18 replies to this topic

[Snow Drop 6:15]

I have the BBC News on at the moment and it seems that they do not do their research!!

In a promo regarding the forthcoming Twilight film released in a few weeks, the voice over reporter said...

"And now news of the American answer to Harry Potter!"

Hello, Harry Potter is nothing like Twilight....

And now they have once again called it the "equivalent of Harry Potter"..

As all Twilight fans will know, one is about a child wizard and the other about a vampire...

D'uh!!!

And this is why I hate some media coverage of films...get your blooming facts right...

Rant over and clock watching fro a few weeks!!!

[Bear Hug]

Popularity wise then yeah they are similar. Story line and audience wise, not so much. Twilight I think will beat ANYTHING Harry Potter- its not USA version of Harry Potter, it is better.

[theoden_of_rohan]

It's an insult to Harry Potter to be put in the same category as Twilight, which are terribly written. Sure, they're fun...but Potter is still the better story (by far)  

[Bear Hug]

theoden_of_rohan, on Dec 3 2008, 07:04 PM, said:

It's an insult to Harry Potter to be put in the same category as Twilight, which are terribly written. Sure, they're fun...but Potter is still the better story (by far)  

AH! BLASPHEMY! *Sporks to death*

Sparkling vampires win any day over a 13 yr old spotty magician.

[onmyside]

Bear Hug, on Dec 3 2008, 07:08 PM, said:

theoden_of_rohan, on Dec 3 2008, 07:04 PM, said:

It's an insult to Harry Potter to be put in the same category as Twilight, which are terribly written. Sure, they're fun...but Potter is still the better story (by far)  

AH! BLASPHEMY! *Sporks to death*

Sparkling vampires win any day over a 13 yr old spotty magician.

haha!  i agree with bear hug!

[Snow Drop 6:15]

Ooooo...Potter vs Twilight fight...where is Harry Hill when you need it!!!!

The way the BBC put it across was that it was an American version of Harry Potter..which obviously is wrong.

[kayleighmarie]

Ahh I think the whole Vs. thing is daft =\ I kno people who love both.. They both have their ups and downs soo I think the Vs. things utterly stupid. Why cant people just love both... Or appreciate both?? Why have to choose...

[TommyT]

Snow Drop 6:15, on Dec 3 2008, 06:27 PM, said:

I have the BBC News on at the moment and it seems that they do not do their research!!

In a promo regarding the forthcoming Twilight film released in a few weeks, the voice over reporter said...

"And now news of the American answer to Harry Potter!"

Hello, Harry Potter is nothing like Twilight....

And now they have once again called it the "equivalent of Harry Potter"..

As all Twilight fans will know, one is about a child wizard and the other about a vampire...

D'uh!!!

And this is why I hate some media coverage of films...get your blooming facts right...

They have got their facts right; they are both fantasy fiction aimed at teenagers with a fair degree of crossover into adults. They're both a set of books that can be read individually or as an ongoing series. They've both spawned cinematic adaptations. And hey, they're both written by mothers.
Strikes me as a perfectly valid comparison; I think you're taking a too literal/narrow view of the comparison.

[DavidB]

It's certainly a comparison that makes sense to me when taken in the right context.

[Snow Drop 6:15]

Having watched the news report, the impression that came across was that Twilight was an American version of Harry Potter. Having not read any of the Twilight novels I know little of the storyline and was only introduced to the book franchise/upcoming film through a cinematic preview of the film.

If the new report had been worded in a way that mentioned even one of things you listed Tommy T, then I would agree with you whole heartedly. However, it didn't. It was only a few fans who were interviewed that mentioned the books and absolutely nothing about Harry Potter.

So, being someone who is usually very open minded and dismissive of minor errors by reporters in print or on the goggle box, for me to say that the report was wrong means to me that the representation was inaccurate to a great degree.

However, everyone takes away different views of reports and the printed word. But, as DavidB posted, taken in the right context the remarks of Tommy T are spot on.

[LisaMarie]

Well... I still prefer Harry Potter to Twilight, by quite a way but I agree that it shouldn't be called 'the Americans answer to Harry Potter'

They are completely separate series by completely separate authors and with kind of separate fandoms.

Popularity wise, Harry Potter still far beats Twilight, so they aren't comparable there either.

[Snow Drop 6:15]

One good thing out of it...I have decided to give the novels a look.

[Lost Soul]

I think that it might actually benefit Twilight to be compared to HP. After all, HP has been phenomenally successful, and if Twilight gets a few fans off the back of that, that's gotta be a good thing, right?

Plus, I don't think there's any way that Twilight will get close to HP's success. I just don't believe it's possible.

[vintageSW77]

The comparisson that the BBC was making to both series fanbase which consists largely of middle class to upper class teenage girls.
Sure a lot of folk are into Potter but the hardcore fanbase from what ive seen at shows consist mostly of young girls who have probably never used the word "innit" or will be appearing on Jeremy Kyle anytime in the future.

Edited by vintageSW77, 04 December 2008 - 11:24 AM.

[Gandalfia]

I see the comparison very easily. It's talking about the obsession, the community it builds etc. Not the actual content.

The Potter books for me are far superior and I love them more, but I'm far more obsessed with Twilight in general  

[kel]

Tommy T was quite right, plus whenever its anything involving  the 'paranormal' all books/films are grouped together.  In effect its a young adult literature film in the paranormal genre! The fact they are very different wont be picked up be anyone who doesn't see the twi as being very different.

I read a lot of paranormal and I do mean a lot *LOL* and am also a fair bit older than a lot of people here   but personally I didn't enjoy Stephanie Meyer, whereas I did JK Rowling. However, that is a personal thing and no way detracts from the movie. I really dislike the HP films so will probably adpre Twighlight! We all have different tastes and I think this con will be fantastic for people who like the books and/or the film!  

Kirstie

[nightshadewolf]

I must agree that I hate the vs thing - I think that Twilight will translate very well into movies as they're very simple stories (not saying that they're dumbed down for the readers, rather that the plot is interesting but not quite so complex). It's set in the real world and therefore believable in a way - the relationships and family issues for example.
Harry Potter I must say as books I thoroughly enjoyed and am a major fan of, the films however... I must say I only liked two out of the five films so far. They're wonderful and complex books with an amazing world and creatures that Jo Rowling created, but they're so complex and long that a lot was taken out to make them into films.
So for me book wise I love Potter (although I read all the first three twilight books in 24 hours, lol)
Film wise (i'm going to need to see twilight to back this up, lol) I think Twilight will translate much better.

[Betty]

Snow Drop 6:15, on Dec 3 2008, 07:18 PM, said:

Ooooo...Potter vs Twilight fight...where is Harry Hill when you need it!!!!

I've not seen the interview yet, but apparently the GMTV interviewer compared Twilight to Dawson's Creek, which is even weirder than comparing it to Potter. Then again, the GMTV staff are all nuts.

[vintageSW77]

I dunno bout Dawsons Creek
The most obvious comparison would be ANGEL in Buff wouldnt it?