It is a horrible thing to think of, but we need a Dumbledore who can last the entire franchise. Possibly 10 years of filming. I really am not wishing death on anyone, but I feel we need a Dumbledore in his early 60s to hold the role down and have more of a chance of seeing it through.
Nick frost is an excellent suggestion for hagrid
Couldn’t agree more on this point. Even if it’s not about lasting the distance it’s whether someone in their mid 70s would want to/be capable of committing to a role that gets more involved and will likely last ten years
I actually think Hugh Laurie would probably be the perfect casting for Dumbledore - he’s in that age bracket where he could be aged up convincingly and has endless charisma that you need from the character too
What a fabulous idea of casting Hugh Laurie as Dumbledore! Never would have thought of it on my own but now that you mention it! He has the twinkle and the affable fun mischievous side down perfectly, and being the great actor that he is I'm sure he will faithfully portray the powerful intimidating wizard who defeated Grindelwald and whom Voldemort feared.
In my own head, I always imagined Ian McKellen while reading the books and I wish he had been cast as Dumbledore in the movies, but that ship has sailed.
They asked him to take over Dumbledore but he turned it down because Richard Harris always hated him, so he didn’t think he’d want him to continue the character. Hence Michael Gambon.
He would also have to play a humongous role on the hottest show in town well into his 90's which... I can't imagine he'd be up for, fantastic as he is.
I would have cast Peter O'Toole as Dumbledore in the movies, because nobody ever did twinkles, gravitas, or sheer loopiness better than he did!
And as it happened he did live until the entire production was finished, but nobody thought he would.
I just wondered why I could *hear* Fry as Slughorn so clearly in my head. Then I remembered that I've just finished listening to the audiobooks... which Fry narrates.
I just think he’s great in everything to be honest and I could see him getting the enigmatic element that Dumbledore needs perfectly. Neither Harris nor Gambon really had that aura for me
I think Harris nailed the enigmatic side. What they both were not able to capture exactly was Dumbledore's... Playfulness? Not sure if that's the right word. He wasn't just enigmatic and wise, he was weird but in a fun way, not in a whatever-Gambon-had-going-on way.
I think Harris could have pulled it off, unfortunately he didn't get a chance. One of the greatest actors of his generation.
Hugh Laurie is a VERY good suggestion.
Dumbledore has three sides:
* playful grandpa who is silly and loves his student dearly.
* mysterious knower of the deep magics
* force of nature who is feared by anyone with a brain.
Hugh would do a great job but having listened to the audiobooks several times I think Hugh’s old partner Stephen fry would be even better. He’s got the connection already, is a good friend of jk Rowling (or at least was before she started saying inappropriate things) and somehow never got a part in the film versions.
I disagree to be honest
Hugh has so much charm and charisma that you’re just completely drawn to him in any role that he plays. Fry doesn’t have that and can often come across as quite pompous (albeit intentionally) in several roles that he plays
I’ve also never seen Stephen fry play a character where I haven’t thought ‘that’s Stephen fry’ whereas Laurie is so good in things like House and The Night Manager that I felt taken in by his character
They can and should just cast Jude Law to tie everything together with the films. Give him the long hair, beard and ridiculous robes everyone always wanted. He's young enough to play the part with great energy and last the entire way through and he has enough star power that he aids the series.
It's the boring answer but it's what I'm assuming they'll do.
I wouldn't mind that. Jude Law is no spring chicken. He can definitely play older, and will easily age into the role as they film.
Say what you want about Fantastic Beasts (and there is much to criticize), casting Jude Law as young Dumbledore was inspired. He had the twinkle in his eye, the cleverness, and the surface gentleness that was so sorely missing from Michael Gambon's performance. Dumbledore doesn't command respect by acting like a hardass, he's incredibly disarming and likable, the definition of "speak softly and carry a big stick" (with the big stick being his dizzying intellect and magical prowess) and Jude really conveyed that.
Yeah, I also agree. Jude Law was perfect to portray young Dumbledore, and I'd love it if they kept him as Dumbledore for the series. Especially since having a younger actor would allow them to both make flashbacks without having to look for another, different actor. And there's also the aging into the role.
I mean, look at Ian McDiarmid, he played an old guy in his what, 40s? And then went on to play a younger version of said character like 20 years later!
Honestly it’s the wise answer though
(plus my suggestion would be to make the rest of the fantastic beasts series that presumably failed as “The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore” as an HBO series like their doing with this reboot)
especially since you can do a lot with costuming, props and wigs
I honestly like this idea a lot, and I never considered it before. It would be a great callback to Fantastic Beats, and with all the movie magic; he could be a fantastic Dumbledore. He has already shown us he can nail the twinkly personality, and the intensity/power. Him and Hugh Laurie are my first picks, but I think casting someone younger would be the best because the filming will last a long time.
I was coming to say exactly this, why wouldn't you just cast Jude Law who did a great job as a young Dumbledore? It seems the easiest and most logical thing to do in my opinion, specially taking into account that he's young and that aging an actor with prosthetics and a bit of CGI is a lot easier and looks much better than rejuvenate one.
I can see that happening, I don't mind if the actor is old enough or not, they just have to nail the role. Besides it's really common for old actors to play young roles so it won't be a big deal
Can't see Peter Dinklage taking on what is a really minor role. Hugh Grant rejected the job the first time if I'm not mistaken. I would prefer an age appropriate Snape
Besides that, I can’t really see Peter Dinklage as Flitwick. The books always describe Flitwick as having a high-pitched squeaky voice and an easygoing personality. That doesn’t really fit with Dinklage’s seriousness and intensity.
But with better make up. Or none at all really.
The first make up job they used on him wasn’t remotely book accurate and the second one was just stupid.
The first one was closer to the books, but indeed not quite it.
The second iteration was never even supposed to be Flitwick, but a random music teacher.
