS it seemed that Richard was always out of breath and raspy.

And I, for one, LOVED Gambon's performance in both POA and GOF. Even though, GOF could be seen as sort of the train wreck of the series, and a lot of people though Gambon's Dumbledore was out of place here, I loved it. It seemed so genius to me. In POA, Dumbledore's role is like a half-plot device. He's very quizzical and alluding and like always, yet more than ever: peculiar and eccentric. Gambon's way of being this way was absolutely perfect. And also, I LOVED his robes in this film. And his hats and his hair. Loved, loved, loved, loved. :D

In GOF, like either The Scarecrow or Jonny7003 brought up, I can't remember, by this time, Dumbledore is under a lot of pressure. He is frustrated and again, Gambon performs that like no other.

Gambon's energy was what made Dumbledore likable to me, I could relate or exactly become connected with Harris's Dumbledore because he seemed so feeble and the Dumbledore I always imagined was physically very old but you would never guess it by the way he moved with grace and quickness. Like the way he ran up the stairs to the Fat Lady's portrait or just in general the way he glided around was just amazing to see.

I liked Richard Harris so much more. He was much more Dumbledore-y than Michael (in my opinion). I think that Richard captured Dumbledore's character more than Michael. Example: Dumbledore is supposed to be calm, and in HP and the Goblet of Fire (there were other moments too, but this is the one that sticks out the most) he was like "DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIRE?!?!?!" As he practically strangles Harry. I mean jeeze man take a chill pill.

I liked Richard Harris so much more. He was much more Dumbledore-y than Michael (in my opinion). I think that Richard captured Dumbledore's character more than Michael. Example: Dumbledore is supposed to be calm, and in HP and the Goblet of Fire (there were other moments too, but this is the one that sticks out the most) he was like "DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIRE?!?!?!" As he practically strangles Harry. I mean jeeze man take a chill pill.

i would have agreed with you 13 months ago but after wathcing HBP million times, i think Michael Gambon was perfect as Dumbledore

i would have agreed with you 13 months ago but after wathcing HBP million times, i think Michael Gambon was perfect as Dumbledore

I see your point but perfect? a bit exaggerated IMO Richard Harris' death came as a shock to every one and they couldn't find a replacement fast enough, and Gambon fit in well but he prob didn't read all the books. So his Dumbledore style was off a bit :agree:

I see your point but perfect? a bit exaggerated IMO Richard Harris' death came as a shock to every one and they couldn't find a replacement fast enough, and Gambon fit in well but he prob didn't read all the books. So his Dumbledore style was off a bit :agree:

okay maybe "perfect" is a bit too much but still i thought he was really good. also gambon hasnt read any of the books lol.

okay maybe "perfect" is a bit too much but still i thought he was really good. also gambon hasnt read any of the books lol.

Hahaha really?!?! I knew it :wow: at least he came out about it, he should've he might have made such a great Dumbledore. he might do a better job in the Kings cross cause he had to have read that book at least. I mea cmon lol

IMO Gambon got better as Dumbledore as the series progressed. I wanted Ian McKellen to play the part of Dumbledore. His performance as Gandalf blew me away and I think he'd have made a great Dumbledore.

In the HBP I think Gambon was amazing. Escpecially during the Horcrux scene in the cave.

I know people love Harris and I like him but I (and apparently am in the minority in doing so) love Gambon in the role. I often hear the discussions on MuggleCast about him and I do agree he was a bit over the top in GoF (DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIRE!?) but otherwise he's Dumbledore to a T for me. He has a strength to him that I just didn't see in Harris - I couldn't imagine him doing any of the later Dumbledore stuff - the fight at the end of OOTP or the amazing ring of fire in HBP.

I loved Richard Harris in SS. He was the best Dumbledore for sure--exactly as I imagined! When I heard he was dead, I actually cried. But then, my actual grandfather had died, too, so it was kind of a salt-on-an-open-wound thing.

I know people love Harris and I like him but I (and apparently am in the minority in doing so) love Gambon in the role. I often hear the discussions on MuggleCast about him and I do agree he was a bit over the top in GoF (DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIRE!?) but otherwise he's Dumbledore to a T for me. He has a strength to him that I just didn't see in Harris - I couldn't imagine him doing any of the later Dumbledore stuff - the fight at the end of OOTP or the amazing ring of fire in HBP.

