To many, the only importance of Nov. 21 is that it’s the last Friday before Thanksgiving break, giving them two weekdays to slack off before going home to feast.
For the growing “Twilight” fan community, Nov. 21 marks the culmination of years of anticipation for the long-awaited film adaptation of the beloved first novel.
For Harry Potter fans, it is the day they had expected to view the sixth film installment of the franchise before Warner Bros. pushed its release date back to July 17, 2009.
The battle of release dates is just one part of the unnamed competition that has been going on between the two franchises. Sure, 2008 celebrated the 10th anniversary of “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone,” while “Twilight” is a mere three years old, and the total gross sales of JK Rowling’s novels are significantly higher than those of all of Stephenie Meyer’s books. But it’s hard not to compare the two series to one another; the similarities between them are endless.
First, both novels have managed to capture the imagination of the young adult demographic in ways few other novels have been able to.
Both aim to appeal to the teen generations of their time, though have ended up with audiences that crossed age and gender barriers. Both films share actor Robert Pattinson, who played Cedric Diggory in “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire” and Edward Cullen in “Twilight.” Both deal with supernatural ideals: wizards and vampires, respectively.
Their authors and fan bases, however, claim the novels couldn’t be more different.
“Twilight” is directed at an older, female audience, with an emphasis on romance and an afterthought of action. “Harry Potter” is enveloped in plot twists and action, with the romance as a side note only expanded by the imagination of worldwide fans. Meyer wrote a fluffy romance novel that reads more like a diary than an actual novel, whereas Rowling deftly wove plot-twists and story arcs from the first line of “Sorcerer’s Stone.”
Critics argue that “Twilight” does not have the staying power that “Harry Potter” did, since the four installments of the “Twilight” series spanned three years and the seven-book long epic of “Harry Potter” carried over a whole decade. Regardless of their beliefs on the quality of the “Twilight” novels, the success or failure of the “Twilight” adaptation could make or break the series.
Many felt the tension with the original release dates for “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,” which was Nov. 21, and “Twilight,” which was Dec. 12. The two movies duking it out at the box office would be a true clash of the titans, and ticket sales would tell the world where the current popularity truly lies.
When Warner Bros. pushed the “Harry Potter” release date back to July of next year, Summit Entertainment’s “Twilight” and the new Disney animated cartoon “Bolt” quickly jumped to fill the gaping hole left by the box office powerhouse. While the reason believed to be behind the release date’s change was because of the huge success Warner Bros. had earlier in the year with “The Dark Knight,” it seemed to be that the wizards and vampires were having a staring contest, and it was the wizards who blinked.
Trailers are finally starting to filter onto Harry Potter fansites, and the first theatrical trailer of “Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince” will be released before Friday’s release of “Twilight.”
“Twilight” is headed toward being the success that Summit needs based on presale tickets alone and, with only a furry TV-star dog as its competition, will be sure to be this year’s big Christmas movie.
But Warner Bros. is not letting its spiky-haired, lightning-bolt scarred wizard be forgotten, as its reminding Harry Potter fans Friday that while their infatuation with “Twilight” might be all-encompassing at the moment, “Harry Potter” has been with them for an entire generation.
– Terri Schwartz can be reached at [email protected].
