Okay, in the end, it all comes down to three things.
1. Plot/Idea
OK, J.K. Rowling's idea of wizardry wasn't her idea, and vampires weren't Stephenie Meyer's idea either. But when it comes to plot, Harry Potter wins. The world in Harry Potter is so detailed and intricate. Yes, we know it's not real. But it feels real, it seems as if it could be real. The setting of Twilight was just some random place Stephenie Meyer probably picked using "Eenie, Meenie, Miny, Mo." Twilight's plot was extremely predictable. My friend told her aunt the basic plot of Twilight, and then she practically guessed the rest of the entire series correctly. Harry Potter's plot is much more complex. Yes, it was predictable that Voldemort would lose, but there was hundreds of other things that caused uncertainty. All four Twilight books are basically the same. Bella gets in trouble, Edward comes and saves her, the vampires win, and everybody lives happily ever after. The same plot, repeatedly used over and over again. Harry Potter also kind of had the same plot (Harry Potter vs. Voldemort), but it had immensely different subplots in each book that made it UNIQUE from the other books.
2. Characters
The characters in Harry Potter are "round characters." Meaning, they are as complex to describe as a perso...
1. Plot/Idea
OK, J.K. Rowling's idea of wizardry wasn't her idea, and vampires weren't Stephenie Meyer's idea either. But when it comes to plot, Harry Potter wins. The world in Harry Potter is so detailed and intricate. Yes, we know it's not real. But it feels real, it seems as if it could be real. The setting of Twilight was just some random place Stephenie Meyer probably picked using "Eenie, Meenie, Miny, Mo." Twilight's plot was extremely predictable. My friend told her aunt the basic plot of Twilight, and then she practically guessed the rest of the entire series correctly. Harry Potter's plot is much more complex. Yes, it was predictable that Voldemort would lose, but there was hundreds of other things that caused uncertainty. All four Twilight books are basically the same. Bella gets in trouble, Edward comes and saves her, the vampires win, and everybody lives happily ever after. The same plot, repeatedly used over and over again. Harry Potter also kind of had the same plot (Harry Potter vs. Voldemort), but it had immensely different subplots in each book that made it UNIQUE from the other books.
2. Characters
The characters in Harry Potter are "round characters." Meaning, they are as complex to describe as a perso...
Okay, in the end, it all comes down to three things.
1. Plot/Idea
OK, J.K. Rowling's idea of wizardry wasn't her idea, and vampires weren't Stephenie Meyer's idea either. But when it comes to plot, Harry Potter wins. The world in Harry Potter is so detailed and intricate. Yes, we know it's not real. But it feels real, it seems as if it could be real. The setting of Twilight was just some random place Stephenie Meyer probably picked using "Eenie, Meenie, Miny, Mo." Twilight's plot was extremely predictable. My friend told her aunt the basic plot of Twilight, and then she practically guessed the rest of the entire series correctly. Harry Potter's plot is much more complex. Yes, it was predictable that Voldemort would lose, but there was hundreds of other things that caused uncertainty. All four Twilight books are basically the same. Bella gets in trouble, Edward comes and saves her, the vampires win, and everybody lives happily ever after. The same plot, repeatedly used over and over again. Harry Potter also kind of had the same plot (Harry Potter vs. Voldemort), but it had immensely different subplots in each book that made it UNIQUE from the other books.
2. Characters
The characters in Harry Potter are "round characters." Meaning, they are as complex to describe as a person in real life. The characters in Twilight are "flat characters", meaning that they are described without much individualizing detail, and can be basically summed up in about 2 sentences. The characters in Harry Potter went through radical change and developed as the series progressed. The characters in Twilight basically remained the same throughout the entire series. Bella remained whiny and selfish. Her becoming a mother didn't even change that fact. The only change I see in Edward is that he finally conquers his urge to eat Bella. And that's basically it. The rest of the Cullens had no personality whatsoever, and their personalities were unrealistic. You can't relate to any of the characters in Twilight.