Actually, I agree he was pretty good in OotP. But during the duel with Voldemort, he moves a bit like an old man, not physically strong (and he is consideraby younger than Richard Harris was in the first 2 movies). He did a fair job in HBP, except he came very close to playing it over the top in the cave scene....right on the edge. Had Richard Harris been well and around, it's my opinion that he would have been a book-perfect Dumbledore.

Did Gambon finally read the books? I assumed that he finally did when doing HBP because...well...he finally nailed the character to a T! It took him a while though. He was pretty great in OotP though. The Ministry fight scene comes to mind. "It was foolish for you to come here tonight, Tom. The Aurors are on their way." The way he says that is very Dumbledore. It was like he was saying there wasnt going to be tacos on monday's menu. :lol: In HBP, we got a pretty damn accurate Dumbledore! He was nearly everything i imagined in that movie. (Too bad we didnt see the scene in the Weasley's broomshed! I loved that part in the book!)

okay maybe "perfect" is a bit too much but still i thought he was really good. also gambon hasnt read any of the books lol.

I thought he had read the books and he was just joking around - he's known for lying in interviews.
Anyway, I really like Michael Gambon as Dumbledore. He's an amazing actor - I loved the cave scene in the sixth film and his speech about Cedric at the end of the fourth film was very powerful and moving. I'll admit he seemed a bit rough in the fourth and fifth films like when he said "Don't you all have some studying to do?" but I guess that was just to show how worried Dumbledore was about the things that were happening.
Not that Richard Harris wasn't good of course - I think he was perfect in the first two movies, but I really can't imagine him doing some of the things in the later movies like the duel against Voldemort.

Not that Richard Harris wasn't good of course - I think he was perfect in the first two movies, but I really can't imagine him doing some of the things in the later movies like the duel against Voldemort.
The duel against Voldemort didn't require a huge amount of physical stamina, most of it was CG effects. While I think Mr. Gambon did OK in OotP, he didn't look particularly physically strong/nimble to me. So I don't see why you would think Mr. Harris wouldn't have been able to handle that scene.

The duel against Voldemort didn't require a huge amount of physical stamina, most of it was CG effects. While I think Mr. Gambon did OK in OotP, he didn't look particularly physically strong/nimble to me. So I don't see why you would think Mr. Harris wouldn't have been able to handle that scene.

I did LOVE Harris' Dumblerdore - physically he was exactly as I imagined and he played the character very believably. What I didn't realize was missing was a little bit of fire in the heart of the character. I feel like Gambon brings that to the character - something like the fight between DD and Voldy would be something he would do well though I see him as a more flawed, human DD... not exactly how I imagined him.

The duel against Voldemort didn't require a huge amount of physical stamina, most of it was CG effects. While I think Mr. Gambon did OK in OotP, he didn't look particularly physically strong/nimble to me. So I don't see why you would think Mr. Harris wouldn't have been able to handle that scene.

I just can't imagine Richard Harris in that scene - everytime I think of Dumbledore I think of Michael Gambon. Maybe he would have been able to handle that scene but I still prefer Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore.

I like them both really.. but I do prefer Richard Harris out of the two.

I think Gambon did really well in the sixth movie, especially during the cave scene, like everyone else said, and during the lessons. But in the fourth and fifth movies I though he was way too harsh to play Dumbedore, I just can't imagine him yelling at Harry or shaking him. I always though Dumbedore was too gentle :')

I really tried to like Gambon as much as I like Harris, but he just isn't the right Dumbledore for me. He doesn't own that glow of wisdom and calmth and Dumbledoreness that Harris had. I know it's not really fair to make looks a big point with this comparison but I do find that very important, and IMO Harris had more than just his looks on his side. His charisma was more like the Dumbledore in the books, I believe. I think you really could see that in his acting. So my votes goes to Harris. Although I have to point out that I don't have anything against Gambon, his acting is good and stuff, he just doesn't give me the awwDumbledore-feeling I had in the books, which Harris did gave me.