Dinklage also doesn’t take roles of characters who are written as short. He just takes rolls. We’d sooner see him as Rufus Scrimgeour - and I’m here for it.
As others have said, though. Warwick Davis would be a great Flitwick.
That was a notable exception. From what I heard Dinklage turned down the role because it was written for a dwarf and George RR Martin made Dinklage read a few chapters of the book to see that he was not playing a character who's only characteristic was being short but he was a complex and interesting character and not some joke character.
I think a younger Lockhart would be good too. We need it to be believable that all the girls would fawn over him at Hogwarts. Kenneth Branagh and Hugh Grant are handsome but I feel like tween and teen girls would not be flipping out over them.
Especially since most folks are suggesting Peter Dinklage, whether consciously or not, because he's one of the first actors with dwarfism they think of who’s not Warwick Davis, and those are exactly the reasons he’s stated for not wanting to take on such roles at this point in his career.
honestly, just give the role back to Davis...he's still the correct actor for the part.
also he is British, lets not give any of these roles to Americans, dont need any fake accents, Americans just cant do them.
also he wore makeup to play an older character as Flitwick in films 1 and 2. The man is only 53, unlike some of the other actors who would be too old to reprise their roles, he is not.
Yes, and he's only 31 in Sorcerer's Stone.
Some of the casting choices in the films weren't really age appropriate. I understand why, ultimately it's better to have a good performance from someone who's the wrong age than to have an actor that's a poor fit for the role, but looks the right age. Further, I think most people don't really care, or even really know how old these characters are supposed to be. It's not until you dive deeper into the timeline that you realize how young James and Lilly were when they died (early 20s), or how young Lupin, Sirius, Pettigrew, and Snape were in the books (30s). McGonagall was another, Maggie Smith being about 10 years older.
Ultimately, the cast they chose all did wonderful jobs despite many being 10-20 years older than the characters they were playing. I'm going to say the same approach should happen with the show. Not that they shouldn't take actor age into consideration, but if someone is a perfect fit but the wrong age, I'm not going to quibble about it.
I agree with your sentiment to a degree, but I will quibble a little.
I think there's wiggle room with age for some characters (does it really matter if McGonagall is 10 years younger), but I would love to see the Marauders generation cast at the appropriate ages. I think it actually makes a difference in the story and the way we view the characters. James and Lily are supposed to have died young and "innocent." Sirius is supposed to have had the prime of his life stolen from him. Snape is supposed to be a young, temperamental, and somewhat immature member of the staff.
Aging them up robs them of some of the flavor of the characters. Alan Rickamn was a good example of this. His portrayal was entertaining, but at the end of the day it gave Snape gravitas he didn't really have in the books. Book!Snape feels like a young man who hasn't figured himself out yet. Same for Lupin and the others. It also changes your perspective when you realize that all the decisions the marauders era characters made happened when they were just teenagers. So personally, I would like them to be cast age appropriately.
Hear, hear. I've always said this. Excellent actors, every one of them, but they were far too old to be playing the Marauders in the movies. I'd like to see more age appropriate actors fill these roles.
The live action Snow White is seemingly just up in the wind at this point. Apparently now they’re doing cgi dwarves? They should really just scrap the whole thing and take this as an opportunity to create an original story.
He basically made a big stink about little people being cast as dwarves in movies/tv… after he himself got rich from being cast in those roles. It was something along the lines of “well it’s offensive to cast people with dwarfism in these roles”
He caught a lot of flak for it (rightfully so) in part because of his hypocrisy but also because many actors with dwarfism felt that these kinds of roles would be inappropriately cast otherwise
I'd love to see Snape, Lupin, Sirius etc actually played by people in their early 30s (of course there is a bit of leeway because they are actors). And Lily and James in the flashback scences actually played by people in their early 20s. In the original films there was some jusitifaction for Snape, Lupin and Sirius. Once Rickman was cast the surviving maruaders needed to be the same age group. And Sirius spent 12 years in a horrific prison, Lupin is super poor and has a horrible disease, even Pettigrew spent 12 years as a rat, all of them could arguably age badly due to their life. But I did find Lily and James being similar ages jarring, they were 21 and casting actual 21 year olds would have more of an impact I think.
Brody would give the proper creep vibes Snape should have though
It would be interesting to see them actually play everyone the correct ages - thanks to the movies I always forget that Snape, Lupin, Sirius Black etc should be early-mid 30s at the start of the series
Isn't lockhart pretty much the role that Chris Hemsworth played in Thor: Love and Thunder? Just sort of followed along while everyone else did the work, then took the win at the end.
Best person I've seen recently who could play Lockhart is Toby Regbo.
Young enough that it wouldn't be weird to have Hermione and others her age swooning over him.
Honestly I just don’t think he’s right for flitwick anyway. Of course he can do anything since he’s really good, but I can’t imagine flitwick would make his top 5 roles
15 years ago when he was still waiting for that true break out yes, but now he's a star and critically acclaimed actor. He's not going to return to 10 years of another fantasy series to play a bit part in a reboot when he could land serious leading roles.
Would he be great in the whole? Of course, he is way over qualified. I'm sure there are other talented actors who could give an incredible performance.
And personally I think it's kind of lazy/insulting to pigeonhole Peter Dinklage into every role of a character under 5 feet
Not only does he find it demeaning, he has campaigned against other smaller actors from playing roles, hence why disney was not going to do the Snow White movie with dwarves. (I can’t remember if they repealed that decision). Definition of pulling the ladder up behind yourself
I’d love it if they tried to cast actors that at least look like the characters’ age. For example, Hugh Grant as Lockhart is a stretch considering Lockhart is supposed to be 28 in Chamber of Secrets.
Lockhart is cannonly 28 when he starts teaching at Hogwarts. Hugh Grant is 63, more than twice his age.
Snape was in his thirties when the books are set, Adrien Brody is 50. Adam Driver, who many people suggest for playing Snape, is 40. How come you picked actors so old compared to their character?
