Harry Potter characters in movies vs. books?

Question

How do the characters in the movie compared with the books size up for you? For instance, I thought professor Moody was too goofy looking, not scary. And I think that the ''new" Dumbledore is too harsh, not the kind, sweet Dumbledore I see in the novel.

Answer 1

Mostly I think that they did a pretty good job with casting the characters for the movies. I think that the actors that play all of the most important roles are believable (Harry, Ron, Hermione, the Weasley's, Neville, Draco, Tom M. Riddle, Voldemort, the Dursleys, etc). They couldn't have done better than the the actors they chose for Dumbledore (Richard Harris - the original Dumbledore), McGonnagall, Hagrid, Snape, and Lucius Malfoy -- they are exactly as I imagined they'd be. But I've been very disappointed by their choice in recasting Dumbledore. Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody didn't look like I thought he would. I expected him to be frightening. I thought that Fleur de la Cour and Cho Chang would be really beautiful. The actresses are pretty, but they aren't as attractive as they are supposed to be.

I think that either Ian McKellen (who played Gandalf in "Lord of the Rings") or Peter O'Toole (Priam, King of the Trojans in "Troy") would've been a much better choice. They portray their characters with a sense of grace, an almost regal presence and could show Dumbledore as he was in the books: gentle, wise, powerful and as someone who commanded enough respect that there was no need to raise his voice. He was obeyed without question or argument, by staff and students. Richard Harris was perfect for the part. Michael Gambon is just awful. He talks to fast and too loud. He is volatile, calm one moment, then angry the next - he has completely changed the character! Dumbledore isn't supposed to shout at people or shake his students. It is ridiculous. In Book 5, he warned Umbridge because he wouldn't allow her to manhandle his students, yet in the 4th movie he shook Harry.

I also was sort of bothered by the way that Filch was portrayed in Goblet of Fire. In the first three movies he was shown as he is in the books, a bitter man that intimidates the students and does as he is told by Dumbledore. In Goblet though, he is pathetic. Students are laughing at the cartoonish way he runs and then he doesn't fire the cannon on command, to signal the start of each of the Tasks for the Triwizard Tournament. I guess the changes are supposed to be funny, but I found them sort of annoying instead. It would've been better for there to be more continuity in the movies by maintaining the integrity of the characters.

Snape was also changed in Goblet, which I didn't like either. He has always been a unfair and mean-spirited character, but since when does he hit his students? It doesn't happen in the books. He may insult them, he may threaten and/or embarass them, but he doesn't hit them with books or otherwise put his hands on them. Alan Rickman is doing a fantastic job portaying him though. My criticism is to the script change not his acting.

Answer 2

Yes, i agree with you the new actors for the story are a bit harsh and goofy but isn't change a good thing. I'm a huge fan of the Harry potter books and movies. I really appreciate how they are not cutting to much of the story! ( Indicating the directors! ) I really miss the old Dumbledore who was so kind and yet a powerful wizard! But since his death after the second movie the directors would have had a problem! Moody as in the book was goofy in the movie, but remember that he reveal the truth about being Barty Crouch's son. Dumledore has shrunk over the summer hasn't he? Too bad!! Any way i hope this helps.

Answer 3

The books are so well written that each time I read them I have a renewal of the same intense feelings I got the first time I read the books. I cry and scream I cheer. The movies are good but they drive me rather crazy because so much stuff that is really rather relevant has been taken out of the movies. I mean the fifth book was the longest and yet it was the shortest movie. Definatley backwards. And for me nothing competes with the images I get in my own head when I read the books. And I am most definately not pro movies after the news was released that the funeral won't be in the sixth movie. (I don't know if you know who dies so I won't spill any more) That definately got the movie study on my bad side but I've always preferred the books over the movies anyway. If I had an option to just watch the movies or to just read the books I'd say read the books. They are so intricately written to and everything is relevant and so emotionally gripping.

Answer 4

I completely agree with you. The "new" Dumbledore is nothing like he was in the books and I'm curious to see how they will do the scene at the end of the fifth book with Harry and Dumbledore in Dumbledore's office. That is my favorite scene so far out of all of them.

They made Sirius Black ugly in the movies. HE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE UGLY!! I was so mad when I saw the guy they got to play Sirius. I have asked a few other people and they agree. lol, anyways...just my opinion!

Answer 5

Most of the movie characterizations work for me. My only real objection is to Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, especially in 'Goblet of Fire'. He isn't the calm, reassuring, 'three-steps-ahead' mentor of the book. Richard Harris caught the character perfectly. However, we can't simply blame Mr. Gambon. With a different director on each of the last three movies, you're bound to get a different view from each one. Neither of the last two directors seem to have felt the need for continuity with the previous films, as seen in the change of Dumbledore's character and the change of location for Hagrid's hut. I know many think that the first two films weren't very good, but I actually like them better because Chris Columbus wasn't chopping and changing everything at the drop of a hat.

Answer 6

"Mad Eye" looked as if he went through a small keyhole... and came out scrambled into bits... or Star Wars transporter... and was reassembled before Scotty got it repaired to work correctly. As for the new Dumbledore... He is too stiff, harsh, and he does not have the depth of character that is needed to be a successful Headmaster of Hogworts that can handle all the different types of students and activities that they can generate. You are right about Richard Harris getting the character perfect, and also about the different directors. It is TOO BAD that Producers of this movie series are not able to see beyond their money noses and realize that this movie series will become a major set of historically important video legacies.

Answer 7

I agree Professor Moody is goofy looking, but his crazy-eye is cool.. I'm not to fond of the new Dumbledore... he is way too harsh.. I'm also disappointed with the actresses that were chosen to portray Fleur Delacour and Cho Chang, in the book both are described as very attractive, in the movies they fall short of that comparison~Princess

Answer 8

I liked Moody, But I agree with you on the new Dumbledore. Also I thought Emma Thompson was the best person for Mrs. Trelawny. And they couldn't have picked a better Sirius Black

Answer 9

I thought the same thing about Dumbledore. He's a little too harsh for sure.

Answer 10

i like the books way better but the movies seem much more interesting. its like more realistic but anyway....
i really liked the old dumbledore cos he was nice and not harsh but the new one is like too loud.. if you get what i mean (cant find another word lol).
whenever i read the books, i potray the characters in my head. as harry ron and hermonie are the main ones, i potray them as the actors in the movie, so it kinda works out for me.

i wish though that they add more stuff into the movie instead of cutting main things out. they dont do that cos it will take too long...
happy new year 4 2oo7