Alright guys, here's where I start interjecting my own opinion a little more into this blog. For the most part, I'm anticipating that you guys have read the books and seen the movies. This post will deal more with the movie aspect of the series, because it delves more into the realm of interpretation and strays a bit from the books.
To start, I will compare and contrast the two actors who played Dumbledore in the movie series, Richard Harris and Michael Gambon.
Richard Harris played Dumbledore in the first two films. (Fun fact: Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets was his last film ever). He was in his early 70's during the times both were being filmed. Though only in 1/4 of the movies and not being on-screen as much as the other actor, it was quite clear to be by the end of the third movie that this was exactly how I had imagined Dumbledore while reading the books.
In the books, Dumbledore is known for being quiet, calm, and seemingly omniscient. His bright blue eyes and piercing glazes were the most characteristic things about him. Harris seemed to have captured this quality perfectly.
The examples of this that come into my head immediately when I think of Harris as Dumbledore are during the first film while he is visiting Harry in the Hospital Wing, and during the scenes when he is seen in the Great Hall overseeing the dinners. He gave off an extremely powerful presence without having much to say, and it fit the part.
Michael Gambon replaced Harris as Dumbledore after Harris' unfortunate death in 2002. He played Dumbledore for the remainder of the films, making appearances in all even after the character's death. During the filming, Gambon was in his mid-60's, and in better health than Harris.
As mentioned above, Dumbledore is a "quiet but powerful" man. Gambon, however, tended to accent the "powerful" quality without taking much notice of the "quiet" aspect. His on-screen performances of Dumbledore leaned more towards the outspoken end of the spectrum. He raised his voice on multiple occasions, which Dumbledore did not do in the books (with the exception of the howler he sent to Petunia in book 5). The perfect example of one of these scenarios would be in the fourth movie (Goblet of Fire) when Dumbledore yells at Harry after he becomes one of the Triwizard Champions. This interpretation of the scene is definitely not how it played out in my mind while reading it. If anything, Dumbledore seemed more curiously worried than mad. I digress.
Instances like these, where Gambon makes out Dumbledore as an angry character, irked me in the film. It was the only problem I honestly had with Gambon as Dumbledore; he had a great voice otherwise, and also gave off a great, powerful vibe on-screen. I applaud his efforts.
Actor Analyses
I will move on, now to discussing how certain actors/actresses fit their characters personalities. Because Harry, Ron and Hermione are overly discussed, I will instead focus on Severus Snape, Luna Lovegood, and Neville Longbottom, three important yet underrated characters.
From the beginning, I loathed Professor Snape's character. I do not say this lightly; I found him to be rude and insufferable, and for me to feel so strongly from reading is saying quite a bit. When Alan Rickman, however, walked onto the screen as Snape in the first movie, my feelings were justified; his interpretation of Snape was nothing shy of perfect.
From the facial sneers, to the intimidating vibe, to the slow, thick drawl, he was everything I had imagined Snape to be in real life. In the first scene Snape actually has lines in the first film, he makes fun of Harry for being a class "celebrity"; in these first lines, I knew that Rickman would do a fantastic interpretation.
However, I cannot talk about Snape without discussing my change of feelings for him. By the end of book 7, I not only regretted my judgements, but I honestly felt sorry for him as a character. The amount of suffering he had gone through in his lifetime was admirable. Once again, I digress from that soapbox.
In book 7, descriptions of Snape's true depth of emotion is only touched on; it is something that was visually enhanced with the movies, and in a great way. Rickman's interpretation of the way Snape felt when learning his only love had died, looking at Harry as he died, and the discussions with Dumbledore were beyond amazing. Words can't even express how I felt when seeing those scenes. It was beyond anything I could have imagined while reading, and it was one of the times I was truly proud they turned the books into a movie series.
In short, carefully selecting Rickman to play Severus Snape was no accident, and definitely no mistake; it was the perfect fit.
Luna Lovegood
On a less pessimistic tone, I absolutely adore Luna. She is a character that literally marches to the beat of her own drum, and gives no regard to what anyone else has to say about her. Embarrassment does not exist in her world.
Casting Evanna Lynch as Luna was yet another fantastic casting choice. Luna's voice in the books is described as somewhat airy. The light, airy voice Lynch has was not altered in any way to fit how the directors' wanted Luna's voice to sound, making her a perfect candidate for the job. Not only that, however, but the way in which Evanna is so clearly articulate, just like Luna.
There aren't many examples that stick out very clearly in my mind, but during Deathly Hallows part 1, when she helps to console Harry and bury Dobby is a great prototype of what Luna would have done in that situation, though it was not written exactly the way it happens in the movie.
All in all, I'd say the choice to cast Evanna as Luna was fantastic.
Oh, Neville. There's not much else one can say upon hearing that name. He's just so...what word am I looking for? Pathetic? Cute? Hero? How about all three?
Upon first seeing Mathew Lewis cast as Neville, he looked exactly how I had pictured Neville to be; slightly chubby, awkward, and shy. Lewis was great at being clumsy and cowardly, incorporating these characteristics in every scene.
With the development of Neville as a character, however, it seems Lewis developed as well. Not only did Lewis grow taller and gain more muscle (which I'm sure wasn't solely because of his role as Neville), he became a more solidified person with heart and bravery. In the 5th movie (Order of the Phoenix) Neville fights in his parents' honor with the witch who tortured them to insanity. Lewis really showed this transformation in the fight scene by not being afraid of the fact that he was around Death Eaters, but by focusing on how badly he wanted to fight them. This bravery was simply great on-screen.
In Deathly Hallows Part 2, however, the transformation from complete coward to hero was made complete. As Neville kills Nagini, he shows he is unafraid to stand up to Voldemort and that he is capable of being a hero. This courage earns him respect from all of his friends. Lewis definitely interpreted this in the scene quite well by adding the extra energy that one could not experience while reading the books.
Once again, I would have to say I applaud the choice of casting Lewis as Neville.
This will conclude my review of the characters. If anyone has any suggestions, comments, or if anyone disagrees, I encourage you to comment! I would love to discuss these further!
Coming next...
I will continue to analyze the movies, but focus more on the viewing of the Deathly Hallows Part 2 in 3D vs. in regular 2D. Anyone like watching it in one more than the other? Highly dislike one over the other? Please let me know!