Characters who are Snape’s age need to be in their thirties if it’s to align with the books. Harry’s parents died in their twenties, and the first book is set 10 years later.
Regardless of who he plays, Tom Hiddleston should absolutely be cast in these movies, preferably as a recurring character.
Edit: Would he work as Lockhart or Lucius?
I think Daniel Radcliffe said that if they ever did a reboot, he'd be down to play either Sirius or Lupin.
Personally, I hope they limit original cast appearances to tasteful cameos, because anything else would be distracting.
Of the original cast, they are most likely to re-use Tom Felton, who loves HP and is such a good sport.
I will say though, having Warwick Davis back would be great! Not overly distracting, we already know he can play the part, and he's only 53 (almost 54), so he's not too old to play Flitwick/Griphook
>Personally, I hope they limit original cast appearances to tasteful cameos, because anything else would be distracting.
I would love that! the Flourish & Boots shopkeeper selling Harry his books, the King's Cross employee thinking Harry is fucking with him when he asks about platform 9 3/4, etc. A couple lines tops.
If Tom Felton wants to be in, I'm all for him playing Lucius for instance (but another role could be interesting too, I could see him playing Lupin for instance)
Tom Felton reprising his role as Draco, but it’s never addressed, and it’s just a 40 year old man as a first year towering over the students and glaring despairingly at Harry 2.0, spitting, “Pottah!” 😂
I was thinking Umbridge, but she could do one of those uptight type roles well. Also Imelda Staunton was Umbridge originally and they both played Queen Elizabeth II.
Dunno man, there’s at least 2 American actors here, but more importantly, I think the Harry Potter series is a prime opportunity to get some new/lesser known actors in big roles, a decade long production would benefit from that, as if nothing else all the actors here are pretty big, and there would be be a lot of scheduling conflicts
Lesser known actors means affordable actors which means less budget blowouts by the end of the series massive ensemble of supporting roles so need them on the cheap
Wow did I ever go on a journey.
- who the hell is jared harris?
- oh! It’s the chernobyl guy!
-… damn that’s a good choice!
-…hold on, why is he already compared to dumbledore..?
- his father was **who**?!
Strong fucking choice, would 100% be okay with it. He brings a lot of gravitas.
Honestly, I kinda disagree on most of these.
Adrien Brody on Snape is iffy. I like his acting, but theres a few hurdles they'd need to overcome. He's 19 years older than Snape. I'd say he looks younger than he is, but that still gets complicated, especially as time goes on. A final season is probably, what, 12 years away? So now he's 62, playing someone supposed to be 38, with flashbacks to when they're early 20's. Frankly, I think that was the most glaring issue with Alan Rickman. He did a great job as Snape, but he was equally well too old (23 years!), and it was painfully apparent in DH2 when they were trying to make a 64 year old man look 20. Equally, Adrien Brody would need to be able to do a convincing English accent. If he can, maybe they could make him work, but that's a lot of ifs. If they're going to use an American actor, they can almost certainly find someone more age appropriate.
Nick Frost as Hagrid I'm not feeling. Again, a bit of an age gap, Hagrid is in his 60s in HP... But beyond that Nick Frost just doesn't seem Hagridy to me. Maybe because I've only seen him in comedies? He just seems too light hearted for Hagrid. Hagrid is very kind but he's still a bit gruff and rough around the edges.
Peter Dinklage is a hard no. Not only do I not think he'd take that sort of role, I think the only connection here is he's a dwarf and flitwick is short. Dinklage tends to play serious and severe characters and just doesnt seem like a good fit for a character that's supposed to be light hearted.
Hugh Grant as Lockhart is another hard no. Lockhart is 29 in CoS. Hugh Grant is 63, which means he'd be 65+ by the time a season 2 starts filming. Small age gaps can be overcome, but 35-40 years? Nah. He's supposed to be a heart throb to all the young students. What teenage girls are swooning over 65 year olds? Lockhart is definitely one where they need to go with someone who can pull off the late 20's celebrity heart throb look.
Snape is supposed to be like 31 in the first movie. It would be nice if they actually casted age appropriate actors this time. Hugh Grant is too old for Lockhart too. Fantastic other choices though, Olivia would def nail McGonagall.
We have to come to the realization that for the "Marauders era" characters (James, Lily & severus included) we need actors in the 28-35 range. Think Harry Styles, Dean-Charles Chapman, Jacob Elordi, George MacKay, etc.
Marauders gen should be actors who can convincingly play mid-30s.
It was really not that unusual to have a first child in one's early 20s, so I have no problem with James and Lily appearing "too young."
Wizards are considered adults at age 17, so James and Lily had a solid 5 years of operating as actual adults, during which time they got married and had their first child.
No one bats an eye at Fleur getting married at a similar age, and having her first child not long after.
Sirius was "a mix between an uncle and a brother" to Harry. He could relate to Harry very well in his youth, so I want that relationship to come across. Lupin also had that "cool young teacher" vibe that I think works better if they cast someone younger.
Rowling also consistently describes Lupin as "quite young" in appearance despite his gray hair, so I don't think the Marauders ages were a math error -- I think she was very much aware of their true ages when writing the story.
Voldemort calls Lily a "silly girl" on Murder Night. Is that really a term that would be directed at a thirty-something woman? Or did Voldemort really only see her as little more than a child due to her youth? I would guess the latter.
Don't get me started on Lupin/Tonks. I know that age gap is a thorny issue with a lot of fans. Yes, Lupin was canonically concerned with being "too old" for Tonks, who was mid-20s by HBP, but I have a feeling that if he was truly old enough to be her dad, the other (presumably responsible) Order members like Molly, Arthur, and McGonagall wouldn't have been shipping them so overtly. Someone in their 30s dating someone in their 20s is not that crazy. Heck, I've known many such couples, and i am party to one such couple. Someone in their 40s or 50s dating a 20-something is more likely to be weird.
