[HPFGU-Movie] Re: Voldemort vs Dumbledore - the Actors

[Karen]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <GryffindorAuburn at aol.com>
To: <HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: [HPFGU-Movie] Re: Voldemort vs Dumbledore - the Actors


>
> In a message dated 2/19/06 12:25:48 PM, phoenix_kevin at yahoo.com writes:
>
>
> > Yes Richard Harris did indeed have that wonderfull ability. As I
> > said I just wonder occasionally about that. Hopefully Gambon will up
> > his performance in the next movie.
> >
> >
>
> Oddly enough I guess I am the odd girl out....I like Gambon's protrayal as
> Dumbledore. No disrespect to Richard Harris may he rest in peace, but I
actually
> like Michael Gambon a little more.
> Only my humble opinion though :-)
>
> Amy
>

kchuplis:
I don't think Gambon is bad, exactly, I just don't feel that sense of
"heightened truth", of believability, that I got with Richard Harris, or
that I get from many stage actors who are required to play characters
outside our normal frame of reference. Almost a "hyper-real character",
meaning ones surpassing reality. You see it often in the Star Treks series
TNG and DS9. Let's face it, many of those characters would just come off as
cartoons, but for the acting style of the people in the roles. Harris Yulin
in Duet deserved an Emmy;  Christopher Plummer in the 6th movie conveyed a
real person to me, a layered person and many of the guest actors in the
series who were really stellar Shakespeareans and stage actors; they could
bring you to tears with characters that you'd look at objectively and say,
how is THIS turning my emotions on so much? Look at the LOTR movies. Who, in
reality, should become emotionally attached to these characters sIt's
because the actor/ress really care and believe. They *have* to really
believe and sink their teeth into the character, no matter what it is, so
that it comes across believably. It's why stage actors do so much better
(generally) than straight film actors in this type of genre. Gambon is OK,
but I don't think he is the best choice or has the best portrayal. Now, on
the other hand, DD's character is yet to be the fully rounded one on screen.
He certainly has a chance coming up in OoTP to fill out DD.

Just on a side note I ran across an interesting bit on a bio of Michael
Gambon (all things equal, one must take internet info with a grain of salt
but there is generally a grain of truth to things.):

While on the subject of deceit, Gambon is notorious for his lying.
Throughout his career he has told magnificent porkies both to journalists
and his peers about his past life and achievements. It's not to look big,
just not to be bored. Often he would claim to have started out as a dancer
at the Royal Ballet, only to have his career ruined when he fell from the
stage and crashed through the orchestra's timpani kit. For years he carried
round a photo of Robert De Niro that read "To Mike, Best wishes and love
forever, Bob". He'd regale any entrant to his dressing-room with tales of
the work he'd done with De Niro and the affection they had for one another -
until some bright spark noted that Gambon had actually never worked with De
Niro and clearly written the note himself. Most outrageously, he once
claimed that he used to be gay, but stopped because it made his eyes water.