23 Legitimate Reasons Harry Potter is Better than Twilight (with a handful of superficial reasons to boot).

Whilst I am definitely not a fan of Twilight, for a plethora reasons, I have generally held my tongue in regards to completely ripping the books / movies to shreds. It's rude, and everyone likes what they like - who am I to tell them that their opinion is wrong? I've always been an advocate of that line of thinking.

Then I came across this Facebook fan page, entitled 100 Reasons Twilight is Better than Harry Potter, courtesy of my friend Colin (by the by, Colin, I blame 50% of this article on you). Intrigued from the snippets that were being posted on Colin's status, I took a gander at the page myself and was appalled. Not only were the "reasons" some of the most ludicrous and poorly written things I've ever read,but there aren't even a hundred reasons total. There are three blank reasons, about half a dozen reasons that are reiterated (some not even bothering to change the wording from a prior instance), and reasons included that have nothing to do with the books or movies of either title. Don't believe me? See for yourself.

I -with my friend Daniel's help- am determined to set the record straight, with no "Oh-ehm-gee, Twilight fans are soooo stupid lolololol," comments as in the aforementioned page. Unlike the page, which claims maturity and reason but has none, this list will actually have those things. And so, without further ado, I give you:

23 Legitimate Reasons Harry Potter is Better than Twilight
a collaboration between Anne Teensma and Daniel Koeker

1. Plotline: A big argument amongst Twilight fans is that Harry Potter has a "boring" plotline. I agree - if boring consists of many near-death experiences for multiple characters, a wide array of villains (both main and secondary), easily relatable characters, in-depth character development (including relationships), and a dangerous and mostly well-explained magical world hidden in plain sight within our own "normal" one.



2. The Harry Potter series reads more like an actual book series, as opposed to numerous segments of copy-pasted fanfiction. Harry Potter's goal is clear, but there is an actual plot and numerous subplots to guide the reader along the way. Twilight, on the other hand, has very little depth and requires very little thought or imagination. While both book series are created for the enjoyment of the reader, Twilight's books are designed more for the readers who already know what they want, and just want to see it spelled out for them.



3. The imagery in the Harry Potter series is beautiful and imaginative, without being overly "fluffy" - ie: filled with useless detail that does not further the plot or scene in any way, or usage of words without grasping their full meaning. For example, a quote from Twilight: Breaking Dawn - "His eyes tightened." Excuse me, what?



4. The difference in creativity between both series is easily distinguishable. Harry Potter's world is incredibly unique and vast, but yet written in such a way that it seems almost realistic. Countless readers can relate to longingly awaiting their acceptance letter to Hogwarts in the mail. In contrast, Twilight's level of creativity consists of 'unique' vampires that glitter like a Crest commercial in the sunlight instead of blowing up, and in an almost Harry Potter-esque magical way, somehow gets a live girl pregnant with a dead man as its (the baby's) father.



5. Both series have a very stereotypical protagonist; Harry Potter, born into unfortunate circumstance destined to save both our normal world and his magical one, and Bella Swan, a perfectly imperfect and 'normal' teenager thrust into a confusing world of sparkling vampires and shapeshifters. The difference is consistency and growth. While Harry Potter learns from his mistakes, goes through typical teenage drama, all whilst shouldering the burden of 'Chosen One' on his young shoulders, Bella is off having underage sex (considering Edward is thousands of years old, I'm sure this counts as statutory rape) with a dead man. Not only that, she begins the series as someone who belittles other women for being petty and shallow, yet when she herself transforms into a vampire she states: "So my brain will never work right, at least I'm pretty." (Breaking Dawn; Chapter 20, Page 406)



6. While opinions are always open for debate, and cannot be incorrect, Harry Potter appeals to a typically more advanced reader base. The series is very creatively written and has innumerable story arcs that fit together seamlessly. There is also a connection between the reader and the characters that grow as the stories progress for reasons other than 'well, I just read 30 straight pages describing how hot he is, it must be true.' Harry Potter is a mastery of fiction, whereas Twilight is simply numerous segments of redundant writing pasted to appeal directly to the readers' tastes, rather than exploring creative options.



7. Many Twilight fans proudly proclaim that the series is "more mature" because the it is often listed in the Young Adult/Teen section of bookstores, where as Harry Potter is often categorised in the Children's section. Perhaps it's just me, but I don't think that a book series that glorifies bestiality, necrophelia, and pedophelia makes for a "mature" series - just a rather disgusting one. Harry Potter, on the other hand, appeals to all audiences without being a horror show of "taboo" relationships.



