Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban question

Are you kidding me!? Michael Gambon destroyed Dumbledore's character for me. In my opinion, he created a Dumbledore that wasn't nearly as calm and wise as the original. It felt like he was over-acting it for me, and it bothered me immensely. He was never Dumbledore in my eyes. I understand that when making a movie actors must portray their characters as they see fit, but that doesn't stop me from disliking it. I felt Richard Harris did a much better job, even though I'm not sure he could have pulled off the moments when Dumbledore needed to be powerful.

No one could have replaced Richard Harris as Dumbledore. I nearly cried when I heard that he had passed away because I thought he was the most perfect person for that role. Michael Gambon had huge shoes to fill, and although he filled them well enough, he never became Dumbledore to me.

Dumbledore was never gotten right. The new Dumbledore was too energetic and engimatic, the old too slow and creaky. My mind has the perfect picture of Dumbledore and it is indescribable

I thought they both were great. I felt Richard Harris was better for the first two movies, they were more kid friendly, and I thought he fit that role perfectly. For 3-7 I thought Michael Gambon was better just because I felt like for those movies there was a shift from children to young adult and older. If that makes any sense at all, :)

Gambon didn't even try to portray Dumbledore. He said he didn't read the books so it means he doesn't have the slightest idea the characteristics of Dumbledore.

Dumbledore is soft, wise and caring. Richard Harris will always be Dumbledore for me. Aside from he portrayed him well, he has this "Twinkle in his eyes" which how Dumbledore was described. It is pretty much synonymous to Dumbledore for me.

I did not see a hint of Dumbledore in Gambon. Not one bit.

And I beg to differ, Harris can play well the Dumbledore in the latter books. Dumbledore is wise and sure of what to do but never aggressive nor impulsive.

Both of them are great, but I feel like Michael had to warm up to the part, you know? In the Goblet of Fire book, Dumbledore is like, "Harry, did you put your name in the Goblet?" Very calmly, then Michael Gambon goes, "HARRY, DUD YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET?" While having him by the neck! After that, though, he was fine, if not a bit rough.

To be honest? I didn't know they were different people. haha

I'm just upset they never added the scene from the book (I guess spoiler alert might necessary?) in Order of the Phoenix after Sirius dies and Harry starts screaming at Dumbledore and smashing his office. In the movie they completely changed it to this super calm scene where Harry's like, "I'm sad," and Dumbledores like, "it'll be OK". I wanted to see Harry throw stuff at him like in the book, call me crazy!

The new one.

I liked the old Dumbledore better, but both are great. And Dumbledore is just awesome all around! :D

I can't believe this is even a discussion. Richard Harris 1,000,000 percent. As previously said, Michael Gambon did not even read the books. He knew nothing of who Dumbledore was. He even admitted that he never tries to make himself like the character he plays, but that he adapts the character to him. Which is kind of sad.

For further evidence, re-read the scene when Harry's name comes out of the Goblet of Fire. Go read it. Now! =]

Haha, ok...now that you have re-read that, pop in the GoF DVD and watch the scene. Polar opposite reactions between the Dumbledore of the book and Michael Gambon's portrayal.

And somebody said that Richard Harris lacked a humorous side, that just shows you missed a lot in the first two movies. He was quite amusing, the entire dialogue between he and Harry after the trip through the trapdoor had me grinning uncontrollably and also on the verge of tears. It was warm, it was fun, it was Dumbledore.

That being said, I still enjoyed the final six movies, but if you think that Richard Harris wouldn't have been able to do the job if he was alive and healthy, you are confused. Watch the remake of The Count of Monte Cristo, dude had some flare!

Unfortunately, I can't get over Michael Gambon's extremely OOC moments, especially in the Goblet of Fire. It was obvious that he had no concept of the character's personality. I read a quote in an interview where he said something like "I don't play the characters, I play different parts of myself."

Well sorry, but no one wants to see you. Please be an actor.

Ironically, if you watch off-screen footage of him, he acts more like Dumbledore in real life than he does in the movies! It's a shame because if he'd read the books or even tried to grasp the character, he might have chosen the correct part of himself to play.

Richard Harris was better, and he had that twinkly-eye thing going on. Soft-spoken, gentle, polite, but firm and forceful when needed.

I think Michael portrayed Dumbledore better. Richard Harris was just more..... Soft spoken and just gave me the sensitive shy impression. I could never imagine Richard doing things like the battle against voldemort in Order of the Phoenix or the cave scene in Half-Blood Prince. Michael is just so much more outgoing and mysterious and Dumbledore- like to me. I loved Richard too, but I think Michael portrayed Dumbledore better. Michael just seems more crazy and fun. Another thing that caught my attention was that the shy soft impression from Richard just didn't make me believe what J.K. Rowling said about Dumbledore being gay as much as Michael did. Thank you both Michael and Richard for making my childhood and helping my dreams to come true!!!!!!!