I see your point but perfect? a bit exaggerated IMO Richard Harris' death came as a shock to every one and they couldn't find a replacement fast enough, and Gambon fit in well but he prob didn't read all the books. So his Dumbledore style was off a bit :agree:

Why should he read the books? The script is enough. As an actor myself, I can speak to this. It's somewhat unusual to read the original story that a script is based on. Why should you, when all the answers you need are right in front of you? More than this, the original material might contain information that is non-compliant with the adaption. And if only a few people are reading it, how is that supposed to work? Are you saying I committed a great crime against Charles Dickens and the fans of his work when I didn't read A Christmas Carol before performing a stage version of it? I wouldn't say so. I feel like I represented the child poverty in London quite well (I was played Ignorance) and Dickens would be proud.

Why should he read the books? The script is enough. As an actor myself, I can speak to this. It's somewhat unusual to read the original story that a script is based on. Why should you, when all the answers you need are right in front of you? More than this, the original material might contain information that is non-compliant with the adaption. And if only a few people are reading it, how is that supposed to work? Are you saying I committed a great crime against Charles Dickens and the fans of his work when I didn't read A Christmas Carol before performing a stage version of it? I wouldn't say so. I feel like I represented the child poverty in London quite well (I was played Ignorance) and Dickens would be proud.

I think it's a matter of opinion and circumstance whether or not an actor should read the original material. That being said, with a franchise as worldwide as HP, you would think Mr. Gambon would take the time to at least talk to some people who had read the books, so that he didn't stray so far off character. HP is not some obscure work that has been read by very few; and the HP scripts are written based on the books, with dialogue/scenes often taken straight from the books.

Ralph Fiennes consulted young members of his family who had read HP, to get a perspective on Voldemort as a villain. As he did so, he realized that millions of people across the globe had read the books and already had a certain impression of Voldemort in their minds, and that he could not portray Voldemort properly without learning about the character. If Mr. Gambon had done the same, it's my guess that his few glaring departures from character would not exist in the films.

I think each of them had their strengths in portraying Dumbledore: Gambon portrayed Dumbledore's power and strength very well, and Harris portrayed Dumbledore's wisdom and his almost grandfather-like role toward Harry. The later installments of the movies were more suited for Gambon's performance while the earlier ones were more suited for Harris', given the way our perceptions of Dumbledore's character change as we get more information about him and see more of his actions/reactions toward events. With the exception of GoF, I liked Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore; and in movies 1 and 2 I thought Harris was spot on. As far as looking like Dumbledore, Harris was the closest for me. So in the end, I liked them both for different reasons.hat being said, with a franchise as worldwide as HP, you would think Mr. Gambon would take the time to at least talk to some people who had read the books, so that he didn't stray so far off character.I think that might have helped his performance in GoF, which I think went the farthest away from character and caused me not to like his performance in that movie.

I don't know which dumbledore to choose. The dumbledore i imagine is a crossover between both of them.
Try to picture a dumbledore who has gambon's costume, but has richard harris's face, and has Gambon's voice and energy.
I think that the two of them combined would make a great dumbledore.

I think that might have helped his performance in GoF, which I think went the farthest away from character and caused me not to like his performance in that movie.


I don't think that is how actors like Gambon work. They are not going to disregard instructions from the director/script in favour of ideas they have gleaned from the original text, if they have even read it. Had Gambon read the book, he would disregard anything from it in favour of whatever the director tells him to do instead. Classical actors take their direction from the director and no-one else, which can result in some wildly different performances compared to the source material (see also: Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort).

I don't think that is how actors like Gambon work. They are not going to disregard instructions from the director/script in favour of ideas they have gleaned from the original text, if they have even read it. Had Gambon read the book, he would disregard anything from it in favour of whatever the director tells him to do instead. Classical actors take their direction from the director and no-one else, which can result in some wildly different performances compared to the source material (see also: Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort).

If Mr. Gambon's interviews can be trusted, he has said this about the way he plays any role (paraphrased): he puts on the costume, learns his lines, but basically plays himself. So it would be my opinion that he doesn't do exactly what the director says. If I can find the quote again, I'll post it up. Mr. Gambon is also responsible for convincing the director in PoA, that Mr. Gambon use that very odd accent Dumbledore has from PoA onward.

