Beloved Book Becomes Beloved Film

Note: Because this review is based on the beloved novel, I have posted it on both blogs.

Four Stars

John Hughes had a saying that you are more serious at age 16 than you are at any other time in your life, and I’m suppose that’s true. Reading a novel like “Perks of Being a Wallflower” as a teenager, you walk away with an intense emotional experience. It would be easy for me as an adult to shrug off this book and movie as easily the case of overly dramatic teenagers, despite how serious their problems are. I have read the bestselling young adult novel the movie is based on, and I always thought that “Perks” was a story about closed doors. The problem with me as an adult is that “Perks” packs a lot of teenage problems in a novel that’s about 206 pages. Rape, pedophilia, coming out of the closet, bullying, drugs, sex, mental health, depression, and all sorts of stuff that teens deal with. Between all the typical teenage scenes in the book and movie, someone says something that sticks out like a sore thumb, often an admission of some kind that doesn’t sound quite right.

This brings me back to John Hughes’s saying, that everything is more serious when you are a teenager. It would be really easy for me to talk on and on about all the issues this novel brings up in such a short space, but on with the movie review. Charlie is a shy kid, who is just starting high school. On his first day, he meets a wonderful English teacher (Paul Rudd), who sees how smart he is, and starts giving him extra books to read. He starts to read books like “A Separate Piece” and “Catcher in the Rye”, which in this story is almost foreshadowing of the actual story we get. Angst ridden teen novels, in an angst ridden movie based on an angst ridden teen novel, I’m starting to get the picture. It helps that this movie is written and directed by the author of the actual book, which is very rare, Stephen Chosky. Charlie is a wallflower, which means he sits back and observes, doesn’t get involved and has an unusual way of thinking.

Soon he meets some older kids, Sam and Patrick (Ezra Miller). Emma Watson and Ezra Miller have wonderful chemistry as step brother and sister, and are obviously good matches for the shy Patrick. They are quirky and it’s hard not to like them as they go on and on about good music versus bad music.  Ezra Miller is very good here, as Patrick, the gay kid who has some secrets of his own. Emma Watson is also very good, with an American accent. As Charlie, the beloved character from this beloved novel, Logan Lerman does a wonderful job, and I’m (probably foolishly) hoping he gets an Oscar nod. There are a lot of hints in this movie (and in the novel) about his obsession with his dead aunt. Obviously, something was going on between him as a kid and this aunt that wasn’t exactly normal. Often, victims of abuse in the way Charlie was, become obsessed with the abuser.

Despite all the issues this film brings up, it works, because with all the underlying darkness, there’s a lot of sweatiness to these characters. Charlie’s shyness, and his two outcast friends, Sam and Patrick bring a lot of great friendship that helps them get through their traumas. Scenes like when Sam gives Charlie his first kiss, saying that the first person who kisses him should be someone who loves him, we get the sense that she means she loves him as a very good friend loves another. The scene where Patrick buys Charlie a suit because of Charlie’s great desire to be a writer or the scene where after Charlie admits that his best friend shot himself, they raise their glasses to Charlie after Sam tells Patrick what happened.

                “Perks” would be easy for me to dismiss as I am no longer a teenager, and maybe I don’t have that intense nature anymore that I once had as a teenager, but a lot of teenagers have an intense nature and this film brings us back to that. I know a lot of kids will be waiting on line to see “Twilight”, and believe me, I have nothing against that. I think we all need an escape, but it is kind of a shame that more kids won’t be on line to see “Perks of Being a Wallflower”, which they might actually take something away from. One of the great accomplishments of the writer Stephen Chbosky in both the film, and this, his so far only novel, is just some of the lines alone, like “We feel infinite” or “We get the love we think we deserve.” Writing for teenagers often allows a writer to go for a line that perhaps some adults would roll their eyes at, because a teenager feels that seriousness John Hughes was talking about. However, a lot of Chobosky’s lines have become iconic and have great truth to them.  A lot of the lines from the book (and now the move) raise this story from a normal young adult novel.  “Perks of Being a Wallflower” might require the viewer to get in touch with their inner adolescence, and remember a time that the world did feel that serious. However, the issues these teenagers deal with aren’t exclusive to only teens, as many adults have problems with the same things.

