Seems that Mr. Lee is out for Dumbledor. The new actor is...

[saruman12]

.... Richard Harris !

From darkhorizons.com

Harry Potter & The Prisoner of Azkaban:
The Sun reports that it looks like an actor has been found to takeover the part of Albus Dumbledore - the original star Richard Harris. It seems producers have been in contact with various FX wizards about using facial mapping techniques with the late actor's visage for the role. Harris' stand in Harry Robinson would be on-set and would shoot the sequences, with his face later replaced by a CG rendering of Harris - already it seems "Many hours of footage are currently being scanned to see if the process is viable for the film" says one insider. The process has been used to allow extras to fill in for main characters in the past, one of the more notable uses of similar technology this year was actress Kate Bosworth's face mapped onto a surfing stunt double for scenes in "Blue Crush".

[Brandi]

Seems kind of necromantic if not downright necrophilic.

That and I'm not completely convinced the face won't look somehow masklike, even with as many advances as CGI has made in the last few years...

[Alfonso Casal]

I know that I'm not the only one who is going to feel very uncomfortable with this. This same issue was discussed in another thread on these boards with respect to the late Mr. Cushing. The same legal, moral, and ethical questions arise.

Legally, the issue of consent. Morally and ethically, shouldn't we just hold on to and cherish the performances Mr. Harris gave us while living?

[39steps]

Seems kind of necromantic if not downright necrophilic.

They did something similar with Oliver Reed in Gladiator... there may be times when almost anything is preferable to replacing an actor, dunno.

[b]That and I'm not completely convinced the face won't look somehow masklike, even with as many advances as CGI has made in the last few years...

I don't think it will stand up over time, no. But I think it could be very convincing now. Synthetic video researchers can take video clips of people and manipulate them to say things they didn't say, and fool viewers and most experts. If they're looking through old video clips now, they could use this technique pretty well. But you do have to wonder whether it'll just stand out as a special effect six months down the line... it's more the animator's skill than Harris's, and it may take some getting used to that sort of "animation".

[39steps]

I know that I'm not the only one who is going to feel very uncomfortable with this.  [...]
Legally, the issue of consent.  Morally and ethically, shouldn't we just hold on to and cherish the performances Mr. Harris gave us while living?

It becomes even trickier if the actor signed a multi-film contract he or she can't complete, as Harris probably did. And when you add in the fact that there's a precedent for the estate being able to give that posthumous "performance" consent, what with all those Pepsi ads with Louis Armstrong and vacuum ads with Fred Astaire and things in the early '90s... it is a hell of a mess, and I think you basically just have to trust the estate to be tasteful, which is probably the way things already are for most celebrities.

I agree that it's a bit questionable in that regard. But it might be seen as a tribute to Harris that he's not replaceable, and I can't help but appreciate the incredible skill that would go into carrying it off...

[Matt Gemmell]

This all comes down to context .
When Brandon Lee died during the making of The Crow cgi filled in the gaps , similarly with Ollie Reed in Gladiator . The adverts that have been done such as Steve MQueen driving the Ford Puma have been enjoyable and a bit of fun as eveyone knows it's a trick .To pass off a major character as alive when dead is distastefull . It's not as if filming was well underway , this movie has'nt even started yet . Regardless as to who takes the role I do'nt like the idea of computer imagery for this purpose , hopefully the filmakers will see sense .

[39steps]

There's something about using a dead person to shill something that I'm just not on board with. There's nothing about that which isn't simply using a person's life for financial gain, and I find that tacky. Harry Potter isn't really going to take a financial hit if they replace Harris... whatever their reasons are, I have more sympathy than if they were using Harris to sell Fords.

I don't think either option is a good one; they can neither CGI him in or replace him without inviting some sort of disrespect to Harris and pissing off a lot of people, but they can't do without the character. It's a rock and a hard place decision, and good luck to them whatever they choose, as long as they do it well...

[David Vasser]

I agree with Alfonso. Let Mr. Harris rest in peace. There are any number of people who could step right into the role and be marvelous. Not the least of these is Christopher Lee.

