Top Ten Reasons Harry Potter Is Better Than Twilightdatmidna I love Harry Potter and Twilight but there are a lot of reasons Harry Potter is better. There are some spoilers if you never watched / read Twilight or Harry Potter!
The Top Ten
All of the below are very true, but this one the most. Twilight just doesn't seem all that good. Harry Potter has a much fuller plot structure, the way everything adds up to several climatic moments. But Twilight, on the other hand, is basically just a bleak love story about sparkling vampires and idiot werewolves. nothing to see there. And Harry Potter much better written; I don't even need to get into the nonexistent well-writtenness of Twilight.
With Harry Potter, you never doubt that Hogwarts in real, or think that Hermione may not be an actual person, you just know they exist. And you feel exactly what the characters are feeling and understand why they make a choice when they do. With Twilight you just sit there and wonder why Edward sparkles.
When I read Harry Potter it felt like slipping into another reality- and yet it was ours. That's amazing. It was so real to me! It still is. I have tried to read Twilight. I really tried but it doesn't draw me in, it doesn't feel real. And I'm still waiting for my letter- not my vampire.
It is written in a very friendly way. - CyclneV 10 Comments
Harry potter, neville and so many other characters taught me to be brave, and never give up. Hermione grainger taught me to stand up for myself, not to let people bring me down, you are amazing, just because one side lets you down, you have another side to bring you up. Hermione dealt with racism, and bullying.. And what did bella teach me? Your nothing without a man, if the one you love leaves you attempt lose all the friends and family you do have, don't try and live your own life. Which morals sound better to you? - datmidna
Harry Potter: Stand up for what you believe in, if you fall down, get right back up. Life won't always be happy, but you can make it happy.
Twilight: If you don't have a boyfriend, you should go kill yourself.
Hmm, which morals are a better idea?
Harry potter's moral are better. Bravery, friendship, faith and love of family while Twilight is just like those stupid teenagers who long for a lover. Stupid young love. Hey I don't hate love story but the twilight's moral is not amazing even my parents hate it. They think this is too stupid.
Harry Potter taught me that courage is important and I can do anything I set my mind to, among other things. Twilight TRIED to teach me that I needed a guy to be something of worth. What is this, the 1800's? So, whose morals are better?V 11 Comments
Harry potter had daniel radcliffe, rupert grint tom felton emma watson and many others who gained success through the harry potter movies, not to mention alan rickman, ralph fiennes, helena carter, maggie smith and many other famous names. No offense, but I think they went for looks over acting skills with most of the actors and I think robert patterson was a better cedric than edward! - datmidna
Robert Pattinson was way better as Cedric than Edward. And he actually said he preferred Harry Potter! Sure, he died, but so did all the best characters! Except Hermione, but yeah.
Harry potter's Hermione is played by Emma Watson and she was expressive while Twilight's Bella swan is played by Kristen Stewart which is emotionless (fun fact was made fun of in a episode of we bare bears
Robert pattinson! He was a way better Cedric than Edward!V 8 Comments
Now, twilights plot is a true love story, and harry potter is about true love, friendship, fantasy, courage, power, corruption, and so many other things. A general question- do you prefer glittering fairy princess variety vampires or wizards and withches, a teen who has to fight evil? - datmidna
Harry Potter is better than twilight for all these reasons. - LindenheartInsanity
Yeah, the plot is better, but Twilight isn't bad, either. Did you know it's possible to like both Twilight and Harry Potter? Because some people think they have to side..
Wanna know a good vampire story? Try Dracula. - yungstirjoey666V 3 Comments
I absolutely love universal studios islands of adventure, mostly because of the wizarding world of harry potter. There are also various other attractions world wide. I'm not sure but I don't think there is a twilight attraction. - datmidna
Wizards and witches are better than vampires! I find them annoying and people love them because of their immortality, sexual needs and appearance.
