For many, Harry Potter is a defining story. The films and the books that they are based on captured the imagination of an entire generation. The books created a number of vivid characters that would later be adapted to the big screen. Over the course of JK Rowling’s seven novels, readers are introduced to an array of characters who have become iconic in the years since. When it came time to cast these roles for the films, the people behind the films did a pretty good job.
Although the right people are cast in many of the major parts in this series, no casting director gets it right every time. Most of the performances in the Harry Potter films are solid, and many of them are extremely true to the books on which they are based. For every truly astounding performance, there’s also one that could’ve been better. Whether the role is miscast or the actor is never really allowed to shine, there are performances that could ruin a film, and others that nearly always kept them on the right track. None of the Harry Potter movies are bad, and that’s thanks to some of these performances.
Here are 8 Performances That Hurt Harry Potter (And 8 That Saved It).
Ruined: Ian Hart (Quirrell)
The Harry Potter films would get darker and more realistic as they went on, but the cartoonishness displayed by Ian Hart’s Professor Quirrell would never be equaled by another character in the series. His Professor Quirrell is supposed to be putting on an act, but this act is so big that it becomes almost impossible to ignore. Quirrell’s act is so transparent, at least in the film, that it’s a wonder that none of the adults in the story saw through it.
Of course, Quirrell is only in one film, and he’s in the film that is least grounded in the real world. Even so, he manages to be uniquely out of step with the rest of the cast. It’s a good thing his performance is only in The Sorcerer’s Stone because it allows the other seven dispense with cartoonishness.
Saved: Maggie Smith (McGonagall)
Maggie Smith is pretty great in every role she performs, and she was the perfect choice to play Professor McGonagall. As the often severe transfiguration teacher, McGonagall was delightful because of the warmth that she would sometimes reveal to her students, often when they least expected it.
She was always stern, but like Dumbledore, a man she shares a great deal in common with, McGonagall always made the students her first priority. Maggie Smith played the role perfectly, and, in spite of her long and storied career, always seemed down to do wand work when it was required of her.
She may not have been the most central character to the story, but with the combination of sternness and warmth that she brought to the screen, she was among the most memorable.
Ruined: Bonnie Wright (Ginny)
Ginny is supposed to be smart, daring, beautiful, and kind. Granted, the lack of some of these qualities in the films is not entirely Bonnie Wright’s fault – it’s also a function of a failure to fully develop her character. That’s why, in spite of Half-Blood Prince’s many strengths, the relationship between Ginny and Harry feels rather sudden in the films.
Many of Ginny’s most interesting qualities fail to shine through in Wright’s performance.
She lacks the raw intensity that seems to drive Ginny in the books and tends to fade into the background of scenes where she should be standing out more. Ginny is a skilled witch, and she’s supposed to be the love of Harry’s life. In spite of all that, the screen version of the character falls flat.
Saved: Colin Farrell (Graves)
Although the reception to Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them was fairly mixed, it’s hard to argue with the greatness of Colin Farrell’s performance.
Farrell brings an incredible level of commitment to his work as Percival Graves, an enforcer for the US magical government who turns out to be Grindelwald in disguise.
Even before we fully understand who Graves is, we understand his character. We understand his beliefs, his allegiances, and his ruthlessness.
It’s no surprise that many fans were disappointed when they realized that Johnny Depp would be taking Farrell’s place in the long term.
Farrell gave the film a unique personality and life. He played Graves with such commitment and ambiguity, even if he was really Grindelwald all along.
Ruined: Stanislav Ianevski (Krum)
In the books, Victor Krum is surly and quiet, but he’s meant to be deeply appealing in spite of this. It helped, of course, that Krum was a famous Quidditch player at such a young age, but his allure wasn’t supposed to be defined by his fame.
Krum was meant to be mysterious, but Ianevski mostly plays him as dull.
It’s hard to see what exactly Hermione’s interest in him is about, even if their relationship in the books was mostly off-screen and never that deep. Although Krum was an international Quidditch star, there was almost nothing interesting about him. He didn’t have much charisma, and he didn’t seem to be particularly intelligent either.
