[X] My Assistant

[Isfet]

Totally agree with pokemonrulez435. Don't really get the whole hype about Twilight. I mean, the books aren't that bad, but they aren't very good, either. On the other hand, I've been interested in Harry Potter since I was 5 years old. And they're still good.

[ShiroYume]

Harry Potter is a classic. End of discussion.

Just kidding ^^ I just think that a series which makes teenage girls and older crazy about vampires (which are all extraordinarily beautiful and sparkle in sunlight ) and constantly hope for their "vampire charming" to come along, has nothing on a series that has inspired and charmed both girls and boys, young and old, makes ten-year old children wish to get a Hogwarts letter on their birthday and even let critical topics such as discrimination and the uselessness of bureaucracy and corruption flow in. In addition, it has inspired me to start reading books in English, since several years ago, I was far too impatient and in love with the series to wait for the German version to come out...

My friend loves the Twilight series. I simply can't understand why.

[Dark Nova Lumina...]

Harry Potter beats Twilight
By a huge margin

[tobio6164]

totally harry potter all the way i aggree with all the people who posted on this page whats the deal with twilight?

[Asper Kaos]

Neither. I have never opened a Harry Potter book or Twilight book and I plan on keeping it that way. Twilight sucks though.

[Bladed Darkness]

Harry Potter.

If it was Twilight or Eragon, it would be a little harder for me to pick, since I view them on almost the same level, and depending on mood and how much I want to critique them for their faults. Both ideas would have been better off if someone other than their authors wrote them.

And the Eragon movie that sucked worse than the Inheritance trilogy as it went on? The script was written by Paolini as well. How sad. He managed to botch the movie version of his own book.

Anyways, Twilight gets my no. Because:

A) I don't want to read a book where over 70% of paragraphs mention Edward's eyes as "liquid pools of gold", his chest as "perfectly sculptured like marble, and smooth to the touch", all the stone-statue references, how sweet Edward is when he's controlling and manipulating and forcing Bella to do what he wants, regardless of her wishes (which half the time are basically suicidal or stupid), when his ideas are actually just as bad as hers.

B) I don't want to read anything where the main character has something unique that makes love interest fall in love with them. I want something where chance happens to put them together and they realize the really good and lasting qualities about each other. Namely, personality. Something I feel is skimmed over in Twilight just to mention Edward's amazing good looks.

C) I read Twilight when it was uncool to read Twilight, and even then it was just okay. I only really enjoyed Alice and Jacob, Rosalie and Emmett, and Jasper. Or just basically anybody but the really main characters. That's still how I feel about it pretty much. I really could care less about Edward and Bella. And really, it's popular because Edward is supposed to be the ideal person to fawn over and fall in love with. He's not. Everyone has issues. Edward, as Rob Patterson put it, is "manic depressive".

D) I don't see why if you ask someone if they want to be in a relationship with someone who stalks them, watches them sleep, breaks into their house, they'll give you a no, but if it's Edward, they're all "OMG yes!!" and chew you out for describing him that way.

E) The website Impish Idea can probably sum up what's wrong with Twilight (and Eragon) much better than I can.

F) Why do the religious radicals not make a big deal about Twilight being about falling in love with vampires, who according to the main vampire, have no souls (even I don't believe him, and I honestly want to believe he has no soul)? Because it deals with temptation, and abstinence. You have the apple on the front to represent temptation, and throughout the series, Edward the omnipotent virgin resisting the temptation Bella is, both in blood and body.

Now, Harry Potter:

A) Why was Harry Potter a big deal to the religious radicals? Because it deals with magic. Nevermind that Harry is supposed to overcome the significant evil in our world. I could write a book about the parallels between Harry Potter and biblical stories. In fact, there is a book out there somewhere about it, and if I remembered the name, I'd gladly tell you. It's a great read as well.

B) The characters aren't flat. They aren't "I'm conflicted about this, so I must do this." They really struggle with the decisions. They do stupid things sometimes, yes, but everyone does. They're teenagers with the ability to fly a car or teleport. But, it's their thought processes and how they use reasoning with the world around them that give them dimension.

