DD or Gangalf - who is greater?

[Steve]

---  kemper mentor <kempermentor at ...> wrote:
>
> >  Tonk_op:
> >  So THIS is how we got stuck with Gambon.
> 
>...
> 
> >  I still wish they had tried harder to get someone else.
> 
>  
> 
> Kemper now:
> Gambon does suck, but so did Harris.
> McKellen kicks ass!  And, after the outing, Ian would've 
> been a perfect DD with Alan and Daniel as his apt pupils.
> 
> Kemper
> 

bboyminn:

Harris at least had some sense of Dumbledore, Gambon obviously
has none. But we can't blame that all on Gambon. The script
writer and the director have a huge part is what we finally
see on the screen. 

McKellen would have indeed been a magnificent Dumbledore, but
as he implies, after you played the best, after you've created
the definitive movie wizard in Gandalf, why settle for second 
best. 

Also, I think for most actors you don't want to play too
many roles that are the same. If McKellen had played 
Dumbledore and made it the definitive role, it's possible
all he would have every gotten from directors and agents
from that point forwards is, 'We'll give you a call if we
ever need a wizard'. Still, I am absolutely certain that
McKellen would have made a first rate Dumbledore.

As a second best, I think Patrick Stewart would have certainly
been better than Gambon. It seems as if this is nothing but
a job to Gambon. He comes, he works, he collects his check,
and he goes home. In a few interviews, he has made some very
insensitive remarks regarding fans and the franchise. That 
more than anything told me he doesn't care about these movie
or his character, it is merely a process by which he earns
a paycheck. Sad really.

Steve/bboyminn