Harry Potter discussion
Personal Preferences
>
Twilight??? What do YOU think?
Of course Harry Potter rules over Twilight, I don't really like the plot of it and the characters made me really mad.
Harry Potter >>>>>>>>>>>>> TwilightI don't love the Twilight books, but I don't hate them. There are some things that I really like and quite a few that I don't. The main things that bug me are the fact that it is almost nothing but romance. Honestly, that much romance is really boring to me. Edward also bugs me. A lot.
I admit that I have not yet read Twilight, but yet I say that it is horrible because it is in competition with HP. The idea of Twilight though, just doesn't really sound all that great like HP. I mean, maybe if I read it I would hate it, but a 17 year old girl would love it! It all depends on what taste you have.
Thanks for posting that Mirely! That's exactly how I feel. Harry Potter and Twilight cannot be compared because they are nothing alike. I have a preference for which series I thought was more creative, written the best, and had better character development, but you can't compare them with each other outside of that because they aren't even remotely the same.I prefer the Harry Potter books because I think they were more interesting and the writing was way better, but I also read Twilight and enjoyed them (but much like Rachel, there are some things in the books that bug me).
People could probably compare Harry Potter to the House of Night series, but I haven't read that series yet.
Yeah but House of Night is about people with "special powers" going to a special school for it. That's why I was saying you could possibly compare those two because they're more similar than Twilight is to Harry Potter. But I don't think any books should be compared to others. All books are different and they should be read as they are, not as something that's like another book.
... Actually, no one in this thread was comparing them. People were just saying which one they liked better.
I think that any two books can be compared. Why do two books have to be very similar to be compared?
Well, if you are looking at it by the definition of the word "compare" you need to compare two items (or more) that have similarities... therefore you would have to compare two books that are similar.I think having a discussion of which book was more interesting to a person is a bit different than comparing, at least in the way I'm talking about comparing (in the Harry Potter vs. Twilight debate).
Kristin, that is exactly how I feel.
Kristin wrote: "I don't like Twilight at all because: it's poorly written, in BD it takes at least 100 pages before the plot really begins, the characters don't have much personality, vampires don't sparkle...
C..."
Totally.
C..."
Totally.
Breaking Dawn is the worst book in that series. Stephenie flopped with that one.
haha! No, you aren't stupid! In the books, when sunlight hits the vampires' skin they sparkle. :-) I have no problem with it but it bothers many!
Teresa~*Bring it on 2010*~ wrote: "Breaking Dawn is the worst book in that series. Stephenie flopped with that one."i liked TWILIGHT better, but i liked the "idea" of breaking dawn. i like that they got married and were able to be together for all eternity or whatever... but i dont think it took like 47856984756984756938745 pages to say that, lol. :D
hahaha!!I just thought it was way to weird (and not in a good way) and the storyline was a little too overdone. Eclipse was my favorite book...cuz I enjoyed the Jacob/Edward banter (Jacob is pretty much the best character in that series)
well, and the more i think about it, bd wasnt much of a surprise. i mean, the way she begins the series even in TWILIGHT, you know bella and edward are going to be together, so even that stuff with jacob and whether or not they're going to change bella, doesnt give much of a surprise... does that make sense? i mean, i liked bd and i appreciated the HEA elements (too many stories nowadays are morbidly realistic) but it never really was SURPRISING. i mean, going into DEATHLY HALLOWS, i had *no* idea what was going to happen: i was relatively sure jk wouldnt kill harry, but then again she killed off dumbledore, so it's like, who ELSE is gonna die!?!?!?
I totally get what you're saying. Which is why I didn't like it. It just felt like that story had been written before and I was reading it for the 4th of 5th time.
I read the Twilight series in 2006, ((one year after it came out)) and i really liked it. I didnt become ALL obsessed and all, but i though it was a very good book. I still enjoy it, but i think it HAS been blown a little out of proportion.....
I was looking at Walmart with my little sister in the Barbie aisle, and I saw Edward. So I picked him up and said real loud: "MUST DESTROY!" Then I noticed that he had glitter all over his face. Nice.