C) I don't like all the Harry Potter books. In fact, after I read the sixth one, my parents got the seventh for me on the day it came out. I never touched it until about six months ago, because I was afraid it would let me down. I really hate the sixth one, and the seventh one is a bit sub-par, I felt, in terms of the writing, but it's manageable. No long descriptions about why Voldemort is evil, we're given reasons and not just told he is (*cough* Eragon *cough*), we're shown that he is evil in his actions, his words, his motives, his destruction.

D) It's hard not to like the characters you're supposed to like, and hate the ones you're supposed to hate. I haven't met a person who actually enjoys Rita Skeeter. I have met people who hate Harry, or Dumbledore, or Ron, or Hermione, but I've met plenty more people who hate Eragon (the character), Arya, Bella, or Edward. Because the characters in Harry Potter are, for the most part, human. They make errors, they often try to correct them, they accept their failures, or obsess over them. You can sympathize with Harry, which is hard to do with Bella in between her fawning or moping over Edward or ignoring/being a jerk to her human friends. You don't have to sympathize with Harry, but it's easy to relate to him in some cases, as well as relate to the other characters (I relate to Hagrid particularly).

[Panlah Eats Cupc...]

I've grown out of HP, but I hate Twilight.. HP crushes Twilight any day in terms of quality, characters and plot.

Twilight was filled with typos, inconsistances, the characters were flat and annoying, and the plot (or lack thereof) was abominable.

[Captain Strong]

The only intelligent responses I've seen in this thread are from Harry Potter voters.

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

I've read the entire Twilight series, and only the first 4 books of HP.

Actually, I lied. I couldn't bear through Breaking Dawn at all. But I've read enough to make a good opinion.

Harry Potter wins here, absolutely NO contest whatsoever.

[AdaWongWasHere]

I like them both!

[PortgasGAce]

I like HP than Twilight, even though I never read Twilight. It may be biased but I hear that Twilight is mostly about romance, and I'm not really interested than that.

[Usagi Zakura]

A) Why was Harry Potter a big deal to the religious radicals? Because it deals with magic. Nevermind that Harry is supposed to overcome the significant evil in our world. I could write a book about the parallels between Harry Potter and biblical stories. In fact, there is a book out there somewhere about it, and if I remembered the name, I'd gladly tell you. It's a great read as well.

I think its the magic-thing.

In my opinion it seems more like the religious radicals need to just teach their kids the difference between reality and fiction. Its not like most kids with half a brain above a certain age are going to think all that's in Harry Potter is real

[Aira]

I like both; Harry Potter is better in my opinion but I don't hate and bash Twilight into the dust XD;
Both had things I liked and disliked, I would probably recommend Harry Potter to people though.

[Usagi Zakura]

I can say one thing I like better in Twilight than in Harry Potter...well the movies at least.

This:

>
This...



Note that in the book of Prisoner of Azkaban the kids are once asked to tell the difference between werewolves and real wolves, like that is supposed to be a CHALLENGE. Heck Peter Pettigrew has problems with the same question in a flashback.
In the movie...you'd have to be freaking retarded if you can't tell them apart. It doesn't even look like a wolf, it looks like a furry were-Gollum!

[cherrylove]

i have to say i much prefer harry potter. but if twilight has one thing over harry potter, it's the parodies. i love those. xD
as much as twilight fans can be obnoxious/obsessive/etc, the hatedom? far scarier. hating one person for writing a book is kind of weird. and creepy (yes, just as creepy as ~~~edward stalking bella. if not moreso. that is fiction.). while i don't like twilight at all, the dripping hatred some people have for it honestly scares me. :/

to be honest, i don't like either books. both of them contain raging mary sues and gary stus. i'm not a big fiction person, either.

This post has been edited by cherrylove: Nov 6 2009, 04:10 PM

[Liliac]

harry potter always

[Lilijka]

I think comparing Harry Potter to Twillight is somethingthat doesn't have sence.

