Old Dumbledore or New Dumbledore?

Now we all know Harry Potter, and we've all seen the 5 movies released. First we had the old dumbledore [Richard Harris] who only played in the first two movies as he unfortunately died after the second one. He played Dumbledoor as a happy bubbly character who was extremely caring. He played Dumbledore as he was represented in the book.

The second Dumbledore [Michael Gamban] is the resident Dumbledore at this time and has been playing him since Harry Potter 3, he takes the reole seriously and makes Dumbledore more fierce and determined.

Which Dumbledore do you like more? I personally like Harris more seeing as he played the role to what Dumbledore did in the books[R.I.P]

If this is meant to be in a different section ~ sorry please can you move it.

 

I will forever love Richard Harris, may he rest in peace. But really, in my opinion, he had the magic that Dumbldeore has. The spirit, if you understand. His voice was even something that I found enchanting, and he had that twinkling in his eyes. I think it would've been hard for him to do some of the scenes that would be later in the books, but that is only because he was sick. Harris definitely sticks closer to the book. And he's always Dumbledore in my mind when I picture him.

The new one, I don't like him. He's too aggresive with his movements, and granted, Dumbledore was suppose to be more angry and more emotional, but I don't think he would grab Harry's shoulders or arm and shake him, demanding him to speak in GoF. Or I forgot what he said. For the more action Dumbledore, he's good, but at times over does it.

I wish Richard Harris didn't pass away.

 

I agree... Harris acted like the dumbledore in the book, he was soft and friendly. The new guy [ cant be bothered ] he's pretty aggresive and it's a wonder why Harry looks up to him now [ in my opinion ]

 

Personally, I like them both. Like you've both stated, Harris seemed to have the "Dumbledore" feel to him. He played him just as Rowling had depicted him, and was so great at it that it seemed as if Rowling based the character off f him. I do like the new Dumbledore, though. He doesn't seem like he's the warm, bubbly Dumbledore that Rowling has written about, but rather he has a bit of a new take on it. It's kind of like movie remakes. They're not always exactly the same as the first one; rather the director takes some creative license and shows it differently.

That's just my two cents, lol.

 

I liked Richard Harris better as Dumbledore but like Misty said, Micheal Gambon gives Dumbledore kind of an edge.

 

The old was warm i liked the first one ever since Micheal came in and then dumbledore just started wearing his beard in hairties

 

Well, they're both good, but I have to say, Harris was more of the Dumbledore character, the new one, seems a bit more firm, and completely different to the other one.

I wonder how many Dumbeldores they'll get through.

Spoiler

Does Dumbledore die in the 6th or 7th book?

 

wow, way to give away spoilers.




imo, Harris was so much better. He had that Dumbledore charm about him, even down to the shape of his beard and the cracking voice. He seemed much more gentle with Harry, specially in the first movie <: Then the other dude comes along and is all shouting and loud....not like Dumbledore should be at all .-. I guess the second Dumbledore's characteristics will come in handy in more violent scenes later on though.

Also, lol @ what Reptar said.

 

Both we're/are good actors and need to be given credit. R.I.P. to Harris, for he was a true Dumbledore. He played out the role of his character as we saw him in the book. So unfortunate that he died after the first Harry Potter, but he is replaced by another talented actor, Michael Gamban. I don't exactly like the change of actors for characters, because then it is hardly ever the same, no matter how much they look alike.

Michael Gamblan shows a different image of the Dumbledore we've grown to love &adore. He fulfills the role, but he just isn't the same ;_; What Reptar : D said about the hairties, I lol'd. But its true, next time you have a Harry Potter marathon, you'll notice it. I agree with Misty aswell, the directors of the film take an extremely well-written original and make it their own. I know for media purposes they may change some things. But changing the personality of a character isn't exactly the best thing.

Anyway, every time I imagine Dumbledore, I imagine the bubbly, warm-hearted Richard Harris. I wish he didn't have to die T_T

 

I like them both, but didn't the director change between the second and the third too? So maybe how Dumbledore acted wasn't just on the actor, after all the director does have a rather large say in how the actors well... act.

So you can't blame the change entirely on Gambon, who is a very good actor who had to follow up on perfection basically.

 

I think they missed out on showing the change of personalities of the two actors in the movie which kind of killed it for me. And I will always like the first actor better.