What I would suggest is that if your kid is begging to see the finale of “Twilight”, make a deal with them that they also see this. I always think it’s important for younger movie goers to not only go to movies that feed them entertainment, but also give them something personal and positive to walk away with. As I said earlier, I have nothing against escapism for younger viewers, but I think “Perks” might also balance that out with something they might hold onto. “Perks of Being a Wallflower” is that book that teens probably pass along to each other, and this movie is the kind of movie that might actually help teens copes with some of the very serious issues they deal with.  “Perks of Being a Wallflower” is one of the year’s best films, and a testament to being able to create characters for teenagers and adults alike. On a personal note, I’ve been waiting to review the movie version of this book ever since I’ve read the wonderful novel, and I wasn’t disappointed with the film.  Often smaller movies that are geared for teenagers are the best films for them to see. “Perks of Being a Wallflower” is one of the year’s best films, and hopefully one of the best attended.  

What’s A Good Storyteller Worth: The Pros and Cons of “Twilight”

 

Now, I’ve read the first “Twilight” and instead of simply saying it’s good or bad, I think it would be interesting to write a review that weighs the pros and cons of “Twilight”. On one hand, Stephanie Meyer is a wonderfully good story teller; on the other hand, she’s not a great writer. What are the pros and cons of a popular book? Should we be happy with anything that gets a teenage girl to read? I vote yes. Should we criticize her writing? I’m not really sure that’s worth doing. Are her characters and situations kind of ridiculous? Yes. “Twilight” is an interesting book, not because of what it is. It’s a fairly standard romance novel with some supernatural stuff thrown in that teenagers love. Now, I’m not saying Stephanie Meyer is J.K. Rowling. She’s not. J.K. Rowling is both a great storyteller and a great writer. However, “Twilight” brings up this interesting point. I am a great believer that not everything needs to be masterful (if it was, we all go nuts!) Some things need to be just good escapism, and “Twilight”, if not a great book, is great escapism.

Now, I’ve heard the critics of “Twilight” bash it for reasons that are serious concerns. I will give the critics that, but I think “Twilight” deserves a mixed reaction, not just a plain bash fest. Reviewing “Twilight”, the book, I think there are pros and cons. Bella isn’t a strong enough female character, Edward is kind of a stalker, they fall in love too fast (yet, a lot of teenagers in real life do, too) and Mayer’s prose are standard, if not subpar at best.  All true statements, yet on the other hand, a reader needs to know what they are walking into. “Twilight” is for teenage girls, who are at an age where every boy who looks the least bit attractive is one for their hearts. An argument I don’t buy is, which I’ve heard from friends who are critics, “Twilight” somehow promotes older men and younger girls getting together. Yeah, Edward has been seventeen for a thousand years, but that’s part of the appeal and escapism. He’s a vampire, and vampires do not age. Anyone who has read better vampire novels knows this.

“Twilight”, for those few who do not know, is about a teenage girl named Bella who is new to Forks, a town near Seattle. She goes to a new school, where boys take notice of her. She meets a new boy named Edward, who quickly becomes her boyfriend. They get together, and well, they fall in deep love. I’m already cringing at this as a twenty five year old male, but I know I will have to put my ego at the door while reading this. I am a book critic, sure, but I’m also not a fourteen year old girl. I have no plans on becoming a woman or a girl or whatever. So, yes, this book wasn’t written with me in mind. So, let’s start this interesting review. I present the pros and cons of Twilight.

Let’s start with the pros. The pros are Meyer’s talent at creating escapism. It’s so ridiculous what we are reading. The romance isn’t set up well enough, and we see that. I mean, these two characters really are hormone driven teenagers, and Meyer pretty much knows this. A simple glance across the lunch room pretty much sets up a big romance between this vampire and this teenage girl. However, the characters she creates are so compelling; she does a good job of selling this. I found myself turning pages, really fast, wanting to know what happens to these characters. I found her introduction of the Cullens sitting at the lunch table compelling. Who are these great looking teenagers who have somewhat pale skin and keep to themselves? They are great looking kids with something mysterious about them! It’s not an original hook, but that doesn’t make it a bad one.