8. Twilight's plots don't seem to have a particular direction for more than a few minutes at a time. From the first book it seemed to jump from day to day simply listing events as they happened. There was a hint of mystery as the story progressed, but it soon died out. There is no foreshadowing, mystery or depth to the stories, whereas Harry Potter's books create a fantastic web of different story segments, but they all come together to form one basic plot line that eventually reveals itself as the mysteries unravel.



9. Harry Potter book releases and movie debuts have a wider array of costume / cosplay options: a student from any of the four houses, a creature, or one of dozens of canon characters. Twilight offers the opportunity to dress like a typical teenager, or to don white face paint and wear a cloak. Well, at least Twilight outfiteers save money on materials.



10. In both books and movie adaptations, Harry Potter characters express one key element to successful story progression that Twilight characters lack - emotion. Standing around mumbling lines is not a great way to convey the story, but I suppose when there isn't much of a story to begin with, simply remaining in one location looking sexy will have to do. It seems to have worked for the fans.



11. Cedric Diggory is a more believable, well-rounded character than Edward Cullen, despite only appearing fleshed out in one of seven novels. Plus, we had Pattinson first.



12. Incorrect Latin aside, the Harry Potter series tries to stay as true as possible to the lore its based on while still making it fit into the universe that Rowling has created. Twilight has taken the lore of vampires and werewolves and turned it upside-down, inside-out, and run through the ringer before completely chucking it into the bin.



13. Harry Potter seems to inspire a more mature fan-base than the Twilight saga. When was the last time you heard that a Harry Potter cast member stated in an interview that they were afraid of getting AIDS from a fan?



14. Character relationships are actually fleshed out over years in the Harry Potter series. The characters go from children in the "eww, cooties!" mentality, to teens in the "I like her, what if she doesn't like me, should I ask her out, what if she says no" phase, and on to adulthood, where even past rivalries (whilst still underlying) are finally put aside for the sake of maturity. Twilight exhibits a flurry of bipolar relationships, where the main character waffles between one 'dark, brooding type' to another, both equally possessive and superficial. A common argument is "Well, Edward loves Bella so much, he would've let her go to Jacob!" A fallacy; Edward would've given her to Jacob, as if she were a possession, so that his wife could bear another man's (his rival's) children. Show of hands how many real men would remotely consider whoring their wives out to other men for breeding purposes! ... Yeah, I didn't think so.



15. While every book is bound to have an occasional error, considering editors are human, Twilight is written as if it had no editor to speak of. Grammatical errors abound - whether it's the gross overuse of the passive voice (nearly the entirety of the saga is written as such), the incomplete sentences, left-out / made-up words, or the missing punctuation, Twilight is an OCD editor's red-marker playground. Harry Potter, on the other hand, is written with very few grammatical errors. At least, not any blatant errors that I (as a OCD pseudo-editor) have noticed.



16. Continuity: Harry Potter has decent, if not great, continuity, even from book to book (which, timeline-wise, span whole years). On a smaller scale, descriptions do not vary from one sentence to the next. For example, if Harry grabs a treacle tart from the food cart on Hogwarts Express, Harry is eating a treacle tart when he returns to his compartment. Twilight seem to not pay attention to this, having a character eat pancakes in one sentence, then switch to cereal in another (or vice versa), despite it still being the same scene.



17. Factual Errors: Since most of Harry Potter is set in an alternate reality to "our world", there are very few factual errors since most 'facts' about the Wizarding World are fabricated by Rowling. Unfortunately, since Twilight is set in "our world", factual errors are more easily spotted. Perhaps Meyer could've done a tad more research before writing, so as to avoid errors such as Edward telling Bella that Carlisle found a coven of true vampires in the sewers in the 1600's, and the sewage system was built in the 1800's.



18. One of the many complaints of Twilight fans is that the Harry Potter series focuses on Harry Potter and Voldemort's stories, where as Twilight has "more drama and therefore is more real." Last I checked, having a book with a defined protagonist and antagonist was perfectly normal and acceptable in the literary world, and most people (barring fans of the Twilight sagas, apparently) enjoy it. Harry Potter clearly comes out on top in this instance, considering that you know who the story is about, who the focus ought to be on, rather than "real High School drama."



19. Harry Potter also has 'vegetarian' vampires, but they don't sparkle in the sun. They burn. Turn to ash. *Poof!* (see passage in HBP about Slughorn's Christmas Party). 'Vegetarian' vampires aren't unique to Twilight; I hate to break it to the fans, but they aren't. It's the sparkles that make them "unique". I have to ask, why hadn't anyone ... you know ... noticed before Bella came along, considering the Cullens go to school in the daytime?