It is interesting that in American soap operas (daily daytime dramatic series) actors come and go with no impact whatsoever on the plot or popularity of the program. There have been five "official" James Bonds, and each is appreciated for his different qualities.

Regarding the earlier thread on Mr. Cushing popping up in SWIII as Dooku's long lost relative I made the following points which are worth it to me to repeat as they are relevant in the case of Mr. Harris also.

1- He's dead.
2- Everyone KNOWS he's dead.
3- How believable to the public will a dead actor be?
4- Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should. This is one of those times. This could be the most distasteful thing about the POTTER films ever.
5- Once the precedent is set where would it end? Why not make photos of all the actors and CGI the entire film? In fact, why bother to even PAY actors when you can GCI the actors? Who needs expensive actors when you can create them for relative peanuts at Skywalker Ranch?

As a performance artist myself, I personally vow to return from the dead and haunt everyone who has anything to do with attempting to digitally reanimate my distinctive performance characteristics. They will pay!

In closing, the new director for the POTTER series hasn't even come onto the job yet so far as I've heard. Wouldn't the ultimate decision about this be left up to him? Maybe he isn't a big enough idiot to try it. It has been done before and it is never successful. Does anyone else remember, "DEAD MEN DON'T WEAR PLAID" with Steve Martin?

As disturbing as this concept is from a basic human decency point of view there is yet another angle. This concept is the equivalent of running a Picasso through a Xerox machine. Sure it looks just a Picasso, but you can tell at a glance that the knockoff has no soul. An artist puts a little of himself in his creations. Computers don't do "soul" too well.

No matter what they decide to do, you can depend on this film making tons of money.

[Juan Aneiros]

The Sun reports

The Sun Newspaper is about outrageous lies and scandals. Never believe anything they say.

[Old Soul]

It

[Alfonso Casal]

As I said in my earlier post, this raises so many questions. The idea of "consent: being formost among them. The possibilities CGI gives for abusive behavior and violating consent are endless.

Let's suppose an actor becomes famous in a certain popular role. After a few films, the actor feels he/she his explored all the possibilities of that role, and it's time to move on to seomething new. The studio, with an eye on profits, wants to continue producing these films with this actor. . .

Now this is a common enough situation. We've seen it many times in the past. Well, in the not-so-distant future, it's very possible that studios, using CGI, potentially could just (if they owned certain rights to the character, etc.) produce these films forever -- or until they no longer made money. And totally ignore an actor's or director's wishes.

[Jurious]

For a start, I don't agree. For another thing, Juan's right, you can't trust The Sun on anything. And thirdly, even though this issue tries to deal with factors of appearance, it doesn't address the problems of voice.

I think everyone will be perfectly happy if a new actor - be he as well known as Mr.Lee or a little known actor - takes over the role. Richard Harris portrayed Albus Dumbledore very well, and he'll be sorely missed, but we must not forget that he wasn't Albus Dumbledore. Being an actor is about bringing a character to life, and even if the actor who is next cast in Harris' old role doesn't look like Harris, it doesn't mean he isn't Dumbledore.

Like it's already been said, there's been several James Bonds, but no one ever questions, when you're watching the film, whether each actor is playing the same character or not.

May Richard Harris rest in peace - I'm sure we can all imagine what he'd be saying about this kind of thing.

[Josslyn]

I agree with everyone else here but I must say that it doesn't surprise me that the thought of something like this had occured. When I read that article (somewhere else too) I just shrugged and had a little moment of disgust. . . but I was not surprised.

[Don Boycik]

if this is indeed true i agree it is tacky it's one thing to do it if an actor dies in the middle of it or do what blake edwards did for the pink panther movies use deleted scenes which worked till about halfway thorugh the movie then it fell flat on it's face. but if this is indeed true it wouldn't surprise me at all.

[Josslyn]

The BBC is now reporting that Mr. Harris will not be digitally placed into the third film. Decent sense and taste have apparently won out.