Although Goblet of Fire isn’t a bad film, Krum is undoubtedly one of the weaker parts of it.
Saved: Emma Watson (Hermione)
Hermione Granger is an icon. She’s often the only capable member of Harry’s friend group, and her intelligence is never belittled or mocked. Although much of the casting, especially of the kids at the story’s center, was quite impressive, perhaps no child was more impressive than Emma Watson. That’s fitting, considering just how impressive her character is.
Watson manages to communicate her own intelligence, and asserts a confidence that makes her feel exactly like Hermione in the books.
From the first moment that Watson appears on screen, it’s clear that she’s going to be a driving force in these films. What’s more, Watson manages to turn Hermione into a full character, filled with emotions and confusion, even as she proves her own intellect time and again.
Ruined: Natalia Tena (Tonks)
Nymphadora Tonks is supposed to be odd, but she’s also supposed to have a big personality. She’s the kind of person that lights up a room by virtue of simply entering it. As played by Natalia Tena, though, she’s something of a non-presence. Although she’s introduced in Order of the Phoenix and eventually marries Lupin, none of that makes her particularly memorable, at least in the films.
Tena’s greatest sin in playing Tonks is that, for the most part, she’s pretty forgettable.
She displays none of the bubbliness that defined Tonks of the books. Although she joined the series late, Tonks stood out because of her willingness to be playful. Unfortunately, Tena plays her largely as another serious adult, and that makes her a fairly useless addition to the story.
Saved: Ralph Fiennes (Voldemort)
Lord Voldemort is kind of an impossible role. He’s the series’ defining villain, and as such, he has to be both menacing and strangely sympathetic. Ralph Fiennes is perhaps the only actor alive who could fulfill both of those roles as well as he does. Voldemort is both cartoonish and deeply human, even in spite of the ways in which he has mutilated his body.
As far gone as Voldemort is, Fiennes is always sure to leave a little bit of Tom Riddle in there.
It’s that part of Voldemort that Dumbledore always seems to be appealing to. Ralph Fiennes is never afraid to go big, and he certainly gives Voldemort plenty of ticks and mannerisms. All these choices work for the character, though, and contribute to a truly fascinating performance from a great actor.
Ruined: Michael Gambon (Dumbledore)
This performance is not a wholesale disaster. Gambon was forced to come in and replace Richard Harris, who had passed away after Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets.
Instead of trying to imitate Harris, Gambon chose to take the character in a louder, more severe direction.
His performance is particularly out of character in Goblet of Fire, when he actually grabs Harry by the collar and screams at him. This moment is one that many single out, and with good reason. Gambon’s Dumbledore was an angrier man than Harris’ had been, and less in step with the way the character is written in the book.
It’s an interesting performance, even if it’s one that doesn’t entirely jive with the role that Gambon has been tasked with playing.
Saved: Kenneth Branagh (Lockhart)
Gilderoy Lockhart is a con artist. Although he initially seems to be one of the greatest wizards to ever live, we eventually learn, somewhat unsurprisingly, that he’s been lying about his exploits for years.
As played by Branagh, Lockhart is a perfect encapsulation of everything that he is in the book.
He’s handsome, arrogant, showy, and entirely realistic. Branagh’s performance may seem slightly over the top, but that’s who Lockhart is. If he has one defining quality, it’s his showmanship. Lockhart has no natural aptitude for anything except performance, and Branagh’s performance is unafraid of shining a light on the performative aspects of Lockhart’s character.
Branagh’s gift is giving 110% of himself over to every scene, and that gift perfectly complements the character he’s playing.
Ruined: Johnny Depp (Grindelwald)
Gellert Grindelwald is supposed to be the villain of the Fantastic Beasts series. In the first installment, his presence seems to infect the film, even as his screentime remains relatively limited. Eventually, we come to understand that Colin Farrell’s Graves is really Grindelwald, and when he’s finally unmasked at the end of the film, many fans were disappointed that Depp was going to take over the villain role from here.