, If they did have vampires they probably wouldn't SPARKLE IN THE SUN! In other words they couldn't be as stupid as twilight. - AnnaOfArendelle332
I'm glad there isn't a vampire world because if there was, it would be too sparklyV 4 Comments
Even though there was magic, it had rules, and drew on mythology for its monsters, and Latin for its spells. Twilight ignored the rich, frankly terrifying multicultural history of blood-sucking monsters, and made one of the most feared creatures of all time into a sparkling teenager.
Ok, so I don't see how a school of wizards and witches are realistic, but you can associate them as real people. Twilight have empty gaps to fill in for bella, edward, and that's the reason it's a saga- identify those people with yourself. You can also see dobby and draco and dean are different, but many characters are nameless, faceless in twilight. - datmidna
Okay I'm not implying that harry potter is a non fiction book series but Bella just randomly falls in love with some guy and the affection between them doesn't even show. Ron and herimone don't fall on love in the first book they actually slowly progress throughout the books and make a realistic relationship.
Twighlight doesn't feel right while harry potter has strong and likableV 5 Comments
Always a good quality to have in a book. - AnnaOfArendelle332
Harry is brave and has gone through so much, even embracing possiblity of death. Bella is a normal girl in love with a vampire who somehow gets a war started! And when Edward leaves she mopes around months, didn't think of getting contacts! - datmidna
Main character is fantastick
The first three harry potters weren't exactly the best movies but the first two twilight movies were boring, and the love expressed in the books didn't show. Plus, harry potter had better music, special effects and let's be honest, twilight's acting wasn't very good. - datmidna
I thought Prisoner of Azkaban was one of the best movies in the franchise - HarryPotter12
The Harry Potter movies are amazing just as the books, but the Twilight movies are a lame copy of the books and they are pretty good actually...
The visual effect are way better in Harry Potter. The actor have also acted way better in Harry Potter
The actors in Harry potter acted way better than the actors in twilightV 3 Comments
Edward sparkles? SPARKLES? I respect if you like Twilight, but please sparkling vampires is the way you KNOW that your book has hit rock-bottom. Also on the other note: Did feminism never happen in the Twilight Universe or something? Bella can't do anything on her own without her sparkling vampire! Steph, we need to talk about 1920, you know, when women could vote and stuff. But I guess it's not important enough as long as we have Cedric... sorry *Edward* our sparkling hero to teach young, impressionable girls that as long as we act stupid. We'll be fine, or just attempt to commit suicide when he breaks up with you for your safety. Thank you Stephenie Meyer, for setting girls back 50 years...
Laugh out loud! I hate you Kristen Stuart! But I don't want you to die, so you can keep on pulling that same expression over and over and over and over and over and over. But seriously, no one should say "go kill yourself" and stuff, because we are all human beings and you would hate if it happened to you
I'm sorry, but seriously? Was Stephenie Meyer actually being serious when she made a book about about a sparkly Vampire and who in their right mind would cast Kristen Stewart as an already abysmal character?
Oh My God.. Steph seriously messed it up with sparkling vamps.. LOL I should say she messed it up by even attempting to write it. - HpforevahV 13 Comments
In most stories, whether they are romantic ones or not, the hero (main male character) gets together with the heroine (main female character). In HP, Hermione (the series' heroine) gets together with Ron, whereas Harry (the hero & protagonist of the series) gets together with Ron's sister (who is such a minor character, she cannot even be considered a secondary heroine, whereas Ron is the secondary hero, after Harry).
People argue that Twilight is more realistic (um.. Vampires don't exist) but actually, in real life, you don't fall in love straight away and you don't always get the person you want but you move on and find love elsewhere (Harry/Cho/Ginny, Hermione/Krum/Ron Snape/Lily- he didn't move on but oh well)
So true! In the first book of Twilight Bella immediately falls in love with that sparkling vampire (Edward). Where as, so doesn't happen in HARRY POTTER! Yes, there are more books in HP than in Twilight. But do what? It takes time to fall in love and twilight had four books, didn't it? So it would have been better if Stephanie Meyer had left the first book for letting Edward and Bellla knowing each other and then they 'SLOWLY' fall in love in the second book. Whereas in Harry Potter, that's what happened (Ron and Hermione slowly fell in love, the same with Harry and Ginny)
The romance is more relatable and real in Harry Potter. Showing how his feelings change from Cho to Ginny, and that you won't always get the girl/boy.