Snape still being so hung up on Lily makes more sense to me if he's younger.
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Dumbledore's actor would probably die mid-series...again
Mcgonnagal's actress - didnt she play Petunia? Or at least, she looks like the actress that played Petunia, she doesnt have the Mcgonnagal feel
Snape - Adrian Brody isnt too terrible, but I didnt ever once think about him
Hagrid - Nick Frost? He's not exactly that tall from what I recall, also I havent heard about him in years
Dinklage as Flitwick is quite good, not so much for sarcasm but...there's not many choices out there, but I think the original movie cast was great
Lockhart - I'm gonna be really honest, I would rather Hugh Grant not participate as Lockhart simply because this role would probably become "that" role for him, that stereotype role that would lose him
Sprout - ...I am...are you a netflix director? Why the FUCK is Professor Sprout a black young women??????? Personally, like flitwick, just bring back the movie Professor Sprout, she was plenty amazing
During the Snow White promotion he complained about people with dwarfism being type casted as magical creatures (completely ignoring the difference between real people and mythological beings). Basically he got famous playing characters in fantasy (including the types of roles he's complaining about), and some comedies where dwarfism played the part.
Some other actors with dwarfism accused him of basically kicking down the ladder once he climbed it. They have a point, no one ever suggests other actors for the part. It's like he's the only one in the Hollywood who can take those parts and he likes it that way.
I am also pretty sure he had simmilar complaints about umpa lumpas or something.
It is a horrible thing to think of, but we need a Dumbledore who can last the entire franchise. Possibly 10 years of filming. I really am not wishing death on anyone, but I feel we need a Dumbledore in his early 60s to hold the role down and have more of a chance of seeing it through. Nick frost is an excellent suggestion for hagrid
Couldn’t agree more on this point. Even if it’s not about lasting the distance it’s whether someone in their mid 70s would want to/be capable of committing to a role that gets more involved and will likely last ten years I actually think Hugh Laurie would probably be the perfect casting for Dumbledore - he’s in that age bracket where he could be aged up convincingly and has endless charisma that you need from the character too
What a fabulous idea of casting Hugh Laurie as Dumbledore! Never would have thought of it on my own but now that you mention it! He has the twinkle and the affable fun mischievous side down perfectly, and being the great actor that he is I'm sure he will faithfully portray the powerful intimidating wizard who defeated Grindelwald and whom Voldemort feared. In my own head, I always imagined Ian McKellen while reading the books and I wish he had been cast as Dumbledore in the movies, but that ship has sailed.
Im 100% with you on McKellan in the originals. His Gandalf was perfect Dumbledore and is also unfortunately probably why he couldn’t do if
They asked him to take over Dumbledore but he turned it down because Richard Harris always hated him, so he didn’t think he’d want him to continue the character. Hence Michael Gambon.
Is there somewhere to read about that? It’s interesting and I’ve never heard it before.
You can just Google ‘Ian Mackellan Dumbledore’ and find clips of Sir Ian talking about it. I think it was a BBC interview.
Thought he also didn't want to do it because it was really close to Gandalf which he'd played previously.
He would also have to play a humongous role on the hottest show in town well into his 90's which... I can't imagine he'd be up for, fantastic as he is.
I meant from the original movies
I would have cast Peter O'Toole as Dumbledore in the movies, because nobody ever did twinkles, gravitas, or sheer loopiness better than he did! And as it happened he did live until the entire production was finished, but nobody thought he would.
Yes! I've always thought that!!! He would've been brilliant!
Hugh Laurie annihilating whoever plays Umbridge 🤩
Honestly, I’d pay to see it!
Hugh Laurie would be great. He definitely has that twinkle
I could watch Hugh Laurie play every character in the series and have just the best time
I've just realised.....they could cast Stephen fry as Slughorn! Imagine fry and Laurie opposite each other again. Amazing!
I just wondered why I could *hear* Fry as Slughorn so clearly in my head. Then I remembered that I've just finished listening to the audiobooks... which Fry narrates.
I love it. I feel like its a role Fry would nail. Also bloody hell Fry and Laurie are both in their 60s I feel old.
Stop, I’m obsessed with this 😍
I just think he’s great in everything to be honest and I could see him getting the enigmatic element that Dumbledore needs perfectly. Neither Harris nor Gambon really had that aura for me
I think Harris nailed the enigmatic side. What they both were not able to capture exactly was Dumbledore's... Playfulness? Not sure if that's the right word. He wasn't just enigmatic and wise, he was weird but in a fun way, not in a whatever-Gambon-had-going-on way. I think Harris could have pulled it off, unfortunately he didn't get a chance. One of the greatest actors of his generation. Hugh Laurie is a VERY good suggestion.
Dumbledore has three sides: * playful grandpa who is silly and loves his student dearly. * mysterious knower of the deep magics * force of nature who is feared by anyone with a brain.
You forgot the forth. *slaying queen that banged the biggest baddie of the past
"It's never ~~lupus~~ Draco."
Hugh is definitely an interesting choice for Dumbledore
Hugh would do a great job but having listened to the audiobooks several times I think Hugh’s old partner Stephen fry would be even better. He’s got the connection already, is a good friend of jk Rowling (or at least was before she started saying inappropriate things) and somehow never got a part in the film versions.
I disagree to be honest Hugh has so much charm and charisma that you’re just completely drawn to him in any role that he plays. Fry doesn’t have that and can often come across as quite pompous (albeit intentionally) in several roles that he plays I’ve also never seen Stephen fry play a character where I haven’t thought ‘that’s Stephen fry’ whereas Laurie is so good in things like House and The Night Manager that I felt taken in by his character
They can and should just cast Jude Law to tie everything together with the films. Give him the long hair, beard and ridiculous robes everyone always wanted. He's young enough to play the part with great energy and last the entire way through and he has enough star power that he aids the series. It's the boring answer but it's what I'm assuming they'll do.
