«
»

Dumble-war: Michael Gambon vs Richard Harris

Richard Harris, Michael Gambon: FIGHT!

I contend that, in the Harry Potter film adaptations, Michael Gambon is a superior Albus Dumbledore to Richard Harris. HOWEVER. This is a controversial matter.

Dumbledore, the headmaster of Hogwarts in the Harry Potter series (except in the last book, because he died in Half-Blood Prince) (spoiler alert!), is pretty much the only major character to be portrayed by different actors in the films1. Sadly, Harris died after filming Chamber of Secrets, and since it’s not like they could’ve written Dumbledore out, he was replaced by Gambon.

What I like best about Gambon’s Dumbledore is his impishness. In Prisoner of Azkaban, Gambon’s first outing in the role, Dumbledore basically orchestrates Sirius’s freedom and Buckbeak’s survival by handing the Time Turner over to Harry and Hermione. “We did it!” Harry exclaims after the mission is successfully completed. “Did what?” Dumbledore asks, the picture of innocence. Gambon’s delivery of the line is perfection – his Dumbledore has more mystery and mischief than the straight-up kindly paternalism of Harris’s.

Gambon’s Dumbledore also has more style (as noted in Order of the Phoenix by Kingsley Shacklebolt, one of the series’ few black – and therefore cool – characters) and, more importantly, more power. Though we’ll never know, I have difficulty imagining Harris’s Dumbledore locked in combat with Voldemort in the Ministry of Magic, or conjuring a swirling vortex of fire to combat a mass of Inferi in the seaside cave.

Early in the Harry Potter series – both the books and the films – Dumbledore is portrayed as an all-powerful, benevolent wizard. Harris’s Dumbledore knows everything and can do everything, and Harry is right to trust him completely.

It’s not till later that Dumbledore becomes more nuanced. In Goblet of Fire he makes his first major fuck-up: failing to realise that the real Mad-Eye Moody has been replaced by Barty Crouch Jr. In Order of the Phoenix he makes another grave error when he chooses to distance himself from Harry and the boy’s mental connection to Voldemort, instead entrusting the guarding of Harry’s mind to his nemesis Snape. (Like, seriously, Albus. WTF were you thinking.) And of course in Deathly Hallows we discover Dumbledore’s dark past: his dabbling in the dark arts, the hours and hours he spent shagging Grindelwald when they were teenagers and his involvement in the death of his sister.

Dumbledore becomes a more unlikeable character, on the surface, but he also becomes darker and more complex – which, paradoxically, makes him more appealing. Gambon benefits greatly from getting to portray this richer Dumbledore, which is probably why I like and prefer him over Harris.

Who, by the way, was not a bad Dumbledore. He was a great Dumbledore (his read of the “Alas, earwax” line was spot-on). He just wasn’t as great as Gambon.

Of course, neither Gambon nor Harris is as lively as the Dumbledore in the books – and that’s fine. Film characters are rarely as good as their book counterparts. That’s just the nature of the two mediums. They both did good work; one of them just did it better.

  1. the only other one is Voldemort, and that’s if you count the face in the back of Professor Quirrell’s head [↩]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

This entry was posted on Friday, November 26th, 2010 at 1:49 pm and is filed under Movies, Reading. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  • http://www.facebook.com/brentcataldo Brent Cataldo

    “I have difficulty imagining Harris’s Dumbledore locked in combat with Voldemort in the Ministry of Magic, or conjuring a swirling vortex of fire to combat a mass of Inferi in the seaside cave.”

    I have thought the exact same thing!

    Whilst re watching the first six films recently I, on many instances, would repeat lines, usually in an action sequence originally said by Gambon, but in the tone and raspy, upward inflected way Harris does. It just doesn’t fit!

  • James

    In the book, Dumbledore seems to battle Voldemort with great ease. And it’s all Voldemort can do to parry Dumbledore’s attacks. Had the movie portrayed the battle in that way, I think Harris could have pulled off that scene just fine. Because they chose to make the encounter much more even in the movie, I think Gambon’s portrayal (in that scene) was adequate. 

  • Britt Dubs

    While I think Gambon portrayed the badass side of Dumbledore better, I thought he seriously lacked the thoughtfulness or kindly side of Dumbledore. 

    Like, when Harry’s name comes out of the Goblet of Fire, Dumbledore should be surprised and displeased, but not angry and physical with Harry. He’s the voice of reason when everyone else is freaking out, but Gambon just shakes him yelling, “Did you put your name in the Goblet!”Gambon in interviews has even said that he never read the books, but since Dumbledore was a headmaster he assumed he should be kind of scary and intimidating, because who likes talking to their headmaster? I would have liked some weird hybrid of Gambon and Harris, but overall I wasn’t too disappointed.

  • HarrisAlltheWay

    Okay, I sighed so many times reading this article that my diaphragm collapsed, so give me a second …

    Alright, here we go. First off, let’s go by absolute fact. Michael Gambon, although not entirely his fault, never looked or acted remotely like the book Dumbledore … EVER. Yeah okay, he wasn’t bad in HBP but even in POA (where he, like in HBP, didn’t get aggressive) he had no real grasp of Dumbledore’s wisdom, his twinkling eyes, his warm smile and he was just too aloof in POA. That isn’t Dumbledore. Now, let’s talk about something I have read on countless blog pages and websites about Richard Harris being too old for the action scenes in OoP.

    No one seems to remember that the poor man was dying of Hodgkin’s Lymphoma a.k.a cancer of the lymphatic system. He was sick! Of course he seemed frail in Chamber of Secrets! Watch him in that film and, although he seems to walk around reasonably well, his voice sounds phlegmy and wispish. My strong belief is that it was the disease causing these effects on his body, not the results of being 71-72 years old.

    So, if we are to imagine him in future films, picture him at a time when he at least appeared not to be suffering from cancer … YEP, Philosopher’s Stone, guys! Watch him closely in that movie, and you can tell that he was pretty much fine then! That movie was made less than a year before CoS, so you tell me: Would it likely be that aging a year caused him to sound so frail and, forgive me Mr Harris, appear to be breathing through his mouth most of the time? Or does it make more sense that his disease had taken its toll?

  • http://www.samdowning.com Sam Downing

    Your poor diaphragm.

  • Pianoperson

    One of the stupidest things I have read in a long time – basically, because it blames an actor for the actions/foibles of a character, or indeed, a script!!! Both Harris and Gambon are fine actors, and EITHER would have been capable of playing Dumbledore from start to finish. Had Harris survived, he’d doubtless have done a great job. As it was, he didn’t… and Gambon filled his shoes wonderfully. One can really only speculate (pointlessly) on what would have happened to the role otherwise. Whoever wrote this ‘comparison’ has WAY too much time on their hands.

  • Ada

    Gambon is FAT, YELLS, STRANGLES harry!!!!