The Perks of Being a Wallflower - The Novel

After having seen the film twice, I decided to read The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chboski.  Originally published in 1999, I was amazed the slender work could be adapted into a two hour film.

The novel (novella?) consists of a series of letters written by Charlie, the protagonist, to an unknown "friend" over the course of one school year.  It is explicitly set in the 1991-92 academic year. The film starts with this epistolary plot device but abandons it until picking it back up for the epilogue.  In the book, the effect of the letters is to make fuzzy what was presented as facts in the film.  Since Charlie's subjective observations are the topic of his letters, the reader is left to wonder about his biases and as the novel continues, his mental state.  The film presents the events written about in Charlie's letters as gospel but there is some ambiguity in the novel.

Charlie's relationship with his sister is much deeper in the novel.  In the film, Ponytail Derek slaps her and Charlie keeps quiet.  She eventually dumps Derek and goes to the prom alone.  In the novel, Charlie reports the incident to his English teacher (Paul Rudd) who reports it to Charlie's parents.  This forces her to keep her relationship with Derek a secret because her parents insist she have nothing to do with him.  She continues to see him secretly (even having a "fake" boyfriend) and eventually becomes pregnant.  She tells Charlie who drives her to the abortion clinic.  This remains their secret throughout the novel.  She dumps Ponytail Derek (the character has no name in the book) because he denied being the father of the baby and has a new boyfriend by the time of the prom.

The tone of the novel is much darker than the film.  Charlie witnesses a rape and the dysfunctional family dynamics on both his maternal & paternal sides are explored through holiday visits and recounted stories.  Charlie's family has been through a lot going back at least two generations which legitimizes his illness and the concerns of his family.  Charlie is seeing a psychiatrist for most of the book whereas he only sees one after his nervous breakdown the film.

Oddly, the character of Mary Elizabeth goes to Cal Berkeley in the book instead of Harvard in the film.  There are other small discrepancies but the biggest difference was the humor or lack thereof.  I thought the film had moments of inspired comedy whereas the book focused more on Charlie's sadness and difficulties.

I've read that The Perks of Being a Wallflower is a cult favorite among a certain segment of the population.  I can understand that.  It reminded me a little of Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger.  If I had to provide a pithy quote, I'd say The Perks of Being a Wallflower is the MTV generation's Catcher in the Rye.  The odd thing about the film is the time it took to adapt the novel.  The "MTV generation" is in the 30s or even 40s now.  My quote isn't nearly as original as it may sound.  The Perks of Being a Wallflower was originally published MTV Books which I believe has been bought out by Simon & Schuster.

More Parkway and More Perks of Being a Wallflower

On Sunday, I returned to the New Parkway with a friend who works in downtown Oakland.  Before the screening, we stopped at an Oakland bakery she knew of called Sweet Bar Bakery.  Located at the corner of Broadway and 24th, Sweet Bar is located in the "historic MacFarlane’s Candy and Ice Cream showroom."  MacFarlane Candy & Ice Cream is not a business I was familiar with; it must be one of those old-timey Bay Area institutions (I've only lived here for 20 years).  Just to show how cool Sweet Bar is, it raised over $20,000 via Kickstarter.  Open seven days a week (closing at 7 PM Mon-Sat and 5 PM on Sundays), Sweet Bar is nice place to get a coffee and pastry.  They have some fascinating historic photos of downtown Oakland on their walls.

Having seen every film being screened at the New Parkway on Sunday, I gave my companion her choice of films.  I was hoping she would choose Barbarella which was screened under the theme "Thrillville Theater" - Will "The Thrill" Viharo's Sunday night series.  Viharo hosts "Parkway Classics" on Thursday nights (The Big Lebowski is being shown tomorrow evening at 9 PM).

Instead, she chose The Perks of Being a Wallflower which I saw at the now shuttered Bridge Theater.    I'm glad to say Wallflower stood up well to a second viewing.  There were a few humorous moments which I caught the second time around.  I didn't even realize Paul Rudd was the teacher until the second screening.  Wallflower is a poignant film which mixes in humor for a crowd pleasing experience.  The film has "legs" as they say.  It's box office has gone up every week since its opening in late September. Tellingly, the Landmark Bridge carried it over for a month (or longer) and it was the last film they screened on December 27.  The next day it opened at the Landmark Opera Plaza in their largest auditorium.  That tells me it must be drawing some crowds.  There were 30 or so people at the New Parkway screening I attended.

I cannot recall which screening room is which at the New Parkway.  I think I saw Beasts of the Southern Wild in Theater 1.  We saw The Perks of Being a Wallflower in Theater 2 or the other, smaller screening room.  Theater 2 lacks much of the kitschy charm of the other room.  The floor mostly consists of a number of utilitarian dining tables which gives the impression of a corporate cafeteria.  There is an organ in the corner but I don't think it is functional.  There is a  balcony with three rows of terraces.  We sat in the front row of the balcony.  All but two people sat in the balcony.  I didn't think the floor tables were that bad but my friend insisted on the balcony as she felt the viewing angle was inferior from the floor.  There isn't as much leg room as the first row of the balcony as in the other theater.  Again, there is a side table between seats for your food and drink.

With a bigger crowd, I noticed a few problems.  First, the food runners have less room to maneuver so they were stepping in front of people to get the food to its ultimate destination.  Also, there was quite a bit of noise as servers called out orders, plates clanked and customers asked for condiments or whatever.   I have no doubt that spilled food/drinks and broken dishes/glasses will occur more frequently when the audience is large.  It looked like the Barbarella screening drew a good crowd so I don't know how many people ordered food in total.  The kitchen seemed to have a hard time keeping up as food came in 30 or 40 minutes after Wallflower started.

