The Perks Of Being A Wallflower: Book And Movie Comparison

Stephen Chbosky plays a good role as a writer as well as a director for The perks of being a Wallflower and its movie. Both, about a young teenage boy named Charlie and many struggles that he’s faced with as he enters his freshman year of highschool. At school, Charlie finds a friend in his English class, Bill. He also overcomes his shyness and approaches a classmate, Patrick. Along with Patrick’s sister, Sam, these two characters become Charlie’s friend group. During the school year, the protagonist Charlie has many typical teenage experiences all while dealing with a disturbing family secret that he has repressed for his entire life. He has a severe mental breakdown. Finally, Charlie hopes to get released from the hospital, forgive his aunt Helen for what she did, find new friends trying not to be a “wallflower”. This essay will compare the book titled The perks of being a Wallflower and its movie by looking at the main character Charlie, casting, editing and discussing scenes in the movie.

Charlie is the eponymous “wallflower” of the novel, who is so quiet and introverted as at first, he has no friends and does not try to connect with people. Charlie shows he is quiet and introverted in the novel when he writes daily entries to an anonymous friend about his difficult life: the loneliness of his first day of high school, the pain of memories from his past and the questions that confuse him:

I am writing to you because she said you listen and understand and didn’t try to sleep with that person at that party even though you could have. Please don’t try to figure out who she is because then you might figure out who I am, and I really don’t want you to do that (2).

In the movie, Charlie is similarly portrayed as being quiet but much more funnier and bolder. He flounders much less in the movie contrasted with the sort of character he is known in the novel. Specially, the character Charlie in the movie specifically has an ability to relief the mental state of the audience rather than stressing their head out with many behavioral complexity that Charlie has in the story, in the movie he is more open, easygoing, even though he’s still quite, it makes the atmosphere more relief and less stressful. As an author and a director, the development of the protagonist towards becoming in the movie does not create so much different but the character is far better described in the novel.

The use of two technological components, casting and editing, brings to the audience who watch the movie a different effectiveness. The first component in the film is casting. Specifically, in the novel, Charlie’s grandfather is described as a person who frequently makes racist and homophobic remarks, “We had this big brunch…. “This is a good champagne” (186)”. In contract, Charlie’s grandfather is never shown in the movie. Charlie’s grandfather is shown to be a racist through making racist comments, the fact that the character is not portrayed in the film partly made the subject matter disappear that it has been shown in the novel. In the book, the letter format is to focus in key events as well as allowing the readers understand Charlie’s inner world. However, in the movie, Charlie narrates the whole time and there are a few letters, but the action mostly plays out in a straightforward manner. The change of editing by the director does not affect too much as the book’s method allows for a clear delineation while the movie’s method makes this film much cheesier. Stephen Chbosky has made the movie worse than the novel by the use of two technological components.

Discussing the difference between the novel and the movie, it could be analyzed through a scene omitted and another one in a different order. There are two distinct points of comparison changed by the author and same director Stephen Chbosky. The first scene is when Charlie’s sister gets pregnant and he takes her to get an abortion, which is omitted by the director. This event allows for the relationship connection between Charlie and her sister, it seems a shortcoming as it never transpires. It’s fairly critical to the sibling relationship after a conflict happened earlier between them. The second one is in a different order, which is the fight between Brad and Patrick. In the book, Charlie wins the fight and then threatens to expose or blind Brad the next time. In the movie, he does not threaten to tell, and doesn’t really remember anything. Hence, it is a huge change since it makes Charlie an active fighter as opposed to a “put upon” guy who happens to win the fight. Readers have a chance to look for a depth of understanding in every turn of events while for those, who watches the movie, are compromised these events based on what the director wants to convey. Considerably, this point makes itself more difficult for filmmakers to insert every details.

The way the book is written is better than the way the movie montaged. The book can reveal many aspects that the author wants to convey to the readers rather than when the content of the book is adapted to the movie. Moreover, the author desires to share many themes in the novel more clearly through the details written in the novel, while in the film, director Stephen Chbosky cannot alter these details into the movie. In addition, teenagers especially can relate to the feeling of the main character Charlie being lost and trying not to be a “wallflower”. This book is recommended as this is about a young boy with diverse emotions. All in one, Stephen Chbosky enhances the value of detailing particular points in the novel and lessens issues to help audience become more focused on the movie based on aforementioned elements.