3. Realism & Message
Yes, Harry Potter contains magic and Twilight contains "vampires", so technically, one of them can't be more realistic then the other. Well, wrong. Harry Potter was much more realistic.Obviously, In the end Harry and his friends are more relatable, more real. Though throughout the Twilight books, when Bella was human everything she did came with a price, a choice. However by the end of the fourth book, all the characters are immortal, no one lost anything. Yes Bella will lose both her parents but she expected that she made that choice. However EVERYONE lives, only one character dies by the end of the fourth book, and Bella only met her once. Harry Potter is the better series because of more developed characters, both stories are equally moving and captivating too say the least, but because after reading Harry Potter one feels human. Characters you love die, things that seemed impossible finally happen, the good guys win, for the time being. It on a level, though competely fictitious, it is real because in life you lose people you love, sometimes you catch a break sometimes you don't and the world is always in a constant struggle of good versus evil, going on a small hiatus every now and again. But by the end of Twilight, all the characters are alive, Rosalie, Emmett, Carlisle, Esme, Bella, Edward, Jasper, Alice, Renesmee, Jacob, and none of them are ever going to die because they are all immortal, they didn't win the fight against the evil Voltouri because the big battle, never happened, and in the end minimal sacrifices were made, everyone ended up happy without the loss of ANYthing. Yes, they were vampires so they are supposed to live forever, but that doesn't mean everything always pans out because no one's life is that perfect, not even for an immortal perfectly beautiful creature. Thus Harry Potter is the better series, not because of just character, plot, theme, no nothing like that, though Harry Potter does trump Twilight there also. Harry Potter is the better series because it is honest with its readers, sending a simple message, nothing in life is perfect live it to your fullest and be the best person you can, spread as much love and hope as possible and fight for what you know is right, because in the end, though you may loose things or people in the process good does triumph over evil, even though to earn that good thing sacrifices must be made, it will be okay, you aren't perfect and you don't have to be. Twilight sends the message that stalking, abuse, suicide, and teen pregnancy is okay, and that males are the superior sex (but the sexism in Twilight is an entirely different discussion). Anyway, when you are reading fiction, yes, it doesn't have to be realistic, unless the intent of the author was to make it realistic. Which it was seeing as it was set in a normal high school setting and Stephenie Meyer professes that Bella is an average girl, a realistic girl. And I'm not saying that to love something, characters need to die, however as a writer you get attached to your characters, SM got so attached in fact she completely departed from any realm of realism and gave them a perfect cookie cutter happily ever after. This isn’t realistic. Bella was supposed to have all these sacrifices she was willing to make to be with Edward, well guess what after she became undeniably perfect, even more perfect then the other perfect vampires in the world, she got everything and anything she wanted, perfect. No sacrifices no nothing anything and everything she could ever want. SM had created a realistic world and then departed from that reality, which isn't meant to happen.
(more)1. Plot/Idea
OK, J.K. Rowling's idea of wizardry wasn't her idea, and vampires weren't Stephenie Meyer's idea either. But when it comes to plot, Harry Potter wins. The world in Harry Potter is so detailed and intricate. Yes, we know it's not real. But it feels real, it seems as if it could be real. The setting of Twilight was just some random place Stephenie Meyer probably picked using "Eenie, Meenie, Miny, Mo." Twilight's plot was extremely predictable. My friend told her aunt the basic plot of Twilight, and then she practically guessed the rest of the entire series correctly. Harry Potter's plot is much more complex. Yes, it was predictable that Voldemort would lose, but there was hundreds of other things that caused uncertainty. All four Twilight books are basically the same. Bella gets in trouble, Edward comes and saves her, the vampires win, and everybody lives happily ever after. The same plot, repeatedly used over and over again. Harry Potter also kind of had the same plot (Harry Potter vs. Voldemort), but it had immensely different subplots in each book that made it UNIQUE from the other books.
2. Characters
The characters in Harry Potter are "round characters." Meaning, they are as complex to describe as a person in real life. The characters in Twilight are "flat characters", meaning that they are described without much individualizing detail, and can be basically summed up in about 2 sentences. The characters in Harry Potter went through radical change and developed as the series progressed. The characters in Twilight basically remained the same throughout the entire series. Bella remained whiny and selfish. Her becoming a mother didn't even change that fact. The only change I see in Edward is that he finally conquers his urge to eat Bella. And that's basically it. The rest of the Cullens had no personality whatsoever, and their personalities were unrealistic. You can't relate to any of the characters in Twilight.
