With the third installment of The Twilight Saga open nationwide, excited fans are grabbing at any sneak peaks or trailers they can to see how close the film is to the 2007 bestseller by Stephenie Meyer. Almost half the films hitting theaters since the beginning of the moving picture have been based off of literature, fairytales, or just local myths passed down through the generations (see: 1996′s Romeo + Juliet, 2010′s Beastly, and 2010′s Clash of the Titans, respectably). But what makes an adaptation successful? Is staying close to the novel really the only defining factor?

The great franchise debate in recent years has been Harry Potter vs. The Twilight Saga and usually, the fight goes something like this:

“Twilight sucks. Vampires don’t sparkle and they aren’t ‘vegetarians.’ It’s SO lame!”

“No, Harry Potter sucks! It’s so predictable and every single movie is exactly the same.”

However, there are definite pros and cons to both movies which go beyond plot and focus on the decisions made by the director to shape and mold the original material into the finished product of the film.

Casting:
√ Harry Potter: In J.K. Rowlings’ first novel, which hit bookshelves in the United States in 1998, Harry is described as having round, black glasses; a unique scar on his forehead; and brown hair, but it’s his personality which radiated through Daniel Radcliff as he took to the silver screen as Potter in 2001. Radcliff was the perfect choice for the young wizard, embodying the ever curious, brave, loyal, and good natured Potter and breathing life into the pages of Rowlings’ novel. Moreover, Radcliff’s co-stars are far from failures in their representations of Hermione Granger, played by talented Emma Watson, and Ron Wealsey, played by the adorable Rupert Grint. As an ensemble, the Harry Potter cast has blown the doors off the hinges and really proven how with the right casting, an adaptation can nearly outshine the original.

X The Twilight Saga: Somehow, the casting directors of the saga missed the memo about the characters of Bella Swan and Edward Cullen when they cast Kristen Stewart and Rob Pattinson in the now iconic roles. Bella is described as having dark hair, pale skin, and brown eyes, which was the easy part; however, Bella is also self-conscious, meek, a good cook, extremely accident prone (which seems to be an afterthought in both films), and smiles every once in a while. Stewart has claimed before that she feels uncomfortable on the red carpet, which leads to her sour face, but in the films, Twilight and New Moon, she cracks maybe two smiles and both seem pained. Pattinson, who seems happy-go-lucky, and absolutely adorable in interviews and on the red carpet, has taken the tortured soul thing too far in his portrayal of the mesmerizing Edward Cullen. Instead of the strong, brave, and happy Edward we all read in 2005′s Twilight, we were left with an angry, bruiting, self-hating vampire in the film, which led to the disappointment of many avid fans (myself included) after watching 2008′s Twilight.

Location, Location, Location:

√ Harry Potter: Okay, so this is kind of a giveaway considering all of the novels were created in Rowlings’ mind, but the filmmakers get a check for attention to detail and a creative look at the magical world of the series.

√ The Twilight Saga: Filmed in the Pacific Northwest, averaging 30-100 inches of rain annually, the location was idyllic. Meyer’s novel takes places in the wettest town in the United States, and the filmmakers didn’t disappoint when choosing their location, even if they had to deal with the occasional rainfall during filming. The Swan house, Cullen house, and even Forks High School, were exactly what the audience was looking for when bringing the beloved novels to life.

Plot Changes and More:

√ Harry Potter: Of all the recent film adaptations, it seems Harry Potter stays as close as possible to the novels. There has to be a bit of leeway with the change from novel to film because the novels have grown longer and longer, many pushing one-thousand pages, and with material that long, the directors can only include so much. In 2009′s Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, the director took a noticeable detour from the novel when Hermione visits Ron at the Hogwarts hospital after he is injured and Ron calls out for Hermione. While the change may have upset some of the readers, for the viewers, it set up the building relationship between Hermione and Ron and gave an ounce of romance to a usually non-romantic series.

√ The Twilight Saga: In Twilight, director Catherine Hardwick took many liberties and strayed from the simple romance of the novel, creating a trying-too-hard version of the story of Bella and Edward. However, there are a few scenes where the changes helped create some interesting characters, especially when Bella first visits the Cullen’s house and meets the family. The actors portray an excitement and genuine interest in Edward’s new leading lady that is palpable through the screen. In fact, the three minute exchange between Bella and the Cullens stole the screen and really set up for some heart-warming moments in New Moon and hopefully the next three movies.

Luckily, with the influx of novels being adapted into films, fans are allowed the privilege of seeing the characters they love so much act out in front of them the plot they are so familiar with. Filmmakers are given the rare chance to put their own unique twist on films and hopefully create cinematic gold with it. Unfortunately, sometimes the adaptation falls flat and misses the mark by poor casting choices, unbelievable filming locations, and vast changes in plot that leave the story fractured and confusing.