20. Another complaint is that Harry Potter's cast has no film experience outside of the HP series, or that they have "never even heard of most of the cast". If it's the latter, I'm not entirely sure if these people have experienced film outside of the teen angst genre. If it's the former, then it's a fallacy; Harry Potter has some very notable actors (not just a bunch of post-teeny-bopper barely adults) in film history:
    
    
    
    • Alan Rickman :: Dogma, Sweeney Todd, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Galaxy Quest, Love Actually, Alice in Wonderland.
    
    
    • Maggie Smith :: Sister Act, Sister Act 2, Hook, The First Wives Club, Gosford Park, The Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood
    
    
    • Helena Bonham Carter :: Alice in Wonderland, Sweeney Todd, Corpse Bride, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Big Fish, Twelfth Night, Frankenstein
    
    
    • Gary Oldman :: Batman Begins, The Dark Night, The Fifth Element, Air Force One, Lost in Space, The Scarlet Letter
    
    
    • Jason Isaacs :: Avatar: The Last Airbender (Voice of Admiral Zhao. Okay, I put this one in because it's awesome), Peter Pan, Resident Evil, Armageddon, Black Hawk Down, The Patriot, DragonHeart
    
    
    • Jamie Campbell Bower :: Sweeney Todd, Twilight <- No way you can tell me that he's not in any "American" movies.
    
    
    • David Thewlis :: Kingdom of Heaven, DragonHeart, The Big Lewbowski
    
    
    • Timothy Spall :: Sweeney Todd, The Last Samurai, Hamlet, Vanilla Sky, Lemony Snicket's Series of Unfortunate Events, Alice in Wonderland.
    
    Not the entire cast or a comprehensive list of their movies/shows, by any means, but I think you get the picture. I see only a handful of names I recongise in the Twilight cast list, the most notable being Jamie Campbell Bower & Dakota Fanning. I don't think you can even begin to compare the career of those two + Bella / Edward / Jacob to that of the resume of the Harry Potter cast, even going off the truncated list (the one I just posted) alone.



21. Yes, characters in the Harry Potter series need to "use pixie twigs" to deliver their "spells". I find that more refined and less brutal than tearing a person apart with your teeth / claws.



22. Creativity all but explodes off the pages of the Harry Potter septology. Rowling created for us, tucked away in our own normal world, a fantastic setting, filled with amazing foods, stores, locations, sports, and traditions. For example, Rowling developed Quidditch, riding broomsticks, a system of government, new politics, Honeydukes, Weasley's Wizarding Wheezes, A History of Magic, Hogwarts, Beauxbatons, Durmstrang.... Twilight has "bomb proof" Volvos.



23. The Harry Potter septology (books) has received at least thirty distinguished literary awards. Twilight has received eight total; seven for the original book, and one for Breaking Dawn. Whilst the movie series may not have been the recipient of Oscar awards, that has no bearing on the merits of the series itself. All it means is that the movies did not deliver the expectations needed for an Oscar - which says nothing about the series themselves, and everything about how they were translated into film, signifying a dissatisfaction amongst viewers regarding the book to movie transition. To say that Twilight is a better series than Harry Potter on Oscars alone would be to acknowledge that Twilight is a lesser book series, which is really what's important here.

A Handful of Superficial Reasons to Boot

1. Alan Rickman. Need I really say more?


2. The Weasley Twins.



3. Daniel Radcliffe had the balls (literally, and figuratively) to involve himself in a play that left him nude for one scene. Many actors go from the stage to the silver screen, but very few do the reverse. It says a lot about Radcliffe as an actor to be able to do that, and to be confident enough to be nude for a portion.



4. Emma Watson. Much better looking, and a better female role model (assertive, confidant, attending Brown University - that's an Ivy League school, kiddies), along with the role she plays (a smart, friendly, sensitive, kind girl). If anyone brings up Emma's drinking, I'd like to remind them that the legal age to consume alcohol is eighteen in the UK, and she was perfectly within legal rights to do so. Besides, she's of legal age in the US now, so stop fussing.



5. J.K. Rowling. A single mother, inspired by a random thought she jotted down on a coffee house napkin, battling depression - who went forward with her idea and became a celebrated author world wide. Another fantastic role model for people (not just women) everywhere.



6. No tooth-incised cesarean sections.


7. People don't marry the children of other people their age.