Well maybe if you would compare for example first books of each... maybe it would be fair.

How long did Rowling write all HP books? 10 years? Do you know how experience is she now as a writer and how much help from others did she get through all her books? It's like comparing Tolkien and Nix.

When I read all HP I like it.
Still Twilight made an impresion on me. Maybe because I'm older or maybe because I know how you feel in amazing romance.

[Sarabi]

Harry Potter.

If it was Twilight or Eragon, it would be a little harder for me to pick, since I view them on almost the same level, and depending on mood and how much I want to critique them for their faults. Both ideas would have been better off if someone other than their authors wrote them.

And the Eragon movie that sucked worse than the Inheritance trilogy as it went on? The script was written by Paolini as well. How sad. He managed to botch the movie version of his own book.

Anyways, Twilight gets my no. Because:

A) I don't want to read a book where over 70% of paragraphs mention Edward's eyes as "liquid pools of gold", his chest as "perfectly sculptured like marble, and smooth to the touch", all the stone-statue references, how sweet Edward is when he's controlling and manipulating and forcing Bella to do what he wants, regardless of her wishes (which half the time are basically suicidal or stupid), when his ideas are actually just as bad as hers.

B) I don't want to read anything where the main character has something unique that makes love interest fall in love with them. I want something where chance happens to put them together and they realize the really good and lasting qualities about each other. Namely, personality. Something I feel is skimmed over in Twilight just to mention Edward's amazing good looks.

C) I read Twilight when it was uncool to read Twilight, and even then it was just okay. I only really enjoyed Alice and Jacob, Rosalie and Emmett, and Jasper. Or just basically anybody but the really main characters. That's still how I feel about it pretty much. I really could care less about Edward and Bella. And really, it's popular because Edward is supposed to be the ideal person to fawn over and fall in love with. He's not. Everyone has issues. Edward, as Rob Patterson put it, is "manic depressive".

D) I don't see why if you ask someone if they want to be in a relationship with someone who stalks them, watches them sleep, breaks into their house, they'll give you a no, but if it's Edward, they're all "OMG yes!!" and chew you out for describing him that way.

E) The website Impish Idea can probably sum up what's wrong with Twilight (and Eragon) much better than I can.

F) Why do the religious radicals not make a big deal about Twilight being about falling in love with vampires, who according to the main vampire, have no souls (even I don't believe him, and I honestly want to believe he has no soul)? Because it deals with temptation, and abstinence. You have the apple on the front to represent temptation, and throughout the series, Edward the omnipotent virgin resisting the temptation Bella is, both in blood and body.

Now, Harry Potter:

A) Why was Harry Potter a big deal to the religious radicals? Because it deals with magic. Nevermind that Harry is supposed to overcome the significant evil in our world. I could write a book about the parallels between Harry Potter and biblical stories. In fact, there is a book out there somewhere about it, and if I remembered the name, I'd gladly tell you. It's a great read as well.

B) The characters aren't flat. They aren't "I'm conflicted about this, so I must do this." They really struggle with the decisions. They do stupid things sometimes, yes, but everyone does. They're teenagers with the ability to fly a car or teleport. But, it's their thought processes and how they use reasoning with the world around them that give them dimension.

C) I don't like all the Harry Potter books. In fact, after I read the sixth one, my parents got the seventh for me on the day it came out. I never touched it until about six months ago, because I was afraid it would let me down. I really hate the sixth one, and the seventh one is a bit sub-par, I felt, in terms of the writing, but it's manageable. No long descriptions about why Voldemort is evil, we're given reasons and not just told he is (*cough* Eragon *cough*), we're shown that he is evil in his actions, his words, his motives, his destruction.

D) It's hard not to like the characters you're supposed to like, and hate the ones you're supposed to hate. I haven't met a person who actually enjoys Rita Skeeter. I have met people who hate Harry, or Dumbledore, or Ron, or Hermione, but I've met plenty more people who hate Eragon (the character), Arya, Bella, or Edward. Because the characters in Harry Potter are, for the most part, human. They make errors, they often try to correct them, they accept their failures, or obsess over them. You can sympathize with Harry, which is hard to do with Bella in between her fawning or moping over Edward or ignoring/being a jerk to her human friends. You don't have to sympathize with Harry, but it's easy to relate to him in some cases, as well as relate to the other characters (I relate to Hagrid particularly).