♥ Bluebunny12♥ wrote: "I read the Twilight series in 2006, ((one year after it came out)) and i really liked it. I didnt become ALL obsessed and all, but i though it was a very good book. I still enjoy it, but i think it..."BUMP :D
I admit I mainly want to read Twilight to see how it compares to Harry Potter. The idea of Twilight though, doesn't really appeal to me.
And like people say, it just depends on your personality. But i liked it alot....
And you are how old? Another thing, age. I have a friend who's little sister is reading HP and is in 2nd grade. A love story is not going to appeal to a 2nd grader, so they will automatically think that HP is better.
Looks like you are 12... Going to turn 13 in 2 days. Happy early B-day!!!
I think a love story can appeal to anyone of any age (there are a lot of books where people fall in love in books for children) However Twilight is considered a young adult book, and I think it would appeal to people that age. Though, you shouldn't automatically assume Harry Potter is better than any book just because Harry Potter can be read by a 2nd grader. While I do agree Harry Potter is better than Twilight, deciding that Harry Potter is better than a series or a book you haven't read based on the target audience is a little silly. You could miss out on a lot of great books making those kind of judgements
i actually find it hard to believe that a 2nd grader could read--and APPRECIATE--harry potter. now lemme explain:2nd graders are typically 7-8 years old. for a 7-8 year old to read a 300+ chapter book is extremely advanced. in 2nd grade, reading curriculum is mostly structured around early chapter books. so HARRY POTTER seems slightly mature for that age level. i think the perfect ages for HP are around 4th grade, because at 9-10 kids are (widespread) starting to approach a reading level that allows them to follow multiple plot-lines, recurring themes, keep trach of multiple characters, and retain knowledge (like which professor corresponds to which subject, the names of the spells and their purpose, etc). im not saying i dont believe 2nd graders can read HP, but given the age level, i would raise my eyebrow at it. my little cousins didnt start reading HP until around age 9, and thats about how old my brothers and i were (of course, we had to wait for all the books to get published, haha)
I read the hp books in 2nd grade also...
Haha, I feel old! I was in 8th grade when the first HP book came out!
Amber wrote: "Amelia*annabeth&percy*sittin in a tree* wrote: "i actually find it hard to believe that a 2nd grader could read--and APPRECIATE--harry potter. now lemme explain:2nd graders are typically 7-8 ye..."
yeah, that's why i used words like "typically" and stuff. i did observations in a 2nd grade class and i would maybe give SORCERERS STONE to 5/30 of them... its not typical. its definitely awesome, though :]
oh ow geez...i was like 13, i think...
Haha Amelia we're the old ladies of this thread! I was in college (the summer before my second year) when the third Harry Potter movie came out! But in 8th grade when the book was released in the US. But I was really snobby with Harry Potter. I refused to read it because it was so popular and I didn't want to to be one of those people who was reading it (haha yeah, being young you're stupid sometimes). But when the first movie came out (I was in 11th grade then) I saw Daniel Radcliffe and I was like "awwwww he's the cutest little boy I've ever seen" and suddenly, I was into Harry Potter.
haha! So, thanks Dan Radcliffe!
I hate twilight. hate hate hate hate hate hate hate. And yes i have read all of the books and seen the first nine minutes of the first movie before i walked out of the theatre because of how bad it was. I hate that he sparkles. No vampire would willing or unwillingly sparkle and lets face it hes a veggitarian (dont know how to spell) hes anit-violance (unless he has to to save bellas freaken neck over and over) and he sparkles. Edward is not a vampire hes a freaken Fairy who needs to go burn in hell. Im sorry, but I hate her books because she took things from other authors and made it soo out there that I could tell from which books they came from. Dont get me wrong I love vampires. I freaken love Jean-Claude who is a vampire and a hot one. Anywho. She took some things from my favorite authors and used them making them change just enought to not get in trouble for it. And with me being a writer yes we use things from other authors but thats to get ideas not to steal them and change them to where they are almost the exact same problem/solution/whatever.