In Twilight, Bella automatically falls in love with Edward, this can be seen as real but that fact that she gets hurt when he is away/ignores her and knows that he hasn't fallen in love with anyone before her is just plain annoying. So what makes her different from any girl before her?
As a series, harry potter sold 4 times as many books as twilight, and harry potter is 36.36% higher selling if all the series had the same amount of books. The harry potter movie series made 7.7 billion dollars. The twilight series made 3.3 billion dollars. You do the maths. - datmidna
Yeah, the individual Twilight movies were more successful, but that's only because Robert Pattnison's hot. He has more fangirls than Daniel Radcliffe so more teenage girls went to see his movies. Fact.
It just makes so much money
Nobody likes Hermione because she's pretty, because she's just average until about the Prisioner of Azkaban. Nor do they hate Neville because he looks a bit goofy when he's younger. Robert Pattinson is hot. Get over it, or watch the Goblet of Fire.
I think it really true
I snorted on my cereal. But good point...
Ya of course... I not only watch harry potter movies again and again becuase they are my favourite and the best... but because of this pretty face
Sirius BLACK. Jacob BLACK. Sirius turns into a big DOG. Jacob turns into a wolf, which is part of the DOG family. Sirius has a flying MOTORCYCLE. Jacob has a MOTORCYCLE. Sirius was created first. Do the math.
Even though they appear in different book series, I guess they are from the same family... because I guess that's what the author would have wanted.
Exactly. Twilight came out in 2005 and harry potter in 1997-98. Moreover, Sirius Black was mentioned in the very first book. Hagrid borrowed the motorcycle from him. He tells Dumbledore so. So there
Stephanie copied the names.
Bella, Charlie, Lily... And so many other's.
Besides. siriusly ( you get it? )? Harry potter was written way before Twilight.
In fact, harry potter movies were released before twilight came out
Characters in Harry Potter have their own flaws and characteristics, but Twilight characters have no depth and practically no personality. Edward is flawless, faceless, and sparkles like a pixie. He's described as having a perfect crooked smile, however that works, and is supposed to be really hot. Belle Swan's name literally means "beautiful swan". Her only described flaw is being clumsy, and that something about that feels kinda forced. Both Sparkleprincess and Clumsygrace are very bland, and don't have any depth or character. Harry Potter characters are a lot more colorful, and have their own flaws and average characteristics.
Harry has flaws like a normal person. As do all the other characters. Edward has literally no flaws.
Yeah. That's a good point. I'm writing a book, too, and it's actually all about my main character's flaws x3
Isn't there a place for Umbridge in here, she deserves this!V 1 Comment
True* Seriously, I misspelled like, three things already!
Expelliarmus for a start.
Originally vampires looked bloated and had purplish skin due to drinking blood, as opposed to being very attractive to mouth-breathers, also vampires originally burned in the sun, as opposed to SPARKLING!
Yeah, I couldn't finish the first chapter of the first book of twilight, meanwhile I've read every book in the Harry Potter series about ten times. Harry Potter made me want to be a witch more than ever. Twilight ruined vampire Halloween costumes for me. I wholeheartedly agree with The Oatmeal about twilight. Also Edward is the worlds biggest Gary-Stu ever, but Harry has flaws like a normal person.
- Linna Hart
Bram Stoker's Dracula is a real vampire story - yungstirjoey666
I meant Linna Hart, not Linda. Sorry!V 4 Comments
Every reason I see for Twilight being better has bad spelling, bad grammar and is as shallow as a kiddie pool.
X3* What is wrong with me today?
Related ListsTop Ten Harry Potter and Twilight Books Reasons Lord of the Rings is Better Than Harry Potter Top Ten Reasons Why Harry Potter Is the Best Series of Books Ever Reasons Why Harry Potter Is Better Than the Hunger Games Top Ten Reasons That Warriors Is Better Than Harry Potter
4 years, 159 days old
3. The Romance In The HP Series Is More Original Than In Twilight