I can understand as actors them wanting to leave themselves a bit of wiggle room when the films are already so faithful to the books. And I have no complaints about their performances (yes, Gambon is a little…gruff compared to Harris, but his Dumbledore has been facing even darker days). Yet, a piece of me would like to know that they — and really, I just mean Gambon, who's embodying the most beloved role after Harry — have turned every page and cried when I cried.
How do you feel about this? Does an actor have to have read the books for you to believe that his role means as much to him as it does to you? Or does the fact that he's actually spent more hours walking in the characters' shoes than it took for you to read all seven novels mean that he wins?
More 'Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince':
'Harry Potter': Your favorite Daniel Radcliffe talk show appearance?
'Harry Potter' and the 10 Teen-Movie Parallels
'Harry Potter': 8 Exclusive EW Cast Pics!
Sex and the 'Harry Potter' movies: Does anyone want this?
Poll: Will you reread 'Half-Blood Prince' before seeing the film?
Comments (1-30) of 94 Add your comment
Those are rather brilliant actors, and so I don’t really mind that they trust their screenwriter and their director to get them where they need to be. I must say that I really like that Matthew Lewis (Neville Longbottom) is a fan. That’s a character than benefitted from the actor being a fan, and I mean in both the movies and the books, as Rowling seems to have expanded the character with Lewis in mind.
As an actor, I totally get it. You are performing the script you’re given, and ultimately you’ll give a truer performance by not having that “but in the book” lingering in your mind. A great actor plays what’s on the page.
Having said that, I hope he someday does read the books because they’re awesome.
Oh my God! Just don’t tell me that Mike Myers never read “The Cat in the Hat.” His nuanced performance suggests that he did, but I’ve always had my suspicions.
I totally respect that those actors can go out there and rely on their thespian prowess to get them through their roles, and i think with where the screenwriters have taken the movies, it might help a bit not reading it, because yeah, id be pissed about certain things. however, i think that if gambon had read maybe even the first book before coming on to the scene, he might have approached the role of dumbledore with a little more…grace. it never occurs to a true fan that dumbledore would ever have to yell something, he just has that natural charm and air of importance, so whenever i see gambon yell, which, for some reason happens fairly often, it always makes me wonder how richard harris would have done it [better].
This is a very difficult question for me to answer. I have a very difficult time watching a movie after I’ve read a book and will at times wait to read something if I know it will eventually end up on screen. I can’t imagine trying to film a movie when your so familiar with the book it’s based off of. You would almost want to try to do the scenes word for word becaused you loved how it was originally written. That said I wonder if Michael Gambon’s Dumbledore would benefit from reading how Dumbledore is written in the books. He’s doing a good job with the character, but it still at times feels a little off from how he’s portrayed in the books.
Well, it would have been nice if he would read the books because even though he is a good actor, he is just wrong as Dumbledore. Dumbledore would NEVER act the way he does. I was heartbroken that Richard Harris sadly could not continue in the role because he was absolutely perfect!
It’s a little disappointing that he has not read the books. I completely understand where he’s coming from, but I think he would portray Dumbledore a little more true-to-form if he read the subtleties that you can only get from the book. Gambon does play the character more gruff than I had ever interpreted of Dumbledore. I think reading the books would help to soften the character a bit.
Okay, Gambon is actually a big sore spot for me in the HP films and this explains a lot. I feel like so often he does things so completely out of character. He’ll say things or say things in way that often has me thinking “Dumbledore would never say that or do that or say that that way.” And it kind of upsets me because the Dumbledore of the books is so kick ass I feel it is the one casting job in the movies not done up to par. Gambon has none of Dumbledore’s serenity or his cool kindness. And though I am so looking forward to the HBP movie, I’m sure so much Gambon will irk me. For instance, I’ve noticed in the trailers he’s not wearing GLASSES! Dumbledore not wearing glasses is like Harry not wearing glasess, WTF?
I would hope after the movies are over that he would at least attempt to read the books to see how close he was. I have to say that Richard Harris is still my favorite! RIP!
I personally don’t like Gambon in the role. Maybe I would, if I hadn’t seen the PERFECTION of Richard Harris as Dumbledore, first.
I’m not mad at Gambon for not reading (and not wanting to read) the Harry Potter books. At the end of the day, he’s an actor, and this is just another job for him. Whether he’s emotionally invested in the source material isn’t really important – just that he brings it in the movie.
I also agree that Gambon’s performance is probably gruffer than what is on the page. However, I’m not mad at Gambon for that either. I can’t blame an actor (especially in a big-budget movie dominated by effects) for wanting to try something different in a role and maybe bring their own take. (I’m thinking about the scene in “Goblet of Fire” when Dumbledore RAILS against Harry after his name comes out of the Goblet. ) To me, it’s the director’s/producer’s job to tell Gambon to pull it back a little (or a LOT)…and I kinda wish they had.
Mostly though, John is right. I would tell him to read the books because they’re pretty great.
Actors don’t need to be intellectuals to do their jobs. They don’t even need to be knowledgeable. Sometimes it’s even a drawback to know too much. Gambon obviously feels it would hinder him doing his job, rather than help. That said, I always hope actors will be as informed and interesting as the roles they play, but usually they are not.
Well, I’m someone who tries really hard to separate the book version and the movie version of stories – they’re two very different mediums and you have to accept that (I mean, if you want a movie that is EXACTLY like the books, just read the books!). So the fact that he hasn’t read the books is fine with me – he has to base his character off what’s there in the script, and if you start thinking about all this other characterizations that’s only in the books you’re not being true to the movie. Some people are going to see the movies without reading the books and vice versa, and that’s okay. Stories should have lots of different versions and interpretations, or else it’d be really boring.
