Why 2012’s The Perks of Being a Wallflower Movie May be a Flop

It’s no secret that hundreds of thousands of teens everywhere are excited for the release of the film adaptation to the popular novel, The Perks of Being a Wallflower. An essential young adult novel that touches on subjects that many teens feel they connect with or have to deal with such as drugs, homosexuality, sex, and suicide. In many cases, the book is an important resource to comfort and console young adults as it gives the epistolary view of protagonist, Charlie, a high school freshman in 1991.

My issue with the film adaptation is that the casting just does not make much sense. Logan Lerman gives off the vibes of a “high school stud” that’s not really in sports but has the cool car and is friends with all of the popular kids. Charlie is not that type of person in the least bit, he is a shrinking wallflower, painfully shy and quiet. And most of all, awkward. Logan Lerman is not in the least bit awkward and it’s obvious that if he has to act as such it will only look forced. In my opinion, a better choice would have been It’s Kind of a Funny Story’s, Keir Gilchrist. In the movie, Gilchrist pulled off the perfect balance of awkward and shy and everything that he had to say had much more weight to it.

(Keir Gilchrist from It’s Kind of a Funny Story)             (Logan Lerman)

Then, the strange casting continues with British actress and star of the Harry Potter series, Emma Watson. When I had read the book, I pictured Sam to be this down-to-earth girl with long flowing hair and a care-free attitude. Although Emma Watson is a wonderful actress, I believe that she does a great job in more serious roles. Also, not to be extremely picky, but when I read the part that said “And in that moment, I swear we were infinite” I got chills from picturing this loving, care-free girl standing in the bed of the truck with her hair flowing all around her. It was supposed to be a fluid and mesmerizing seen, and Emma’s bob cut completely ruined that for me. I believe that a much more suited actress for the role would have been the star of The Hunger Games, Jennifer Lawrence. She is a highly talented and versatile actress and much closer to the Sam that I had pictured in my mind.

(Jennifer Lawrence from The Hunger Games)                  (Emma Watson)

As for Ezra Miller, I don’t have many complaints about him because I haven’t seen him in anything so far. However, I am not happy about the casting of comedic actor Paul Rudd as Charlie’s English teacher. That seemed to come out of nowhere and really I just think they put him in there so that they could have another big name.

And, to be honest, if I had my way, none of the aforementioned actors would have been in the movie. All of the actors would have been unknowns so that they could have completely emxemplified the characters without any previous roles affecting the viewers opinions of them and done the book much more justice.

Actors make up a huge part of the quality of a movie and I truly hope that this turns out well for the sake of the story. Fortunately the director is Stephen Chbosky (author of the novel) and I’m assuming that he stuck close to the book.

Only time will tell if the movie will turn out or not. Let’s hope for the best.