Richard Harris was the perfect Dumbledore. He was such a great actor and through his career proved that he could show gentleness and strength equally well. His speech at the end of the first movie was such a touching, memorable cinematic moment.

Richard Harris. Unfortunately, death played the trump card. If we had to replace him, I think Mr. Gambon did a fine job. It's very difficult to accept a change in a character so well-loved at Dumbledore. He had almost impossible shoes to fill, but he stuck with it and got the job done. I'm sure we all wish we still had Richard Harris around to provide more excellent acting. He is missed!

The first one was great but also the second was great aswell. Their both actors and they both played very great Dumbledore's!

Richard Harris hands down. I stopped watching the films after the forth one. Micheal Gambon destroyed Dumbledore for me. I think Ian McKellen would have been a great replacement!

i liked the old dumbledore - just seemed more like the calm wise character of the book. the new guy came off as being really flighty and not wise at all.

I like him he is OK. but I like the old one better

I liked Richard Harris better. he was more calm than the new Dumbledore.

yet I haven't seen movies 6-7 yet.

new he looks more like the dumbledore i imagined!!!

I like the new one, but bear in mind that the old one only had a chance to do one movie before he died. If he had continued, I'm sure he would have done great.

As if Michael Gambon was better! He didn't even read the books! Richard Harris was the perfect Dumbledore; he was calm, gentle and wise, he was just brilliant! Michael Gambon was way to aggressive, thought that could have been a result of the directing and producing of the third movie onwards. Chris Colombus directed the first two movies brilliantly and Richard Harris was fantastic.

richard harris was more like what i imagined dumbledore to be like. he was a kind sweet old man. but it is a little hard to picture him doing things like the cave scene. they were both pretty good.

I preferred Richard Harris, personally. He seemed more old and wise and mystical; I thought he was a better Dumbledore, he had the right aura for him. But he was a bit too old to play Dumbledore, especially for the Cave Scene in HBP.

I really liked both of them! I do wish that Richard Harris would've been able to be Dumledore in the rest of the movies ;( I was really shocked when I heard he died....

I really liked both of them! I do wish that Richard Harris would've been able to be Dumledore in the rest of the movies ;( I was really shocked when I heard he died....

both were good, but i preferred the first one. michael gambon was way to serious. dumbledore is supposed to be calm and funny in the face of disaster, that is the point!

Richard Harris was definitely the best. He was the perfect Dumbledore. He had the voice, decorum, love, sometimes silliness and brilliance that Dumbledore possesses. Michael Gambon completely ruined the character of Dumbledore. He was too angry and shouty and had absolutely no decorum. He seemed too indifferent not just towards Harry, but everyone and everything. Gambon himself said that he never read the books and didn't like the character of Dumbledore and did what he wanted with him. He says he basically played himself. "A little Irish, a little scary. That’s what I’m like in real life." Pathetic. Explains the weirdo accent of Dumbledore that destroyed everything in the movies. (I recommend reading the Hero Complex article about Gambon.)

I liked the second one better because I feel the second one portrayed the character as dumbledor better. He was louder rather than quiet-(old one)

First, though the second was awesome too.

Richard Harris all the way! I liked Michael Gambon well enough, and he grew on me over time, but Richard Harris nailed it. No one could have done it better than him. I'd say he does pull off the aura of power Dumbledore is supposed to have, which he shows a bit of when he shouts "SILENCE" in the first movie. Dumbledore is supposed to be calm and collected, which Michael Gambon is not, as he shows in scenes like in "The Goblet of Fire" when he questions Harry about putting his name in - he practically manhandles the poor kid! That is so not Dumbledore. (If it had been me to recast, I may have gone with Julian Glover {now Grand Maester Pycelle in "Game of Thrones"}).

I preferred the first Dumbledore but sadly he's no longer with us so someone else had to be cast.
I hate it when actors are changed in a series.

I'm deep into a re-read of HP at the moment, so I feel especially passionate about this question!

I read just this morning, actually, that Michael Gambon, Sir Harris's replacement, didn't feel that he would benefit at all from reading the original Harry Potter books, so he never did read them. To my knowledge (and this trivia can be found on IMDb) he never read even one book, which just irks me. I'm not sure how Rowling herself felt about this choice (though I'm sure she approved of Gambon in a general sense) but if I were in her position, I would find this a bit disrespectful. At the end of the day of course, he did things as he saw fit, but when the majority of the cast members HAVE read the original source material (and enjoyed it, at that) - What does that tell you?

As Book Dumbledore so wisely tells Harry in the second book..."It is not our abilities that make us who we are, Harry, but the choices we make."* Gambon most likely felt his acting ability was perfectly on-par, and therefore made the choice to skip the books, but still...