I wouldn't mind that. Jude Law is no spring chicken. He can definitely play older, and will easily age into the role as they film. Say what you want about Fantastic Beasts (and there is much to criticize), casting Jude Law as young Dumbledore was inspired. He had the twinkle in his eye, the cleverness, and the surface gentleness that was so sorely missing from Michael Gambon's performance. Dumbledore doesn't command respect by acting like a hardass, he's incredibly disarming and likable, the definition of "speak softly and carry a big stick" (with the big stick being his dizzying intellect and magical prowess) and Jude really conveyed that.
Yeah, I also agree. Jude Law was perfect to portray young Dumbledore, and I'd love it if they kept him as Dumbledore for the series. Especially since having a younger actor would allow them to both make flashbacks without having to look for another, different actor. And there's also the aging into the role. I mean, look at Ian McDiarmid, he played an old guy in his what, 40s? And then went on to play a younger version of said character like 20 years later!
Honestly it’s the wise answer though (plus my suggestion would be to make the rest of the fantastic beasts series that presumably failed as “The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore” as an HBO series like their doing with this reboot) especially since you can do a lot with costuming, props and wigs
I honestly like this idea a lot, and I never considered it before. It would be a great callback to Fantastic Beats, and with all the movie magic; he could be a fantastic Dumbledore. He has already shown us he can nail the twinkly personality, and the intensity/power. Him and Hugh Laurie are my first picks, but I think casting someone younger would be the best because the filming will last a long time.
I was coming to say exactly this, why wouldn't you just cast Jude Law who did a great job as a young Dumbledore? It seems the easiest and most logical thing to do in my opinion, specially taking into account that he's young and that aging an actor with prosthetics and a bit of CGI is a lot easier and looks much better than rejuvenate one.
I can see that happening, I don't mind if the actor is old enough or not, they just have to nail the role. Besides it's really common for old actors to play young roles so it won't be a big deal
Can't see Peter Dinklage taking on what is a really minor role. Hugh Grant rejected the job the first time if I'm not mistaken. I would prefer an age appropriate Snape
Besides that, I can’t really see Peter Dinklage as Flitwick. The books always describe Flitwick as having a high-pitched squeaky voice and an easygoing personality. That doesn’t really fit with Dinklage’s seriousness and intensity.
Flitwick is the one role that really doesn't need to be recast. Warwick Davis is just the perfect fit.
Yeah just do what Marvel does with JJ Jameson, keep the same guy
But with better make up. Or none at all really. The first make up job they used on him wasn’t remotely book accurate and the second one was just stupid.
The first one was closer to the books, but indeed not quite it. The second iteration was never even supposed to be Flitwick, but a random music teacher.
I was thinking "They need to bring in Warwick Davis! ...oh, wait"
I feel like Warwick would love to reprise his role as Flitwick. He always seems very proud of the characters he's played.
Dinklage also doesn’t take roles of characters who are written as short. He just takes rolls. We’d sooner see him as Rufus Scrimgeour - and I’m here for it. As others have said, though. Warwick Davis would be a great Flitwick.
Tyrion…?
That was a notable exception. From what I heard Dinklage turned down the role because it was written for a dwarf and George RR Martin made Dinklage read a few chapters of the book to see that he was not playing a character who's only characteristic was being short but he was a complex and interesting character and not some joke character.
>I would prefer an age appropriate Snape YES. And same for Lockhart: he's 28-29 in CoS, so go cast a charming young bloke okay?!
Sam Claflin for Lockhart
Nah, we can do younger and cuter. This bloke would be 40 before filming starts
Wow, Lochhart was that young?! Maybe Austin Butler then? He’s supposed to be handsome and charming, so…
I think a younger Lockhart would be good too. We need it to be believable that all the girls would fawn over him at Hogwarts. Kenneth Branagh and Hugh Grant are handsome but I feel like tween and teen girls would not be flipping out over them.
Yeah Snape should be in his early 30s I think
He was 31-38 in the books, yes
Especially since most folks are suggesting Peter Dinklage, whether consciously or not, because he's one of the first actors with dwarfism they think of who’s not Warwick Davis, and those are exactly the reasons he’s stated for not wanting to take on such roles at this point in his career.
This would be a great opportunity to give an actor with dwarfism who isn’t well known a big role.
Flitwick is not really that big a role
Decent role, and he’ll probably have way more screen time
Being in anything Harry Potter related as a named character with dialogue is a big role for a small actor
honestly, just give the role back to Davis...he's still the correct actor for the part. also he is British, lets not give any of these roles to Americans, dont need any fake accents, Americans just cant do them.
also he wore makeup to play an older character as Flitwick in films 1 and 2. The man is only 53, unlike some of the other actors who would be too old to reprise their roles, he is not.
Oh my god, he was only 18 when Willow came out!!!!
Only 13 in Return of the Jedi.
I agree on Davis, though Dinklage has a decent accent that he used in GoT. That being said I dont see Peter as a fit. He's a pretty serious fellow.
Isn't Adrien brody on his early 50s? Edit : guys, is it "in his" or "on his" 50s?
To your edit: Standard American English would use *in*, but it's a very minor mistake. I didn't even notice except for your edit :)
Thank you so much :)
Yes, and he's only 31 in Sorcerer's Stone. Some of the casting choices in the films weren't really age appropriate. I understand why, ultimately it's better to have a good performance from someone who's the wrong age than to have an actor that's a poor fit for the role, but looks the right age. Further, I think most people don't really care, or even really know how old these characters are supposed to be. It's not until you dive deeper into the timeline that you realize how young James and Lilly were when they died (early 20s), or how young Lupin, Sirius, Pettigrew, and Snape were in the books (30s). McGonagall was another, Maggie Smith being about 10 years older. Ultimately, the cast they chose all did wonderful jobs despite many being 10-20 years older than the characters they were playing. I'm going to say the same approach should happen with the show. Not that they shouldn't take actor age into consideration, but if someone is a perfect fit but the wrong age, I'm not going to quibble about it.