I didn't like Gambon at first because I think Richard Harris was just so perfect as Dumbledore, but as the films have gone on I have grown to love him now :) He plays it so passionately and with a kind of mad attitude that I felt to Dumbledore when I read the books. It evolves well from the Dumbledore of the young films to the more mature.

Here's the quotes from Mr. Gambon I was referring to:


I just play him as myself, I don't ease myself into any role really. I stick a beard on and play me.




“He’s got to be a bit scary," Gambon said of his Dumbledore. "All headmasters should be a bit scary, shouldn’t they? A top wizard like him would be intimidating. And ultimately, he’s protecting Harry. Essentially, I play myself. A little Irish, a little scary. That’s what I’m like in real life.”

I like Gambon's portrayal of Dumbledore better, he has the energy and sense of powerfulness that I envisioned the Dumbledore from the books having. Harris seemed to have a much quieter voice, but I think that suited him in the earlier films.

Richard Harris was an AMAZING Dumbledore and he really played the Dumbledore of the 1st two books well. I really missed him at first when Michael Gambon took over because I thought Gambon played Dumbledore too aggressively. Now I think about it though, Gambon's approach probably fits the Dumbledore of the later books better.

(RIP Richard Harris)

Richard Harris was an AMAZING Dumbledore and he really played the Dumbledore of the 1st two books well. I really missed him at first when Michael Gambon took over because I thought Gambon played Dumbledore too aggressively. Now I think about it though, Gambon's approach probably fits the Dumbledore of the later books better.

(RIP Richard Harris)

I agree, Richard Harris was my idea of Sumbledore when reading the books, and I hated Michael Gambons agressive Dumbledore (Particularly in GoF!! Dumbledore would never shake Harry and yell at him like that!), but I don't think that Richard Harris would have been able to evolve and be as agile as Michael Gambon is in OotP and HBP.

I agree, Richard Harris was my idea of Sumbledore when reading the books, and I hated Michael Gambons agressive Dumbledore (Particularly in GoF!! Dumbledore would never shake Harry and yell at him like that!), but I don't think that Richard Harris would have been able to evolve and be as agile as Michael Gambon is in OotP and HBP.

I just rewatched the first two movies after a long time and still think that Gambon is the better Dumbledore. The few miscues that everyone talks about not withstanding, Gambon can show all manner of Dumbledore's personality. His strength, his power, his intelligence, along with his purple suited eccentrities, the fact that's he's off his rocker, that bit of playfulness.

It is interesting that you comment on the agility of Harris.

Harris was sick with Hodgkins Lymphoma for a while (can't find how long).
Also, have you seen the robes they placed this poor man in! Harris could barely move in them? I noticed his robes were especially confining in the final scene in CoS in Dumbledore's office (with Lucius). Harris was sitting in his chair, DID NOT MOVE at all. When he got up and walked around, it was like he was encased in something stiff.

Beautiful fabric, beautiful robes, but is it any wonder that Gambon said - yeah, not going to do that, going to put a small THIN robe over my clothes.

I still think Harris was good for the first two films, but Gambon is much more suited to the later, darker material and portrayer of a more complex and flawed Dumbledore.

Personally, I cannot make a honest decision since the role of Dumbledore changes so much between the movies. To say what dumbledore is better, I would have had to seen both actors in all the movies.

However, with that said, I always thought Ian McKellen would have been a perfect Dumbledore. Yes I know this was an impossiblity because it would have been too passe since LOTR came out when it did.

However the role of Gandolf is very similar to that of Dumbledore, especially in the way McKellen's take on Gandolf. And I'm not talking about the obvious simularities of each being in a fantasy world and each being a Wizard type person.

McKellens Gandolf on one hand started off as a mentor to Frodo. A friendly yet fierce friend to Frodo.

McKellen's Gandolf is exactly what Dumbledore is in the books. A smart, skilled wizard wrapped ina jolly old man that could pass for your grandpa. McKellens Gandolf can be your funny old uncle in one scene and a fierce unstoppable force against evil in the very next scene.

Richard Harris was one of the worst things in PS and COS, in my opinion. His acting reflected the general flaws of the first movies : static, unimaginative and boring. He always kept the same facial expression and wasn't excentric at all for a Dumbledore. I wanted to sleep during his never-ending exposition speeches.

