Actor Robert Pattinson, who we first saw as Cedric Diggory in “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,” has given a new interview to MTV News for his upcoming film “Twilight,” during which he speaks of the common comparison to the Harry Potter books and films. In the interview, Mr. Pattinson, who plays the character of Edward Cullen in the film adaptation of the “Twilight” book, relates his view that the style of the two books are “completely different.” He then goes on to speak at some length about the comparison and what he feels makes the “Harry Potter” and “Twilight” series different. Quoteage:
“Twilight” is a first-person narrative. It’s very obsessive, and it’s a much more personal book, I think, than “Harry Potter” is, in a lot of different ways. There are only two characters pretty much in the trilogy. Well, I guess three, but essentially two. It’s just about a love story rather than a massive adventure and an entire world. It’s set as much as possible in the real world, so it’s different.
...
There are obviously a lot of comparisons [to “Potter”], but really the only one is that it is a fantasy series. The way Stephenie Meyer writes, so much more of it is based in the real world than the fantasy world. It’s not like there are goblins or something. The way a vampire gets made is you just get bitten by someone. I mean, it’s just like a disease. They’re not separate entities to the rest of the world. They are much more human. You’re just a human, you get bitten by another human who’s been turned into this thing, and you just have to live forever afterwards. And you have these powers, you have super-strength and really amazing agility, but the pros for being a vampire don’t really outweigh the cons at all. ... You can never reveal that you’re a vampire, so you’re just trapped in this kind of purgatory all the time.
Mr. Pattinson then goes on to talk of his role in more detail, saying his character “is [more substantial] than the character I played in “Harry Potter” [Cedric Diggory], mainly because the entire thing is based on Edward’s character and who he is. He is very tortured and conflicted, which is very different from what I played in “Harry Potter.” The interview wraps up with the actor describing his trouble keeping an American accent, his thoughts on being the dazzling character of Edward Cullen, and his feet.
Additionally, Robert Pattinson graced the cover of this week’s issue of Entertainment Weekly along with his “Twilight” co-star, Kristin Stewart (Bella Swan). Two additional photos featuring Mr. Pattinson from inside the issue, can be viewed in our Image Galleries.
I like Robert Pattinson, and my daughter is bouncing off the walls waiting for this Twilight movie, but I am not that excited about it. I have read all the books and I they just don’t appeal to me. I will read the fourth one just to finish out the series (if I can pry the book out of my daughter’s hands) but that will be that. Harry Potter on the other hand… I’m on my 9th read through the series and no plans to ever stop reading them or watching the movies (despite all the various things we all complain about what was left out/changed/etc.) :)
He put it so wonderfully! The comparisons have been driving me mad to the point where I started to like Twilight less because of the people who say Potter’s crap in comparison.
I feel kind of sorry for Rob. Every time I’ve seen him do an interview about Twilight, he has this very uncomfortable, oh-god-how-did-I-get-myself-into-this-mess look on his face. But maybe that’s just me. (shrug)
That Entertainment Weekly cover is… interesting. Oh, who am I kidding, it’s hilariously bad. I think even the Harlequin Romance Novel people would have been too ashamed to put that on one of their bookcovers. Poor Rob. As someone infamously said over at Oh No They Didn’t, he really does look like a hairy powdered donut.
He put it so wonderfully! The comparisons have been driving me mad to the point where I started to like Twilight less because of the people who say Potter’s crap in comparison.
I was wondering when leaky was going to mention the EW cover. I sent it to them Thursday night. I wonder if they had already gotten the mag and so they did not credit anyone. Haven’t read this series yet but I plan to. I was kind of annoyed by the slightly anti-Potter (IMO so don’t slam me Twilight fans, no disrespect intended) slant of the EW article, it was interesting though. I was actually surprised when the EW article mentioned how apparently the Twilight fandom somewhat had to warm up to the idea of Robert as Edward. Since I have not read these books yet I am in no position to judge whether he is completely right for the character or not, but I will say this, he is one smokin’ Vampire! Wooo!
i love twilight (of course, never as much as harry) but i love the comparison! i agree with amanda i just want to slap people who say the potter series arent even in the same league as twilight. they are very different series!
I’ve read the Twilight series, and trust me, Robert Pattinson is fine for the role. He’s very good-looking, and that’s all that Edward needs to be. Edward has no personality (except occasionally being a creepy-ass stalker, although the reader is obviously supposed to think it’s OMG SO ROMANTIC that he snuck into a girl’s room every night without her knowledge and watched her sleep). Being beautiful and sparkly is his defining character trait. All that’s really required of the actor who plays Edward is to be handsome. And Robert fills that bill adequately.
Look out everyone, I’m about to share my thoughts on yaoi.
I read the books after the last time Leaky posted about them (and the comments exploded between the Leaky-ites and the Twilighters who’d found the post and come over to defend their books). While I don’t think Twilight is quite as inherently awful as some have claimed, I do think it’s pretty bad. The writing is of poor quality, the purple prose is frequently eyeroll-worthy, most of the characters are flat and uninteresting, and the first book has no plot until about two-thirds through when BAM, it’s suddenly pastede on yay.
But all of that pales in comparison to the very bad message the books send to girls. (Be warned: I’m about to get preachy here.) Bella has no life outside of Edward. She almost can’t even function when she’s not with him. When he leaves her, she thinks her life is over, and Stephenie Meyer does nothing to contradict this. In fact, she pretty much allows the reader to believe that Bella’s life really isn’t worth living without Edward. Bella doesn’t really have any friends outside of the Cullens, with the exception of Jacob, and she’s ultimately willing to cut even him out of her life so she can be with Edward. She’s willing to give up everything, her family, her friends, college, her future, even her mortal life, all for Edward. Basically, the books reinforce the horribly antiquated idea that a girl’s life should revolve around her boyfriend, and that she shouldn’t be able to function without her shmoopykins by her side.
It disturbs me that so many girls are reading these books and holding up Edward/Bella as the ideal romance, it really does.
Okay, I’m done. Thanks for indulging me, everyone.
Wow, lotta Twilight haters?? Um if you dont like it, then whyd you click on the article?
And its FICTION Saria, not the Bible, theres no message were supposed to follow, just a love story to enjoy. Girls love it for the romance and excitment. Dont be so judgmental, its just a BOOK.
I like Robert Pattinson, and my daughter is bouncing off the walls waiting for this Twilight movie, but I am not that excited about it. I have read all the books and I they just don’t appeal to me. I will read the fourth one just to finish out the series (if I can pry the book out of my daughter’s hands) but that will be that. Harry Potter on the other hand… I’m on my 9th read through the series and no plans to ever stop reading them or watching the movies (despite all the various things we all complain about what was left out/changed/etc.) :)