Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wendybeth
Snow, I agree about MG as Dumbledore. Harris captured him perfectly, and Gambon is too 'in your face', especially in this movie. The literary Dumbledore is quietly cool and confident, slightly arrogant, but in a likeable way. Gambon's Dumbledore is a bit too excitable, and seems to not have the knowledge and assurance that the book's character conveys. In the books, if Dumbledore says it is so, it must be, but the movie Dumbledore would not impart the same sort of confidence.
|
WB, I'm right with you, Harris was note perfect from the very first moment of HP & the SS.
With Gambon, it's not only the "personality" of Dumbledore I feel they got completely wrong, but also the look of the wizard himself. I assume that they wanted to differentiate from Harris, in this they succeeded. I do not feel Gambon has the "heart" of Harris. I'm hard pressed to come up with a suitable replacement for Harris. Broadbent does not have the same lanky kind of look of Harris, but he has all the heart and gentle strength. When I read the obit for Harris, I hoped that they might pursue Peter O'Toole for the part. I think he could have carried it off beautifully and made Dumbledore his own. In any case, the casting of Gambon will irk me to the end.
Otherwise, I feel the casting of the various new characters has been truly inspired. Kenneth Branagh was brilliant in the second film. I'm on the fence on Fiennes not having seen him (but I think his voice will be marvelous).
Donna