Michael Gambon isn't much better, but at least he can be fun. I don't like the lines in POA about "turning on the light" and "the deepest ocean", that's silly (but it's the script's fault, not his). I also don't like his weird outburst in GOF, neither the hypocritical smile he gives to Umbridge in OOTP during her speech. But he was thoroughly awesome in HBP, and I like how he was starting to look like Gandalf at the end. (:

I think they both portray different side of Dumbledore
For me, Richard Harris captured the quiet, calm Dumbledore that everyone admires, but doesn't have that flare of crazy that makes him so wonderful
Michael Gambon as Dumbledore is eccentric and funny but there's times he's gone wrong (GoF) and IMO, portrayed his characters alter-ego.
Overall I liked them both, but I'm not completly convinced on either of their suitability for the character. If I had to chose, I'd say Gambon, because I do think he's improved and captured a little more of the essence of Dumbledore over the last two films.

Well...Dumbledore is a little scary, so Gambon nailed it.

Being new, I suppose I need to add my opinion since this was the one "change" in the film series that I felt was devastating. Not only did I think that the late Richard Harris portrayal of Dumbledore was much more in line with the book, but his portrayal also was perfectly done, esp. his voice and mannerisms. Gabon's Dumbledore had been, for the most part, cringe-worthy. Very inconsistent in voice and mannerisms, not to mention out of line with the book (esp. GoF). One could say that Gabon made Dumbledore "his own" but that doesn't mean it was any good. His portrayal in PoA was very forgettable, while in GoF, it was awful (but I'm biased as a disliked the book and hated the movie). In OotP, it was not as bad as GoF and in HBP, it was a little better. Every scene of Harris' Dumbledore was quietly commanding and memorable; Gabon never made a scene as memorable, while most of his were very forgettable. It was unfortunate that Harris passed away, I think the post-Columbus movies would have been much better with Harris, all other things equal. My 1-cents.

Well...Dumbledore is a little scary, so Gambon nailed it.

I agree Mr. Gambon's portrayal is scary.

More is missing though. Where is twinkling-of-the-eye Dumbledore, or in-control Dumbledore, a step-ahead-of-everyone-else Dumbledore, protect the students at all costs Dumbledore who makes everyone feel everything's going to be OK?

Granted Mr. Gambon might not be responsible for the following, but also...where are his glasses? And his magnificent wardrobe?

I voted for both. I loved Richard Harris for how much he felt like the Dumbledore of the books, but I have a hard time imagining him fighting Voldemort in OOTP, or pulling off the cave scene in HBP. And I really do like Michael Gambon's quirkiness in the role... To me, Richard was gentle while Michael was odd and a bit fiery, and all of those are essential traits for Dumbledore to have.

:lol: I get your point. Everytime I see this scene in GoF I catch the eye of the person with whom I'm watching and both of us end up laughing.

But, yes, I also follow that by saying that is SO not Dumbledore.

I do the exact same thing...usually i :rotfl:

I voted for both. I loved Richard Harris for how much he felt like the Dumbledore of the books, but I have a hard time imagining him fighting Voldemort in OOTP, or pulling off the cave scene in HBP. And I really do like Michael Gambon's quirkiness in the role... To me, Richard was gentle while Michael was odd and a bit fiery, and all of those are essential traits for Dumbledore to have.

This is how I'd put it too. They both have their strengths and weaknesses and bring something different to the character. I definitely prefer Richard Harris because he embodied the wise old wizard with the twinkle in his eye and a youthful spirit. (Even his costume was better!) Michael Gambon though actually portrays the youthful, energetic, and powerful sides of Dumbledore, which I cannot see in Harris. (As you point out, I cannot see Harris dueling Voldemort or in the cave scene.) I just don't like Gambon's appearance though. It's too laid back with his small, tied beard and more casual robe. (And can we clean up his fingernails? He may be old but I'm sure that's not stopping him from good hygiene habits.)

richard harris was always my idea of how dumbledore would look and sound.
i miss him.

i've never really liked Gambon's depiction of dumbledore. i liked how youthful he made dumbledore to be, but the irish accent didn't do it for me at all.

not that i'm predjudiced towards the irish, but dumbledore was never written that way. and it took some of the magic away when i watched it as a kid by having an english accent in the first two films to an irish accent in the future films.