Of course, Depp’s screen time is limited in the film, but even in his single scene, he seems to bring some of the loopiness that Depp can’t help but have on screen. Sometimes that loopines is appropriate, but here it feels like too much. Depp may be the villain we have in Fantastic Beasts, but for many, he’s not the perfect choice for the role.
Saved: Brendan Gleeson (Mad-Eye Moody)
Mad-Eye Moody is a great character. He’s paranoid, but only because he’s one of the greatest Aurors to ever live. When Brendan Gleeson introduced us to the character, we understood just how powerful he was. He was the kind of Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher who had seen horrors of his own, and he was more than willing to communicate those horrors to his class.
Of course, the real genius of Gleeson’s performance is that, in the film where he’s featured most prominently, he’s actually Barty Crouch Jr. Gleeson knows how to play that part of the role well too.
Although Crouch gives a pretty convincing performance, he occasionally slips, and Gleeson plays those moments perfectly.
He’s both Moody and Crouch, and his performance is perfect in both roles.
Ruined: Bill Nighy (Scrimgeour)
Rufus Scrimgeour isn’t a huge presence in the Harry Potter films. He’s the Minister of Magic after Cornelius Fudge is forced to resign, and he’s meant to be a no-nonsense man who understands how dire Voldemort’s return is, even if he’s unwilling to play by Dumbledore’s rules.
Although Nighy gets most of those characteristics across in his performance, he’s mostly forgettable.
Nighy’s performance fails to make any major impression on the films he’s in.
As a result, Scrimgeour’s end hardly registers, and it’s clear that, despite his good intentions, he will not have any major role to play in the defeat of Voldemort. That was always going to be Harry’s job, and in the end, it’s Harry who has to get it done.
Saved: Daniel Radcliffe
Daniel Radcliffe was quite literally a child when he was first cast as Harry Potter, and he was forced to carry a pretty enormous burden for the next decade of his life. Through eight installments, Radcliffe played Harry with a great combination of wonder and rage. He was unafraid of exploring the parts of Harry’s character that were a little prickly or uncomfortable.
Over the course of eight films, he turned the young wizard and Chosen One into a deeply real person.
We watched Radcliffe grow up on screen, and saw through his performances how messy and complicated growing up always is. Radcliffe’s journey paralleled Harry’s. He was a normal boy who grew up famous and widely recognized, and had to deal with the consequences. That’s what made his performance work so well.
Ruined: Rhys Ifans
Xenophilius Lovegood is supposed to be a real oddball. When Harry first meets him at Bill and Fleur’s wedding, it seems clear that Luna got most of her strangeness from her father. As played by Rhys Ifans, though, Xenophilius’s strangeness is infected with an unnerving quality that is largely absent in the books.
Of course, most of the scenes with Xenophilius in the films come after Death Eaters have kidnapped his daughter and are holding her hostage. It’s understandable that, as a result, Lovegood would be a little shaken. Still, Ifans never seems to capture the oddness and airiness that feel so specific to Xenophilius in the books. He’s supposed to come across as a pretty colorful guy, but instead, he just seems fairly mopey and morose.
Saved: Alan Rickman
Alan Rickman’s performance as Severus Snape is beyond what anyone could have imagined when reading the books. His iconic, powerful voice imbues Snape with the perfect amount of menace and dark humor, but he also gives Snape enough vulnerability to humanize him. Snape is cruel to children, but ultimately protects them. He joins the Death Eaters, but ultimately fights against them.
Especially in the final installment, Rickman is so heartbreakingly vivid that we come to understand just how much his villainy was often an act. Snape was one of this story’s heroes, and the tragedy of the story is that Harry doesn’t realize it until after his passing. Rickman played Snape as a hero and a villain, and he was perfect for both parts.
Who’s your favorite actor in Harry Potter? Let us know in the comments!