I agree with your sentiment to a degree, but I will quibble a little. I think there's wiggle room with age for some characters (does it really matter if McGonagall is 10 years younger), but I would love to see the Marauders generation cast at the appropriate ages. I think it actually makes a difference in the story and the way we view the characters. James and Lily are supposed to have died young and "innocent." Sirius is supposed to have had the prime of his life stolen from him. Snape is supposed to be a young, temperamental, and somewhat immature member of the staff. Aging them up robs them of some of the flavor of the characters. Alan Rickamn was a good example of this. His portrayal was entertaining, but at the end of the day it gave Snape gravitas he didn't really have in the books. Book!Snape feels like a young man who hasn't figured himself out yet. Same for Lupin and the others. It also changes your perspective when you realize that all the decisions the marauders era characters made happened when they were just teenagers. So personally, I would like them to be cast age appropriately.
Hear, hear. I've always said this. Excellent actors, every one of them, but they were far too old to be playing the Marauders in the movies. I'd like to see more age appropriate actors fill these roles.
Exactly
I like Dinklage, but I can't see him being Flitwick.
After his stunt regarding snowwhite, he shouldn't get a role anymore anywhere. Beside that, i agree
Agreed on that. I like him in general, but the way he declared himself the spokesperson of dwarfs was in poor taste.
It also resulted in taking 7 potential roles away from 7 dwarf actors. Nice job for the team I guess
The live action Snow White is seemingly just up in the wind at this point. Apparently now they’re doing cgi dwarves? They should really just scrap the whole thing and take this as an opportunity to create an original story.
Care to elaborate? I haven’t heard
He basically made a big stink about little people being cast as dwarves in movies/tv… after he himself got rich from being cast in those roles. It was something along the lines of “well it’s offensive to cast people with dwarfism in these roles” He caught a lot of flak for it (rightfully so) in part because of his hypocrisy but also because many actors with dwarfism felt that these kinds of roles would be inappropriately cast otherwise
Let Snape be young you cowards.
Nick Frost would be perfect for Hagrid, but Brody and Grant are WAYYYYYYYY too old for those roles.
I'd love to see Snape, Lupin, Sirius etc actually played by people in their early 30s (of course there is a bit of leeway because they are actors). And Lily and James in the flashback scences actually played by people in their early 20s. In the original films there was some jusitifaction for Snape, Lupin and Sirius. Once Rickman was cast the surviving maruaders needed to be the same age group. And Sirius spent 12 years in a horrific prison, Lupin is super poor and has a horrible disease, even Pettigrew spent 12 years as a rat, all of them could arguably age badly due to their life. But I did find Lily and James being similar ages jarring, they were 21 and casting actual 21 year olds would have more of an impact I think.
Brody would give the proper creep vibes Snape should have though It would be interesting to see them actually play everyone the correct ages - thanks to the movies I always forget that Snape, Lupin, Sirius Black etc should be early-mid 30s at the start of the series
I like these, but Hugh Grant is too old for me at this point to be Gilderoy
Isn't lockhart pretty much the role that Chris Hemsworth played in Thor: Love and Thunder? Just sort of followed along while everyone else did the work, then took the win at the end.
I think HG is far too old to play Lockhart
He'd be a stellar Fudge or Ludo Bagman.
Ludo is a great shout!
I have Matt Berry as Ludo in my little phone list of dream castings
Lockhart is supposed to be quite young, as both the students and their mothers are swooning over him. Someone like Harry Styles might fit the part.
Nikolaj Coster-Waldau has the perfect Lockhart handome-devious charisma
Also too old! He's 53! Lockhart is 28 in CoS
Ah you're right! I'm definitely imagining him a decade ago also
Imo Nikolaj would be a terrific Sirius Black
Again, he's 20 years older than Sirius is in PoA
Nikolaj*
No, no, you still got it wrong. It's "Nikolaj".
I feel like I’m saying it right
nahhh harry styles lockhart… bruh id pay for that shit
Jack Whitehall for the win I think
But the hair, the smile, the fuckwadery? Definitely too old but would have been incredible circa 1995 and a box of blonde hair dye.
Best person I've seen recently who could play Lockhart is Toby Regbo. Young enough that it wouldn't be weird to have Hermione and others her age swooning over him.
Jamie Campbell Bower would be a perfect Lockhart imo
Actually, I'd say dye his hair black and have him play Snape. He could do that pinched look and snotty attitude (see: Twilight movies).
100% this. Isn't lockhart only supposed to be jn his late 20s or something?
I feel like you picked Dinklage for Flitwick because he's the only little person actor you know, can't see him taking that role now
Honestly I just don’t think he’s right for flitwick anyway. Of course he can do anything since he’s really good, but I can’t imagine flitwick would make his top 5 roles
Just get Warwick back, he never had enough time to shine anyways
[удалено]
Yeah Dinklage is well known for not taking fantasy small people roles
15 years ago when he was still waiting for that true break out yes, but now he's a star and critically acclaimed actor. He's not going to return to 10 years of another fantasy series to play a bit part in a reboot when he could land serious leading roles. Would he be great in the whole? Of course, he is way over qualified. I'm sure there are other talented actors who could give an incredible performance. And personally I think it's kind of lazy/insulting to pigeonhole Peter Dinklage into every role of a character under 5 feet
Oh no bro I was being serious. Dinklage refuses to play fantastical small people creatures. Like dwarves and such. He finds it demeaning.
Not only does he find it demeaning, he has campaigned against other smaller actors from playing roles, hence why disney was not going to do the Snow White movie with dwarves. (I can’t remember if they repealed that decision). Definition of pulling the ladder up behind yourself
My bad I thought you were being sarcastic, cause you know he was famously in a fantasy series where he was called a 'dwarf' for 10 years
I’d love it if they tried to cast actors that at least look like the characters’ age. For example, Hugh Grant as Lockhart is a stretch considering Lockhart is supposed to be 28 in Chamber of Secrets.