3. Realism & Message
Yes, Harry Potter contains magic and Twilight contains "vampires", so technically, one of them can't be more realistic then the other. Well, wrong. Harry Potter was much more realistic.Obviously, In the end Harry and his friends are more relatable, more real. Though throughout the Twilight books, when Bella was human everything she did came with a price, a choice. However by the end of the fourth book, all the characters are immortal, no one lost anything. Yes Bella will lose both her parents but she expected that she made that choice. However EVERYONE lives, only one character dies by the end of the fourth book, and Bella only met her once. Harry Potter is the better series because of more developed characters, both stories are equally moving and captivating too say the least, but because after reading Harry Potter one feels human. Characters you love die, things that seemed impossible finally happen, the good guys win, for the time being. It on a level, though competely fictitious, it is real because in life you lose people you love, sometimes you catch a break sometimes you don't and the world is always in a constant struggle of good versus evil, going on a small hiatus every now and again. But by the end of Twilight, all the characters are alive, Rosalie, Emmett, Carlisle, Esme, Bella, Edward, Jasper, Alice, Renesmee, Jacob, and none of them are ever going to die because they are all immortal, they didn't win the fight against the evil Voltouri because the big battle, never happened, and in the end minimal sacrifices were made, everyone ended up happy without the loss of ANYthing. Yes, they were vampires so they are supposed to live forever, but that doesn't mean everything always pans out because no one's life is that perfect, not even for an immortal perfectly beautiful creature. Thus Harry Potter is the better series, not because of just character, plot, theme, no nothing like that, though Harry Potter does trump Twilight there also. Harry Potter is the better series because it is honest with its readers, sending a simple message, nothing in life is perfect live it to your fullest and be the best person you can, spread as much love and hope as possible and fight for what you know is right, because in the end, though you may loose things or people in the process good does triumph over evil, even though to earn that good thing sacrifices must be made, it will be okay, you aren't perfect and you don't have to be. Twilight sends the message that stalking, abuse, suicide, and teen pregnancy is okay, and that males are the superior sex (but the sexism in Twilight is an entirely different discussion). Anyway, when you are reading fiction, yes, it doesn't have to be realistic, unless the intent of the author was to make it realistic. Which it was seeing as it was set in a normal high school setting and Stephenie Meyer professes that Bella is an average girl, a realistic girl. And I'm not saying that to love something, characters need to die, however as a writer you get attached to your characters, SM got so attached in fact she completely departed from any realm of realism and gave them a perfect cookie cutter happily ever after. This isn’t realistic. Bella was supposed to have all these sacrifices she was willing to make to be with Edward, well guess what after she became undeniably perfect, even more perfect then the other perfect vampires in the world, she got everything and anything she wanted, perfect. No sacrifices no nothing anything and everything she could ever want. SM had created a realistic world and then departed from that reality, which isn't meant to happen.
HARRY POTTER
As for the plot, I would leave that up to each his own but for the rest, come on!
Good acting: Kristen Stewart can't act to save her life. She is playing the female lead so the film relies on her. She has that same blank expression throughout the film and speaks in monotone.
Good special effects: -_- During the scene where Edward was "running" or going up a tree it was painfully obvious he was on a zipline.
Good script: "This is the skin of a killer *sparkles*" is there anything else I need to say.
HP's plot was so much more complex and J.K.R. is a better writer. She made a world that doesn't exist, come alive. The books almost made you believe it could all be real. Twilight had a terrible plot, that was very predictable. J.K.R. developed her characters so well, and so complex. In Twilight, none of the characters are complex, there's pathetic Bella, and perfect Edward. They don't even have enough character flaws for us to believe they could be real people.
Also, Harry Potter can teach so much, which is one of the points a writer strives towards when creating a story, to teach the reader something. The only thing I learned from reading the twilight series (and yes, i read all 4 books) was to stay away from anything that was written by Smeyer.
if only i could figure out how to CHECK both!
1. Plot/Idea
OK, J.K. Rowling's idea of wizardry wasn't her idea, and vampires weren't Stephenie Meyer's idea either. But when it comes to plot, Harry Potter wins. The world in Harry Potter is so detailed and intricate. Yes, we know it's not real. But it feels real, it seems as if it could be real. The setting of Twilight was just some random place Stephenie Meyer probably picked using "Eenie, Meenie, Miny, Mo." Twilight's plot was extremely predictable. My friend told her aunt the basic plot of Twilight, and then she practically guessed the rest of the entire series correctly. Harry Potter's plot is much more complex. Yes, it was predictable that Voldemort would lose, but there was hundreds of other things that caused uncertainty. All four Twilight books are basically the same. Bella gets in trouble, Edward comes and saves her, the vampires win, and everybody lives happily ever after. The same plot, repeatedly used over and over again. Harry Potter also kind of had the same plot (Harry Potter vs. Voldemort), but it had immensely different subplots in each book that made it UNIQUE from the other books.
2. Characters
The characters in Harry Potter are "round characters." Meaning, they are as complex to describe as a perso...