This is how I'd put it too. They both have their strengths and weaknesses and bring something different to the character. I definitely prefer Richard Harris because he embodied the wise old wizard with the twinkle in his eye and a youthful spirit. (Even his costume was better!) Michael Gambon though actually portrays the youthful, energetic, and powerful sides of Dumbledore, which I cannot see in Harris. (As you point out, I cannot see Harris dueling Voldemort or in the cave scene.) I just don't like Gambon's appearance though. It's too laid back with his small, tied beard and more casual robe. (And can we clean up his fingernails? He may be old but I'm sure that's not stopping him from good hygiene habits.)

I agree with all of this, I think a mix of the two actors would have been perfect, each of them brings something totally different which together would have worked quite well!

I voted for the 3rd option on the poll, only because I prefer the "in my head" Dumbledore to either of the film portrayals, I just see film Dumbledore as a different character entirely. I liked what each actor had to bring though, they were good performances. I think my favourite is Gambon's portrayal in PoA because he has some of the quirkyness, in Hagrid's Hut and at the speech at the beginning, and the line about dreams in the Great Hall. But that seemed to disappear in the later films, sadly :(

I know Harris was good and Gambon is good too, but can you imagine Harris in that cave scene in HBP think about it or him fighting Voldemort in OotP really think about it Gambon really has the strength to do it and if Harris was still alive he wouldn't have the strength. I voted both but if i had to choose one it would be Gambon

I think my favourite is Gambon's portrayal in PoA because he has some of the quirkyness, in Hagrid's Hut and at the speech at the beginning, and the line about dreams in the Great Hall. But that seemed to disappear in the later films, sadly :(

:agree: Completely agree.

Richard Harris looked more like the Dumbledore I imagined, and he had the calm and wise aspect of the character spot on, but, as others have said, I just couldn't imagine him doing the action scenes like the fight at the Ministry, or the cave. I could actually see Michael Gambon when I was reading HBP because Dumbledore sort of loses his 'God-like' quality in that book because it's where we start to see him, instead of the idealised headteacher, and Gambon suits that version more than the idealised one. I think Harris suited the first two films because his portrayal went with the childish, magical quality of those films but I don't know whether he'd have been as good in the later films where they become darker. Admittedly I haven't watched anything else he was in so that's based solely off PS and CoS.

I voted for Gambon. As much as Harris was a good Dumbledore, Gambon did a good twist on the character. He made him much more emotional and powerful too.

I voted for Gambon. As much as Harris was a good Dumbledore, Gambon did a good twist on the character. He made him much more emotional and powerful too.

I voted for Harris, for the same reasons you voted for Gambon:lol:

I think Gambon put too much emotion -- or in my view, lack of control -- into Dumbledore's character. Dumbledore was a master at not reacting emotionally, without thinking or considering everything carefully. In my view, Gambon took all of the wisdom Dumbledore had gained over his lifetime and tossed most of it out of the window. I think with Gambon that the playful side of Dumbledore disappeared as well.

I liked Richard Harris better.

Michael Gambon was not true to Dumbledores character in GOF at all. He was ok in POA and OOTP. But i think he did excellent in HBP and had one of the best performances in that movie. Richard Harris was true to the character of Dumbledore but never seemed to give off any vibes of Dumbledores quirkiness or powerfulness - well for me anyway! I couldn't imagine Harris acting as Dumbledore later in the series. He seemed to frail and santa claus like to take on the role of Dumbledore fighting off inferi and battling voldemort in the ministry of magic. I prefer Gambon even although his performance was very poor in GOF

I agree with all of this, I think a mix of the two actors would have been perfect, each of them brings something totally different which together would have worked quite well!

A mix of the two actors would have been great, :lol:. I think Harris fitted Dumbledore's looks better, but I liked Gambon's performance much better - perhaps with the exception of GoF; the temper and the shouting were so unlike Dumbledore's character :shrug:.

I liked them both. When I read the books, I usually imagine Richard Harris in the normal scenes, but I got used to Michael Gambon now.

Michael Gambon portrays Dumbledore very well. The only scene that was really off, was the one in the Goblet of Fire, when he didn't ask Harry calmly.
I can't really imagine Richard Harris when I'm reading Half-blood Prince.