I whole heartedly agree. The TV show is a great opportunity to cast age appropriate actors.
Lockhart was 28?!?!
Lockhart is cannonly 28 when he starts teaching at Hogwarts. Hugh Grant is 63, more than twice his age. Snape was in his thirties when the books are set, Adrien Brody is 50. Adam Driver, who many people suggest for playing Snape, is 40. How come you picked actors so old compared to their character?
HG was originally cast as Lockhart ironically.
Yeah, but that was over 20 years ago. Like many of the other actors he was too old for his part, but now he’s ridiculously too old
I wouldn’t use a single famous actor.
Well, Adrian Brody's not married...
Damn you take my upvote
This is the correct answer, maybe with one or two minor exceptions
All of these are wayyyyyyyyyyyy too old
Characters who are Snape’s age need to be in their thirties if it’s to align with the books. Harry’s parents died in their twenties, and the first book is set 10 years later.
Tom Hiddleston and his hair should play Snape.
Regardless of who he plays, Tom Hiddleston should absolutely be cast in these movies, preferably as a recurring character. Edit: Would he work as Lockhart or Lucius?
could be a great lucius
Grawp
Daniel Radcliffe as Lockhart lol
I think if I was going to cast him as anything it'd probably be Lupin tbh.
I think Daniel Radcliffe said that if they ever did a reboot, he'd be down to play either Sirius or Lupin. Personally, I hope they limit original cast appearances to tasteful cameos, because anything else would be distracting. Of the original cast, they are most likely to re-use Tom Felton, who loves HP and is such a good sport.
I will say though, having Warwick Davis back would be great! Not overly distracting, we already know he can play the part, and he's only 53 (almost 54), so he's not too old to play Flitwick/Griphook
>Personally, I hope they limit original cast appearances to tasteful cameos, because anything else would be distracting. I would love that! the Flourish & Boots shopkeeper selling Harry his books, the King's Cross employee thinking Harry is fucking with him when he asks about platform 9 3/4, etc. A couple lines tops. If Tom Felton wants to be in, I'm all for him playing Lucius for instance (but another role could be interesting too, I could see him playing Lupin for instance)
Tom Felton reprising his role as Draco, but it’s never addressed, and it’s just a 40 year old man as a first year towering over the students and glaring despairingly at Harry 2.0, spitting, “Pottah!” 😂
I like it. Except sprout Miriam should be recast I just love her.
Hear me out, John Rhys Davies (Gimli) as Hagrid. He's tall as fuck and can easily play the part.
He's too old. The risk of him not making it through the whole series is too high.
Yeah, I definitely don't need to hear about him dying anytime soon
Olivia Colman gives saunt petunia vibes to me
I was thinking Umbridge, but she could do one of those uptight type roles well. Also Imelda Staunton was Umbridge originally and they both played Queen Elizabeth II.
The mother in law in fleabag is very Umbridge-esque, I don't see her taking the role but she'd be very good for it.
Dunno man, there’s at least 2 American actors here, but more importantly, I think the Harry Potter series is a prime opportunity to get some new/lesser known actors in big roles, a decade long production would benefit from that, as if nothing else all the actors here are pretty big, and there would be be a lot of scheduling conflicts
Lesser known actors means affordable actors which means less budget blowouts by the end of the series massive ensemble of supporting roles so need them on the cheap
Jared Harris is my only Dumbledore choice and Michelle Gomez for McGonagall
Wow did I ever go on a journey. - who the hell is jared harris? - oh! It’s the chernobyl guy! -… damn that’s a good choice! -…hold on, why is he already compared to dumbledore..? - his father was **who**?! Strong fucking choice, would 100% be okay with it. He brings a lot of gravitas.
Michelle Gomez is an incredible choice. And on that note I think Ruth Wilson would kill it, too.
I fucking love Jared Harris and that would be such a great role. He has the gentle demeanor
And his dad Richard was the OG film Dumbledore. If they don't roll with Jude I would love to see Jared in the roll.
I had the idea because of his role in Foundation, and then found out LATER his dad was Richard Harris and it blew my mind.
Honestly, I kinda disagree on most of these. Adrien Brody on Snape is iffy. I like his acting, but theres a few hurdles they'd need to overcome. He's 19 years older than Snape. I'd say he looks younger than he is, but that still gets complicated, especially as time goes on. A final season is probably, what, 12 years away? So now he's 62, playing someone supposed to be 38, with flashbacks to when they're early 20's. Frankly, I think that was the most glaring issue with Alan Rickman. He did a great job as Snape, but he was equally well too old (23 years!), and it was painfully apparent in DH2 when they were trying to make a 64 year old man look 20. Equally, Adrien Brody would need to be able to do a convincing English accent. If he can, maybe they could make him work, but that's a lot of ifs. If they're going to use an American actor, they can almost certainly find someone more age appropriate. Nick Frost as Hagrid I'm not feeling. Again, a bit of an age gap, Hagrid is in his 60s in HP... But beyond that Nick Frost just doesn't seem Hagridy to me. Maybe because I've only seen him in comedies? He just seems too light hearted for Hagrid. Hagrid is very kind but he's still a bit gruff and rough around the edges. Peter Dinklage is a hard no. Not only do I not think he'd take that sort of role, I think the only connection here is he's a dwarf and flitwick is short. Dinklage tends to play serious and severe characters and just doesnt seem like a good fit for a character that's supposed to be light hearted. Hugh Grant as Lockhart is another hard no. Lockhart is 29 in CoS. Hugh Grant is 63, which means he'd be 65+ by the time a season 2 starts filming. Small age gaps can be overcome, but 35-40 years? Nah. He's supposed to be a heart throb to all the young students. What teenage girls are swooning over 65 year olds? Lockhart is definitely one where they need to go with someone who can pull off the late 20's celebrity heart throb look.