Gambon has grown on me the last 2 movies. Maybe b/c now that the story is getting darker a more gruff ‘rougher’ stronger Dumbledore seems to fit/suit. The 3rd movie, he rubbed me the wrong way after Richard Harris. His portrayal was so different. But Richard’s raspy voice, I don’t know if he would have as strong a presence in the latter movies. So now I actually like them equally, but I did prefer Harris in the earlier movies. It doesn’t really bother me they haven’t read the books. Though I don’t know how they managed that.
As long as the directors, writers, and producers have read the books, then I’m cool. Sometimes I wonder whether the makers of the films HAVE read the books; some of the cuts–like the house-elf subplots–seem integral to the overall storyline and I often wonder how they will address those issues. But, so far so good…the movies have taken on a life of their own and I think the filmmakers have done an excellent job up to this point. However, I do wish that J.K. Rowling never watched any of the movies…can’t help but think that some of the characters in the books evolved over the years based on how the movies approached those characters.
I think that reading the books may have helped Gambon give a better performance. He got better over time, but his performance in the Prisoner of Azkhaban made me cringe.
Also, I disagree that all of the films have been faithful to the books. The only film that I felt was a truly great adaptation was Order of the Phoenix. I think that POA and GOF were entertaining movies, but relatively poor adaptations of the books.
I preferred the wiser, kinder, and more elegant Richard Harris Dumbledore. But he did seem a bit frail at the end of his life and I’m satisfied with Gambon’s more rigorous portrayal. It does seem a bit odd that none of them have read the books. But hey, I love Alan Rickman’s Snape. He’s my favorite character in the series, right down to the bittersweet end.
I’d actually read an article a few years ago in which he discussed this and felt then that it explained his portrayal which is the only one that feels slightly off from the book. I think Gambon is a brilliant actor and his wanting to make the role his own is completely reasonable. However, when taking on a role that is beloved by millions of people all over the world, there is a responsibility in finding out what makes that character so beloved to all of those people. It’s showing respect for your audience.
This confirms the reason why I absolutely hate Gambon as Dumbledore.
While I wish Gambon and Rickman and even Ralph Fiennes had read the books (or at least I hope they even attempt at reading them after filming as closure, perhaps), I think all of their performances are more than well done – remember that these actors (most notably Rickman) have received a lot of guidance from J.K. Rowling herself. Meanwhile, I feel that while Richard Harris’s portrayal of Dumbledore was perfect for the first two (more childish) of the films, Gambon fits a tougher Dumbledore for a Dumbledore that is undoubtedly tougher in the later books.
I don’t really think that reading the original book makes or breaks is. Case in point: while Gambon’s portrayal may be a bit off from the book, IMO Rickman’s Snape seems as if he stepped right from the page to the screen.
If the movies were word-for-word interpretations of the books (like “Sorcerer’s Stone” and “Chamber of Secrets” were), then Gambon not reading the scripts would be a bit odd. But these movies have gone on to embody a somewhat different tone from the books…they are becoming their own entities. Because of that, I think it’s not only OK but it’s also smart that Gambon hasn’t read the books. And, while I might be in the minority, I think his portrayal is better than Rowling’s…his headmaster seems more realistic and tormented than Rowling’s Dumbledore.
Well, that explains a lot. No matter whether the scenes/lines were changed from the original text, reading the books would have allowed him extra insight into the character that JK Rowling created and HP fans adore. While an excellent actor, Gambon’s demeanor has never been quite right as Rowling’s Dumbledore. It’s a shame to think that he didn’t even put forth the effort to accurately portray the Dumbledore that we all love.
I like Michael Gambon as an actor but have never felt he played Dumbledore true to character. His Dumbledore is like a completely different person from the one we know and love in the books, even accounting for the darker times he’s facing. I am disappointed with his portrayal and feel he could have benefited by reading the books and incorporating the author’s vivid description into his performance.
Really, you just need to google “Book Dumbledore vs Movie Dumbledore” and look at the cartoon. That sums up the differences between Book Dumbledore and Gambon’s portrayal. It’s most certainly Gambon’s take on it, as the cartoon is a scene from Goblet of Fire.
I’ve never liked Gambon as Dumbledore just because he’s so uncharacteristically “mean”…I guess that’s the word for it. Dumbledore rarely (if almost never) raised his voice. He just commanded respect with his presence. Gambon has never embodied this feeling.
Honestly, it’s probably not because he hasn’t read the books. If the script hasn’t given him the same impression the books give us then it’s most likely the writing.
When an actor is portraying someone who has existed or who still does, they do as much research as possible. Everything from meeting the person to knowing everything about their lives. Why would an actor not put in the same amount of “research” when playing a fictional character who lives within the pages of books that have brought a whole new generation into a deeper love of reading? It just doesn’t seem right to not read what your role is based off of.
At what point are the films “so faithful to the books”????
No, I do not give a flip that Gambon has not read the books. I wish I had a dollar for every time I’ve seen someone whining about it on the internet. He’s not the first actor to skip the source material; he won’t be the last. It’s probably a good idea sometimes and a bad idea other times. No, I have no idea if it would have improved Gambon’s performance and neither does anyone else. The end.
Also just to add, I think that even though both Rickman and Fiennes haven’t read the books they are both doing a fantastic job on their part. Possibly the screenwriter and/or director(s) felt that Dumbledore needed to be a little darker and therefore opted to have Gambon portray him in a slightly different light.