 

I'm starting to like Gambon as Dumbledore a bit more, he's got the darker feel of Dumbledore from the latter three books, when we start finding out that he isn't quite as perfect and pure (not talking about bloodlines here) as he is first shown as. But I did not like Gambon in the fourth movie at all, he was way too aggressive and it seemed like Crouch and Dumbledore changed personalities or something.

Harris was ideal for the Dumbledore in the earlier books though, he portrayed the Dumbledore idolized by a younger student perfectly. But since I haven't seen Harris in anything else, I'm not sure would he have been able to act out some of the things Dumbledore does in the later books. For example, I can't imagine him battling Voldemort in the end of the fifth book/movie, and I can't see him Spoiler warning:going after the Horcruxes(sp?) personally, especially when he has to drink the potion thing that nearly killed him, and later actually being killed by Snape. End of spoilers.

So in conclusion: Harris was better showing the wisdom, and mentoring side of Dumbledore, and Gambon is better as a darker, more action oriented Dumbledore.​

 

The old Dumbledore was such a gentle soul,but I actually think the new one is better for the part in the later movies because Dumbledore has to do be up in your face, and pretty much act younger to get across set faster,blah blah blah.

 

I always liked the old Dumbledore better than the new one. But as Haley said, these later Harry Potter movies become much more dark than the "welcome to Hogwarts year 1 & 2" movies" where it's more about getting used to the place. Dumbledore now has to be more involved in the story than he was previously so I think the new Dumbledore fits the standards better.

 

^ This.

Of course, neither of them can ever truely portray the real Dumbledore, because the real Dumbledore is actually EVIL.

 

Hmmm, I'm not sure about that.

Spoiler

He started out a bit evilish in his youth, but after his sister got killed he turned good. He's still cunning, and some of his plans are a bit morally ambiguous but his intentions were nearly always good.

 

From the very begining there are mounds of damning evidence that show him to be the ultimate puppet-master, carefully molding young Mister Potter and his friends into set roles and ensuring that their Destinies are to his liking, all the while hiding behind his mask of the kindly old grandfather figure, Leader of the Light.

Why do his eyes twinkle? Some form of subtle Legilimency?

He always offers lemon drops to people who enter his office, even those who could be enemies. Laced with some potion to manipulate them?

He is the Chief Warlock of the Wizengamot, yet Death Eaters still wiggled there way home when he could have simply given them Truth Serum. Same with Sirius Black's false imprisonment. Why? To further his own plans.

Lily and James knew they were being hunted and could be killed, so logically they would write a will, saying where Harry would grow up. Would they send Harry to the Dursleys? Doubtful. Dumbledore breaks the law by sending him there.

You are right, his intentions are always good...the Greater Good. A good that does not care about whether or not Harry suffers.

There are countless other examples of his EVIL.

You are right, his intentions are always good...the Greater Good. A good that does not care about whether or not Harry suffers.

Do not fall for the lies.

 

I thought the 'Greater Good' thing was Grindewald's motto...

And actions that aren't good in every possible way don't make a character evil, it makes the character flawed, more believable.

Being a 'puppet master' doesn't mean he's bad, just, like I previously said, cunning.

Sending Harry to the Dursley's was the safest for him, since a) Death Eaters could've tried to kill Harry immediately after Voldemorts fall or b) Voldemort himself could've gone after him after he came back. I wouldn't be surprised if Lily and James knew this, as the Potter's will wasn't even mentioned.

Everyone suffers in a war, and the ones making strategic decisions have to make sacrifices, so that the losses are minimal. If Harry had to suffer, so that he could finally kill Voldemort, it's only sensible for one to let Harry suffer, if that means practically saving the world.

All his plans eventually worked, and yes, for the Greater Good. That's practically the world should work. The world doesn't divide in to absolute good and absolute evil, and like Sirius says "Wizards aren't divided in to good people and Death Eaters" (or something like that), the majority of people go in between.​

 

a) It may protect him from death eaters, but not the Dursleys themselves.
b) In fourth year Voldemort resurected himself with Harry's blood, negating the blood protection. Therefore wards around Privet Drive which are based on blood no longer work as Voldemort can now enter, but Harry is still sent there.
c) Why not have Dumbledore raise Harry himself? Dumbledore is 'the only one Voldemort ever feared'- so surely this would be where Harry was safest? And then Harry, as the chosen one, would be given a headstart to access to the proper training to kill a man with 50 years more magical experience than himself. At the end of DH he still can't do much more than a simple 'stupefy' or 'expelliarmus', instead having to resort to cheating (Elder Wand).

Saftey Fail.