Inconsistency and Incoherence/GOF!Movie!DD/JKR's input to the script

[cubfanbudwoman]

Lupinlore wrote:
Here is where JKR and/or the Kloves get into trouble with a lot of
the adults, and most particularly with Dumbledore. We have a
Dumbledore who acts in the decision scene at odds with how he
professes in the rest of the film to feel about Harry, and at
somewhat odds with the character as we've been led to view him.
Now, that, I think is what has led to a lot of Manipulative!
Dumbledore speculation on this and other issues, since I think a very
natural reaction to that kind of inconsistency is to preserve
coherence of the character by assuming dishonesty and manipulative
behavior. Indeed, unlike the case with JKR's book, we are flat out
invited to believe that by Kloves' screenplay.

The problem is very difficult. We have a Dumbledore in the "decision" 
scene (and to an extent in his final conversation with Harry) who 
seems to deliberately decide to leave Harry in the tournament as 
bait. That runs against the picture we've been given of Dumbledore. 
It also runs against Dumbledore's seeming feelings for Harry. 
Finally, it cuts across some of the other speeches Dumbledore gives 
in the movie - most especially the scene where he tries to browbeat 
Fudge into calling off the tournament. Why? If it has become too 
dangerous, and he IS able to withdraw Harry and Cedric, why does he 
not do so? If he isn't able to withdraw Harry and Cedric because of a 
magical contract, why on earth doesn't he just say that in 
the "decision" scene?

Given that inconsistency, the natural reaction is to preserve the
coherence of his character by postulating that he is sometimes being
dishonest and manipulative. This is, I think, an instinctive
application of the "real person" standard.
<snip>
To add further mud to the waters, we are of course dealing with
Kloves' interpretation of the book, and we have no real idea how much
input JKR has into the process.

Richard responded:
I do agree that the script muddies the water a bit, but I suspect 
that the *intention* of the various authors of the scene was along 
those lines.


SSSusan:
This was a fabulous summary of where the problem lies for the "die-
hard" HP fan trying to grapple with what we've been presented in 
Movie!DD in GoF, I really believe.  If a person isn't all that 
familiar with canon!DD (who, while not *the* most straightforward in 
fans' minds, given the Puppetmaster!DD interpretation of him vs. the 
EpitomeOfGoodness!DD interpretation, is still more CONSISTENT as LL's 
defines that), there's a bit to puzzle over in the GoF movie.  If, 
however, the person *is* very familiar with canon!DD, no matter 
his/her interpretation of him, the INCONSISTENCY we see in GoFmovie!
DD is more than a *bit* puzzling – it's downright head-scratching and 
brow-furrowing.

It's the attempt to *reconcile* the two DDs – movie and book – which 
makes things difficult.

As to Kloves' interpretation muddying the waters, I personally think 
this is exactly what's happened.  I don't believe Jo has a whole lot 
of input, frankly.  She might step in and say, "Oh my goodness, no!" 
if someone wanted to insert something totally UNfactual (e.g., 
Cuaron's proposed Hogwarts graveyard in PoA), but I've never read 
anything which indicates that she's done much by way of "interfering" 
(or assisting!) with interpretation of a character.  (Hence the 
problem for directors/screenwriters re: Snape, as Lupinlore 
mentioned.)  So I think Kloves himself painted a DD which is not only 
not exactly a match to canon but which is inconsistent *within* the 
screenplay.  And more...

Lupinlore wrote:
Perhaps, however, she DID have some major input into the script. If
so, this raises some interesting questions, and would explain part of
the inconsistencies in GoF!Movie!Dumbledore. We would basically have
a screenplay with three sets of fingerprints -- Kloves, JKR, and
Newell <snip>.

Richard added:
You're forgetting another very important set of fingerprints: that of 
the actor. Michael Gambon, by his own admission, has not read the 
books, and expects the script to convey everything he needs to know 
(with, of course, a little input from the director - whose job, after 
all, is to *direct*!).  :-) To my knowledge, neither Gambon nor 
Harris had any direct contact with JKR.

I think I also caught a production comment somewhere that another
controversial moment, DD grabbing Harry's shoulders during that same 
scene, was Gambon's idea, and Newell let him run with it. 


SSSusan:
Yes.  I think, as I said above, that Kloves must have been less than 
perfectly careful with his drawing of DD here, though perhaps it is 
the presence of the other sets of fingerprints which has made it 
difficult, too.  From what I've read, not only has Gambon not read 
the books, Newell has not read the full series.  If they had 
much "say" in how to present DD in GoF, then it's even more 
understandable why what we get doesn't "fit" for what I'd call the 
Careful Fan. ;-)  In this scenario, with Newell and Gambon having 
less base for drawing an "accurate" DD, I'd put more of the blame for 
inconsistency or incoherence upon Kloves, who certainly has read all 
of the books and loves them.  I'm puzzled why he'd have not 
recognized the problems inherent in the "decision" scene, the issue 
of the binding magical contract, and (to a lesser extent, because I 
think more of this comes from Gambon) of DD's feelings towards Harry.


Richard wrote:
The fact that the movie-going public has had two very, very different
"kinds" of Dumbledore from two very different actors (not to mention 
three directors) has more to do with any conceived instability/ 
inconsistency than anything else anyway, so my own view is not to 
worry about it, and certainly not to try to draw any conclusions of 
Book!Dumbledore's motivations from his movie counterpart - in 
particular because the movies can at best sketch the character (and 
the world he inhabits), compared to what the book can do.

SSSusan:
You're right, of course, about not *worrying* about it, but I'm 
actually in agreement with Lupinlore here when he called this a "very 
difficult problem."  As I said, it might give the casual fan a small 
pause as s/he notes DD being a little inconsistent within the movie.  
But for the Die-Hard or Careful Fans <g> who have read and read the 
books, it may well feel like they're being confronted with BIG 
inconsistencies within the character and within the storyline.  It 
doesn't *worry* me so much as just *bug* me, you know?

Siriusly Snapey Susan