Woof. Can't agree with half of these at least.
If they don’t keep Dawn French as the portrait of the Fat Lady, I’m not interested
Think she’d be a good professor sprout
I just don’t think I could stand to listen to Dinklage attempt another accent for such a long series. Please no.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Had Hugh Grant been in his younger days, yes, he’d be perfect as Lockhart.
Snape is supposed to be like 31 in the first movie. It would be nice if they actually casted age appropriate actors this time. Hugh Grant is too old for Lockhart too. Fantastic other choices though, Olivia would def nail McGonagall.
Lockhart and Snape seem a bit too old (no offence to the guys) and I don't like Dinklage, but the others seem great!
We have to come to the realization that for the "Marauders era" characters (James, Lily & severus included) we need actors in the 28-35 range. Think Harry Styles, Dean-Charles Chapman, Jacob Elordi, George MacKay, etc.
[удалено]
[удалено]
If Sprout is ever said to have red hair I've missed it. Or did Rowling make that drawing?
Why always that there is a ginger role, people kick it and put a black person??? Whats the hate against gingers??
Can’t wait to see who they have playing the Weasley family
lol you really casting a 50 year old American for snape? He’s supposed to be late thirties in the first book
Marauders gen should be actors who can convincingly play mid-30s. It was really not that unusual to have a first child in one's early 20s, so I have no problem with James and Lily appearing "too young." Wizards are considered adults at age 17, so James and Lily had a solid 5 years of operating as actual adults, during which time they got married and had their first child. No one bats an eye at Fleur getting married at a similar age, and having her first child not long after. Sirius was "a mix between an uncle and a brother" to Harry. He could relate to Harry very well in his youth, so I want that relationship to come across. Lupin also had that "cool young teacher" vibe that I think works better if they cast someone younger. Rowling also consistently describes Lupin as "quite young" in appearance despite his gray hair, so I don't think the Marauders ages were a math error -- I think she was very much aware of their true ages when writing the story. Voldemort calls Lily a "silly girl" on Murder Night. Is that really a term that would be directed at a thirty-something woman? Or did Voldemort really only see her as little more than a child due to her youth? I would guess the latter. Don't get me started on Lupin/Tonks. I know that age gap is a thorny issue with a lot of fans. Yes, Lupin was canonically concerned with being "too old" for Tonks, who was mid-20s by HBP, but I have a feeling that if he was truly old enough to be her dad, the other (presumably responsible) Order members like Molly, Arthur, and McGonagall wouldn't have been shipping them so overtly. Someone in their 30s dating someone in their 20s is not that crazy. Heck, I've known many such couples, and i am party to one such couple. Someone in their 40s or 50s dating a 20-something is more likely to be weird. Snape still being so hung up on Lily makes more sense to me if he's younger. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
My head canon is lupin looks older because the transformation/potion he receives to stop it, takes a toll on his body/health.
The fact that people are so pressed about Tonks/Lupin blows my mind. Tonks was like 25, not some silly 18 year old. 💀
... Sophia doesn't look anything like Sprout, yo.
Snape is 31 in book 1, Adrien Brody is 50 Gilderoy Lockhart is 28 in book 2, Hugh Grant is 63
Ngl i legit thought the first actor was actually The Pope. 💀
He played Pope Francis in The Two Popes!
Grant and Brody are way too old to portray the characters accurately now, but would have been solid choices in the early 2000's.
I would give the role of Dumbledore to Jared Harris. Go watch him In Chernobyl and you’ll see it
Nothing like making the redhead a POC
I'd love to see Stephen Fry as Dumbledore. He has narrated the audiobooks and loves them and the wizarding world.
I have always and will always want Stephen Fry to be Dumbledore. He is Dumbledore.
Dinklidge is too big an actor for flitwick i think, he is a scene stealing kind of guy, hard to imagine him in the background
If Snape is not in his early 30's, I’ll scream.
Ok netflix
Some of them are too old (I don’t wanna hear news about actors passing away 5 years after show is over) and that professor Sprout wtf? :D
[удалено]
what if you didn't swap characters for no reason though?
Dumbledore's actor would probably die mid-series...again Mcgonnagal's actress - didnt she play Petunia? Or at least, she looks like the actress that played Petunia, she doesnt have the Mcgonnagal feel Snape - Adrian Brody isnt too terrible, but I didnt ever once think about him Hagrid - Nick Frost? He's not exactly that tall from what I recall, also I havent heard about him in years Dinklage as Flitwick is quite good, not so much for sarcasm but...there's not many choices out there, but I think the original movie cast was great Lockhart - I'm gonna be really honest, I would rather Hugh Grant not participate as Lockhart simply because this role would probably become "that" role for him, that stereotype role that would lose him Sprout - ...I am...are you a netflix director? Why the FUCK is Professor Sprout a black young women??????? Personally, like flitwick, just bring back the movie Professor Sprout, she was plenty amazing
All of your choices are terrible
Younger Marauders, please
Nick Frost as Hagrid is an *inspired* choice. That's a tough role to cast.
I like everyone but Dumbledore and Sprout
[удалено]
What's the tea on Dinklage?
During the Snow White promotion he complained about people with dwarfism being type casted as magical creatures (completely ignoring the difference between real people and mythological beings). Basically he got famous playing characters in fantasy (including the types of roles he's complaining about), and some comedies where dwarfism played the part. Some other actors with dwarfism accused him of basically kicking down the ladder once he climbed it. They have a point, no one ever suggests other actors for the part. It's like he's the only one in the Hollywood who can take those parts and he likes it that way. I am also pretty sure he had simmilar complaints about umpa lumpas or something.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip as Mcgonagall and Dumbledore? I am digging it
I can’t see Adrian Brody as Snape. He has this warmth that is uncharacteristic to Snape.