Opinion: The perks of ranting about ‘Wallflower’

 

 

Dan Jenkins

Dan Jenkins

Dan Jenkins is a freshman news major and columnist for the Daily Kent Stater. Contact him at [email protected]

Apparently complaining about a movie not being released in a news column is an effective way of getting what you want.

In my column last week, I vented my frustrations about Summit Entertainment repeatedly delaying the release of the movie adaptation of “The Perks of Being a Wallflower.”

As I mentioned, it was originally supposed to be released Sept. 14, then was delayed to a limited-city-only Sept. 21 release. Then, after stating it was going to release nationwide on Oct. 5, it only released in a few more cities yet again. Finally, the book’s author, Stephen Chbosky, announced on the movie adaptation’s Facebook page that the nationwide release would be Oct. 12, which was last Friday.

Because I was planning on going home for my birthday weekend, I started perusing the showtimes in Pittsburgh theaters. I was overjoyed to see that there was a time Friday night right after my friend, who also loved the book, got out of work.

We were both more than happy with what we saw. I was very happy that Chbosky was the screenwriter for the adaptation, because that led to it sticking pretty closely to the original book.

I was further convinced that Logan Lerman and Emma Watson were the best people to play the characters of Charlie and Sam. Lerman accurately displayed all of Charlie’s socially awkward tendencies, and Watson was excellent at being the outwardly confident and inwardly insecure girl that Sam was. You’re pulling for them to get together throughout the whole movie, and although they do admit they love each other and act on it, they don’t embark on a serious relationship.

That’s how it goes in the book as well, so there’s no disappointment there for people who have read it before. I’m actually glad Chbosky never wrote that Charlie and Sam ended up being in a relationship. Their just staying friends allowed them to bond more and for their love to grow.

The only real problem I had in terms of casting was having Ezra Miller play the role of Patrick. I think he’s a great actor, and I did enjoy seeing him on screen, but his portrayal of Patrick just didn’t really match the kind of person I pictured Patrick being while reading the book. He seemed to kind of lay down and take people’s abuse more in the movie than in the book, and he also seemed more insecure.

Another thing that I loved about the book as well as the movie was that it was set in my hometown of Pittsburgh. So many times I couldn’t help nudging my friend Caroline and going “aw yeah, that’s our city!” throughout the movie. I thought it was very well put-together, and the music, special effects and scenery were nice to look at. Overall, I was more than satisfied with the movie and wish Chbosky would write a sequel so there could be another movie.