I. LOVE. YOU.

I cannot express enough that I read all the Twilight books out of absolute, uncontrollable boredom. I needed something to read, especially during my Senior year. I finished all of those shitty books in under two months. (Thank you Government/Economics class.) I excel in English and grammar, and I've been forced to read many boring books for Honors and AP English classes over the course of my education, but even though I found many of the books (*Cough* The Great Gatsby *Cough*) to be terrible, they had FANTASTIC grammar and other devices at play. Stephenie Meyer writes about as well as I did in the sixth grade. No joke. This is also being kind of generous.

J.K. Rowling on the other hand, has a terrific writing style that is enjoyable and readable by young and old readers alike. I wasn't big on reading when the books first hit the shelves, but a few years later, I went back and read every last book. I love 'em. I'm not going to totally dote on Harry Potter. It definitely has some flaws, but it has less in every fashion that Twilight. I will admit, Deathly Hallows did not hold the splendor for me that the prior books had. Maybe it was the fact that Sirius is dead, or some other deaths that I shall not mention until the movie is released and I don't feel so guilty about it, but I just wasn't thrilled with it. The plot seemed sluggish, granted, finding horcruxes isn't exactly the easiest hunt in the world.

I've read all the books from both the series and can honestly say: Twilight sucks. Big. Time. The writing is terrible, the plot is less than fantastic, and I don't feel like reading about Stephenie Meyer's fantasies.

Harry Potter is definitely, in my opinion, much better in every aspect. The plot is VERY consuming and this series rates among my favorite books of all time.

[Verity Lily]

My inner fourteen year old overrode my capacity for adult criticism and thought Twilight was just so cool. But I am a fan of Harry Potter first, last and always.

[Cyz]

Harry Potter. The storyline is far more interesting and detailed.

This post has been edited by Cartoono: Jan 23 2011, 12:38 AM

[Flamewhisker]

Harry Potter DUHHHH

I voted before I read the first page of replies and I was honestly surprised that Harry Potter was actually winning! I see HP as a million times better, but its just with the twilight craze going on I would have thought it would be loosing.

I'm not wanting to offend anyone with these comments, but this is what I see of twilight (I havn't read the books, but I had my opinion made about HP before I had read it and it just happened to be right). Twilight seems to be a book for all those weirdos who I place in the gothic/emo catagory. From what I have heard its just a weird romance story and taking vampires out what they are known to be. When someone says vampire, I think Dracula... not some teen.

With Harry Potter, the stereotypical Wizard is someone who uses a wand and magic words, what makes HP different than the stereotype is his background and adventures, very creative.



Honestly, when I read about a total of 1 or 2 books a year that arn't school related, those books have to keep my interest. I started reading the HP books in 7th grade and after the first 1 (that took me weeks XD) I read the other 5 in such a short period of time, I was quite surprised with myself. Then when the 7th book came out, I did something unheard of for me...read it in a day O.o



And now for a rant....I am quite freaking sick of people saying that they are a vampire at school... PEOPLE SERIOUSLY!!! YOU ARE NOT A VAMPIRE!

/end rant



and BTW: I see some people commenting on Eragon... I have just recently read that, I thought it was decent, It could have been better in some places, but in general it got the story across and I made up the rest that was left out (massive imagination ftw, thats why some books bore me lol)


AND LAST THING: People commenting on how the movies are, if your commenting on how they look or how the movie is actually done (how well it shows the book) are two different things! As for effects, the Twilight movies are going to have better effects than some of the older HP movies. The first HP movie came out in 2001, thats a big difference from Twilight releasing in 2008 (both were released in Nov. so a 7 year gap makes a huge diff, technology changes and that makes effects better)