As for the food, I had the quesadillas.  Not bad but again a very simple dish to prepare so there isn't much to mess up or excel at.  My friend had an apple chicken sausage served like a hot dog.  She wanted more condiment selections but settled on dressing her sausage with olive oil and Sriracha sauce.  She is an exacting connoisseur of food so I take her food judgments with a grain of salt (pun intended).  She carries powdered popcorn toppings and BBQ sauce in the trunk of her car for exigencies such as this.  I don't know why she didn't bring the BBQ sauce in with her.  I saw her retrieve some popcorn seasoning but we didn't order any popcorn.  We split an order of "saucy fries."  I can't recall what the ketchup sauce consisted of, but the mayonaisse was transformed into aioli with some garlic seasoning.

The New Parkway could do a better job with signage.  We arrived more than 30 minutes early so I asked if the theater was open for seating.  Barbarella was still more than 60 minutes from starting.  The employee told us the theater was open and directed us to Theater 1.  As it turned out, that was the theater for Barbarella.  It wasn't until another patron entered and asked if it was the theater for Barbarella that we realized we were in the wrong room.   I said no, someone else said yes.  It turned out we were directed to the wrong theater.  The New Parkway needs to put up signs indicating which film is screening in each theater.  These signs should be placed in clear view as one enters the theater;  even if it is just an 8½ x 11 sheet of paper.  This is standard for any multiscreen theater.  The 4 Star & Balboa have two screening rooms but have signs indicating which film is screening in each theater.

While waiting in the wrong screening room, I noticed there were red wine ring marks on some of the tables and food crumbs on the sofas & love seats.  At least one person didn't bus his/her tableware.  Given that there was an hour before the next screening, I wonder why the staff didn't tidy up the room.  That's going to be crucial going forward.  There needs to be light cleaning and servicing of the theaters in between shows.

After a second trip to the New Parkway, I'm ambivalent.  I go to the PFA frequently so I'm willing to travel to the East Bay for a film but the New Parkway doesn't seem like enough of a draw to make a dedicated trip.  Maybe some of their special programming will draw me in.  On Tuesday (January 8), the New Parkway is hosting a film series called "Brooklyn Reconstructed."  The series is co-sponsored by the Broaklyn Film & Theater Company.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower

I saw The Perks of Being a Wallflower at the Landmark Bridge on Saturday night.

Before opining about the film, I wanted to comment on the Pittsburgh literary scene.  Although not explicitly stated, The Perks of Being a Wallflower is set in Pittsburgh (as in Pennsylvania; not Pittsburg, CA).  For a while in the late 1990s and 2000s, it seemed like Pittsburgh a rising literary metropolis.  I remember liking The Wonder Boys (2000) with Michael Douglas, Tobey Maguire & Robert Downey Jr.  That film was based on a 1995 Michael Chabon novel of the same title.  Chabon's debut novel was the well received The Mysteries of Pittsburgh (1988).  Although my memory may be in error, I seem to recall more film & novels set in Pittsburgh around a decade ago.  Although there are clues, it is left unstated that The Perks of Being a Wallflower was set in the early 1990s...not that removed from my own high school years.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower starring Logan Lerman, Emma Watson & Ezra Miller; directed by Stephen Chbosky; (2012) - Official Website

Director Stephen Chbosky wrote the novel which the film is based upon.

Wallflower was a deeply moving film for me.  Charlie (Logan Lerman) is an introverted high school freshman.  As he begins the school year, he is unable to make friends until he approaches Patrick (Ezra Miller), a flamboyant senior in his freshman shop class.  Patrick introduces him to his circle of friends - his stepsister Sam (Emma Watson) who suffers from low self-esteem due to child molestation, Mary Elizabeth (Mae Whitman) a Buddhist Punk and Alice a kleptomaniac.  Patrick is a not-so-closeted homosexual who is having an affair with the deeply closeted QB of the high school football team.

This group forms a tight-knit bond which is vert healthy for Charlie.  Part of Charlie's isolation stems from his best friend having committed suicide a few months earlier.  However, Charlie is repressing other memories which causes his social dysfunction.  Charlie is riding along nicely until Mary Elizabeth asks him to the Sadie Hawkins dance.  Clearly infatuated with Sam, Charlie accepts Mary Elizabeth's invitation.  The more dominant Mary Elizabeth quickly decides they are a couple and Charlie meekly goes along until a game of Truth or Dare makes clear his preference from Sam.

I don't want to reveal to much of the plot because what drew me into the film is the depiction of these teenagers with the fickleness, the cruelty of the school social caste system, the missed opportunities and general sense of teenage angst.  These issues resonated with me.  Although I was never molested or had closeted homosexual trysts, I could relate to these characters in ways which surprised me given the distance of time and experience.

Clearly, Chbosky is tapping into something universal.  Wallflower is not as dark as Donnie Darko but scaling back the humor of some of John Hughes' classic films while covering some of the same ground.  Obviously sexual abuse and orientation never entered the Hughes universe, but it never really registered in my teenage universe.  Probability and hindsight convinces me that some of my classmates suffered through these issues.  My only reservation about Wallflower is that it implied teenagers needed something traumatic in their youths to be misfit and lonely.

Lerman is clearly the lead character with Miller receiving the second most screen time.  Those two shine but it is Emma Watson as the vulnerable but winsome Sam who shines brightest.  Whitman in the flashiest role nails down the contradictory elements of an intelligent but socially awkward teenage girl.  Those four actors and characters elevate Wallflower to something special.

Also, Chbosky's script never pulls its punches.  The emotional impact of several situations (with the outsized importance that only teenagers can muster) rings true.  He follows "the formula" enough to be familiar but avoids the tropes which puts a fresh spin on the teenage coming-of-age film.