*Please note that I'm paraphrasing. :)

Anyway, Gambon's curious choices aside, I do find that Harris's performance is better, compared to Gambon. As others have said, Harris just had that special vibe - something I didn't ever feel from Gambon's portrayal. Plus, the height difference between the two actors gets me every time. I know that's not anyone's fault, I just find it annoying that Gambon's Dumbledore is so much shorter.

I think we can safely say that if Richard Harris had lived, he would never have been replaced and we would not be having this discussion. But, the situation being what it was, Michael Gambon was a fine choice in moving forward. I'll admit to being a bit put-off at first--new Dumbledore's energetic style vs old Dumbledore's calm and steady style was unnerving in HP3, but I muddled through, because--what choice did I have? Not watching? Never! In the end, I grew to love the new Dumbledore.

I think they are the two sides of Dumbledore.
Harris was the enlightened, kind one with the twinkle in his eyes.
Gambon was the tough, determined man that took on Grindlewald and Voldemort.

Gotta admit (please don't hate me) but I thought the movie dialogue was way better than the book.

Old one

Richard Harris fit the part MUCH better, always polite. the only problem is his movement but its hard to find an 80 year old actor who can move like a 30 year old.

the 2end one was the best to me

The old one.
1. In the books Dumbledore isn't exactly the most animated person. He doesn't yell at Harry, or jump up from the dining hall table.

The second Dumbledore really blew it. He was animated and yelled at Harry. For example, "HARRY DID YOU PUT YOUR NAME IN THE GOBLET OF FIRE???"
like... chill bro.

Gambon plays a very physical interpretation of the character. He physically looks a lot younger than Harris, but aside from that he runs around grabbing people by the shoulders and getting right up into peoples' faces. He sometimes plays it so broadly as to be slapstick. His version is a substantially less cerebral Dumbledore. I find that to be at odds with most of the characterization from JKR, so Harris gets my vote.

I liked them both.

I feel like Richard Harris portrayed Dumbledore as an old, feeble man who could easily be pushed around. Michael Gambon gave me more of an intensity and spirit that Harris failed to do. Honestly, the new Dumbledore outdid the first.

Richard Harris. :) When I read the books I imagine him there.

Neither. They just didn't have that twinkle in their eye. Richard Harris seemed to old. Michael Gambone is just to grumpy.

I actually liked both because I thought that changing actors really showed the evolution of Dumbeldore's character. Richard Harris gave us an example of the wise and kindly Dumbledore we all originally imagined. I think it is very interesting how they had to switch him out in book four which is when coincidentally we start to see his character as flawed the same way everyone else is. So I think the two Dumbledores are both important to telling the story.

When I Google this on internet and I see this question being asked I always see so much disappointments towards Michael Gambon. People saying he wasn't good enough. But I don't that is fair.

The first couple of Harry Potter movies is more of a child storybook. Hogwarts is filmed in full sunshine and looks colourful and warm. But as you go further on in the series you see that it starts to get little darker. The films get dark , more adult, themes. That's the same with Dumbledore. In the first few films , he's a wise old wizard but in later films the character starts developing and you see different sides of Dumbledore.

So the casting they did perfectly. Everybody will agree that Richard Harris had the perfect looks as Dumbledore, but Michael Gambon brought more of Dumbledore's character into the films. I appreciate both gentleman's performances. There is no actor or actress who did a real terrible job on Potter.

As of this comment, I've only seen the first four movies. I have to say that I liked Richard Harris better. When I saw him in the movies, he was EXACTLY like the Dumbledore I had pictured in my head when I read the books. He had that calmness, that sence of humor, and that twinkle in his eyes. He even looked like a wise headmaster.

Then I saw the third and fourth movies. Micheal Gambon was terrible as Dumbledore! He didn't look wise at all. He looked like a rediculously-dressed version of Gandalf with his beard tied! He wasn't kind and calm! He didn't have that twinkle in his eyes! He didn't have a sense of humor! He was completely unlike Dumbledore! There were so many scenes in the third and fourth movies where I cringed at his acting, because I could picture Richard Harris in those scenes doing so much better!

For me, Richard Harris literally WAS Dumbledore. No one will ever replace him in that role.

Both were good, but I gotta go with Richard Harris. He was wise and old, but still had a sense of humor and a twinkle in his eye. As for not pulling off the cave scene, pah. If he had his health, he could have pulled that off without breaking a sweat.

I don't think you're even supposed to think he can be a really powerful wizard. He's so aloof and frail looking, then he goes all bamf on you, so don't know what hit you. Harris is my perfect Dumbledore.

I will say though, out of all his HP movies, I liked Gambon's performance in HBP the best, even if I think the tower scene wasn't perfect.