1. Plot/Idea
OK, J.K. Rowling's idea of wizardry wasn't her idea, and vampires weren't Stephenie Meyer's idea either. But when it comes to plot, Harry Potter wins. The world in Harry Potter is so detailed and intricate. Yes, we know it's not real. But it feels real, it seems as if it could be real. The setting of Twilight was just some random place Stephenie Meyer probably picked using "Eenie, Meenie, Miny, Mo." Twilight's plot was extremely predictable. My friend told her aunt the basic plot of Twilight, and then she practically guessed the rest of the entire series correctly. Harry Potter's plot is much more complex. Yes, it was predictable that Voldemort would lose, but there was hundreds of other things that caused uncertainty. All four Twilight books are basically the same. Bella gets in trouble, Edward comes and saves her, the vampires win, and everybody lives happily ever after. The same plot, repeatedly used over and over again. Harry Potter also kind of had the same plot (Harry Potter vs. Voldemort), but it had immensely different subplots in each book that made it UNIQUE from the other books.
2. Characters
The characters in Harry Potter are "round characters." Meaning, they are as complex to describe as a person in real life. The characters in Twilight are "flat characters", meaning that they are described without much individualizing detail, and can be basically summed up in about 2 sentences. The characters in Harry Potter went through radical change and developed as the series progressed. The characters in Twilight basically remained the same throughout the entire series. Bella remained whiny and selfish. Her becoming a mother didn't even change that fact. The only change I see in Edward is that he finally conquers his urge to eat Bella. And that's basically it. The rest of the Cullens had no personality whatsoever, and their personalities were unrealistic. You can't relate to any of the characters in Twilight.
3. Realism & Message
Yes, Harry Potter contains magic and Twilight contains "vampires", so technically, one of them can't be more realistic then the other. Well, wrong. Harry Potter was much more realistic.Obviously, In the end Harry and his friends are more relatable, more real. Though throughout the Twilight books, when Bella was human everything she did came with a price, a choice. However by the end of the fourth book, all the characters are immortal, no one lost anything. Yes Bella will lose both her parents but she expected that she made that choice. However EVERYONE lives, only one character dies by the end of the fourth book, and Bella only met her once. Harry Potter is the better series because of more developed characters, both stories are equally moving and captivating too say the least, but because after reading Harry Potter one feels human. Characters you love die, things that seemed impossible finally happen, the good guys win, for the time being. It on a level, though competely fictitious, it is real because in life you lose people you love, sometimes you catch a break sometimes you don't and the world is always in a constant struggle of good versus evil, going on a small hiatus every now and again. But by the end of Twilight, all the characters are alive, Rosalie, Emmett, Carlisle, Esme, Bella, Edward, Jasper, Alice, Renesmee, Jacob, and none of them are ever going to die because they are all immortal, they didn't win the fight against the evil Voltouri because the big battle, never happened, and in the end minimal sacrifices were made, everyone ended up happy without the loss of ANYthing. Yes, they were vampires so they are supposed to live forever, but that doesn't mean everything always pans out because no one's life is that perfect, not even for an immortal perfectly beautiful creature. Thus Harry Potter is the better series, not because of just character, plot, theme, no nothing like that, though Harry Potter does trump Twilight there also. Harry Potter is the better series because it is honest with its readers, sending a simple message, nothing in life is perfect live it to your fullest and be the best person you can, spread as much love and hope as possible and fight for what you know is right, because in the end, though you may loose things or people in the process good does triumph over evil, even though to earn that good thing sacrifices must be made, it will be okay, you aren't perfect and you don't have to be. Twilight sends the message that stalking, abuse, suicide, and teen pregnancy is okay, and that males are the superior sex (but the sexism in Twilight is an entirely different discussion). Anyway, when you are reading fiction, yes, it doesn't have to be realistic, unless the intent of the author was to make it realistic. Which it was seeing as it was set in a normal high school setting and Stephenie Meyer professes that Bella is an average girl, a realistic girl. And I'm not saying that to love something, characters need to die, however as a writer you get attached to your characters, SM got so attached in fact she completely departed from any realm of realism and gave them a perfect cookie cutter happily ever after. This isn’t realistic. Bella was supposed to have all these sacrifices she was willing to make to be with Edward, well guess what after she became undeniably perfect, even more perfect then the other perfect vampires in the world, she got everything and anything she wanted, perfect. No sacrifices no nothing anything and everything she could ever want. SM had created a realistic world and then departed from that reality, which isn't meant to happen.
my answer 2 harrry potter is
BLAH its ok but not the best
Win