Who says all vampires in all books have to be exactly the same? Authors can make their vampires any way they like. I mean, you don't have to like Twilight by any means, but authors have creative authority to make their characters however they want to and Stephenie Meyer decided she wanted her vampires to be more humanistic and instead of bursting into flames in the sun, she wanted them to sparkle. The whole point of the sparkling was to make them even more beautiful.Anyway, I'm not saying you have to like Twilight, but I think books would be very boring if characters that were similar were exactly alike.
My friend wants to know what you have against vegetarians and non-violence? I'm wondering that myself
1. My daughter read HP in 2nd grade and loved them, but from the 5th book on, it was above her level and I had to keep stopping and doing reading comprehension with her to see if she was understanding. She understood them on a 7-year-old level, but when she's older she'll appreciate a lot more of the intricate plot details that she missed. I was pregnant with her when I first ready HP :).2. Yes genres will appeal to people outside their target audience, but Twilight can't appeal to children who haven't developed attraction for the other sex yet. Until you get that, you won't get Twilight.
3. Not a Twilight fan either, but I'm defending SM on this one. She didn't steal anything. She had a dream and wrote about it. Anytime you take a general topic like vampires there are going to be similarities, but if you ever listen to SM, she's actually proud of the fact that she doesn't read other young adult or vampire stories, which I think is wrong for an author. You should read books in the genre you write and if she did she would be a better writer. I don't like Twilight because I hate romance novels and it gets a little too close to the genre, the dialogue is awful, the characters out of date (they read like '80s Mormon kids), Bella is bland and Edward controlling, the writing is horrible and repetitive, and she drags out plot lines and irrelevant details, some of which are way too contrived, but she is a good story teller and very imaginative and the story is very addictive, especially for teenage girls. It's exactly what they obsess about. Even when you hate it and think it's ridiculous and laugh at it, you still keep reading.
1. I started reading HP in first grade and only started seeing the movies a couple of years after, because I was still too young to see a creepy person on the back of someone else's head! But after that I just kept reading. I was kept back for a little bit from the fifth book because I was in fourth or fifth grade I think and I wouldn't have understood the snogging concept..2. Harry Potter is INFINITELY better than Twilight, but I'm not a complete Twilight hater. I still like SM's idea and I think it was creative. I hadn't read vampire books before then or after so I don't know a lot about the genre. I think I stopped liking it a lot when, in my opinion, I realized that the writing wasn't that good and when everyone became obsessed and talked about it nonstop! Twilight annoys me now though, because younger kids are reading it, and its not right, because I wonder how much of it they actually understand. I know that I didn't understand that stuff when I was their age, but of course I don't know them and they could definitely understand it!
*steps down from soapbox* :P
Amber wrote: "Amelia*annabeth&percy*sittin in a tree* wrote: "i actually find it hard to believe that a 2nd grader could read--and APPRECIATE--harry potter. now lemme explain:
2nd graders are typically 7-8 ye..."
I watched the first movie in first grade but really discovered the books in 6th grade.
2nd graders are typically 7-8 ye..."
I watched the first movie in first grade but really discovered the books in 6th grade.
Amelia*annabeth&percy*sittin in a tree* wrote: "i actually find it hard to believe that a 2nd grader could read--and APPRECIATE--harry potter. now lemme explain:
2nd graders are typically 7-8 years old. for a 7-8 year old to read a 300+ chapt..."
This 2nd grader is really advanced and could have skipped a grade.
2nd graders are typically 7-8 years old. for a 7-8 year old to read a 300+ chapt..."
This 2nd grader is really advanced and could have skipped a grade.
....Wow.... You can tell Ella is 9
My birthday was on X-mas. I'm not 9, 10. :(
Then I'll rephraseYou can tell Ella is 10
Oh snap. A very mature 10-year-old, but a 10-year-old nonetheless.
Huh? OH never mind. And is it a good thing that you know I'm 10???
eehhh my two cents.