Bella’s narration, too, is a plus. Yes, to me, a 25 year old male, it sounds like a whiney teenage girl. Teenage girls complain a bit, and I think that’s a natural thing. Yes, there’s a limit, but let’s remember who we are following in this story. Bella is a sixteen year old girl, who’s selfish mom ships her off to the dad she’s hasn’t seen since she was a little girl, because she wants to have a romance with a baseball player. She has to adjust to a new town, and new friends. She has to learn to obey a new parent who she hardly knows. A teenager like that in real life has a right to be a bit of an emo kid. Teenagers have a bit of a right to be emo. People criticize Meyer for sounding like a whiney teenager, but they forget, she isn’t narrating this story. Bella is. Being a bit whiney is true to this character. I would think a teenager in her situation would have a right to whine. Heck, I would expect her to. People say Bella is a martyr. I think she’s just a frustrated teenager.

Teenagers like that have a right to feel a bit rejected, have a right to complain a bit. She can write bad poetry about her situation. An unfair comparison people make is between prose in Harry Potter and Twilight. Harry Potter is told in the third person, and Twilight in the first person.  Bella is narrating the tale, not Meyer. If Harry Potter was told in Harry’s point of view, instead of Rowling, he would sound like Bella. Harry, like Bella, would sound like a mistreated teenager, who doesn’t feel in control, and considering neither is in a great situation, they have a right to complain. Understanding where a character is coming from is important, and besides, she’s not trying to connect to an old foggy like myself, she’s trying to connect to a teenager trying to figure out their raging hormones and puberty. How many times have you looked back on your teenage years and can’t believe what you wrote in your dairy? How whiney did you sound? It’s the same thing.

 Another pro to “Twilight” is its sales. Like Harry Potter’s sales, anything that sells books to kids is a good thing. I rather my kids read both “Twilight” and “Harry Potter”. Heck, they are reading. That’s never a bad thing. Is “Harry Potter” better than “Twilight”? From a literary point of view, yes! Does kid’s literature have to be held up to the standards of the New York Times Book Review Section? No. If we hold young adult literature to a standard that high, kids will never read. Most kids, first and foremost, want to be entertained, not enlightened by some deep, Pulitzer Prize worthy prose piece. However, I was talking to a librarian and she noted that a lot of adult writers are now writing young adult novels, and they often aren’t very good at it. Meyer is good at speaking to the teenagers in a language they can understand.  I however, when I was younger, I did read some books I found rather deep (Perks of Being A Wallflower is great, but looking back, is a bit melodramatic in places), and that’s a skill. I’m not saying give Meyer (or Rowling) the Pulitzer. No way, but respect their talent for being able to do what a Pulitzer Prize winning novelist might not be able to.

Now, onto the cons. “Twilight” is poorly written at times, and on a rather low level. One of the merits of “Harry Potter” is that it doesn’t talk down to kids. “Twilight”, at times, does feel like it’s pandering to its young female audience in the writing department. The book uses a bit too many terms that sound like an adult trying to sound like a teenager. Seriously, Meyer sometimes sounds really ridiculous in the phrases she uses. We know this is a teenager narrating, but we also know this is a grown woman writing it, and sometimes a little self awareness would pay off. This would also have helped the book have some of the crossover appeal “Harry Potter” had. “Harry Potter”, at times but not so much that it ends up being like an episode of “Community”, really did have this self awareness to it. One of the reasons I think adults read Potter so much is because it did wink at the audience sometimes. Rowling has this dry humor Meyer doesn’t. I don’t know if that’s a British thing, because Meyer is American. However, “Twilight” does lack that self awareness which might have made the book better. At times, the book takes itself a bit too seriously.

Another con of “Twilight” is the fact that Bella isn’t really the strongest female character. Hermione Ginger, in “Harry Potter” is a strong female character that Bella Swan isn’t. Bella is in love with Edward to the point of it being a bit ridiculous. Like, too much of her not being able to live without him is really silly sounding. Like, they do fall in love way too fast, but her strong desire to be with him forever sounds a bit silly. I don’t look forward to the day I have to tell my future daughter (if I have one), after her breakup with a first boyfriend, that no dear, you and him are just misunderstanding hormones. “Twilight” sells the idea a bit too strongly that you and your high school boyfriend are meant to be eternal souls. I can see this book making it harder for parents to explain to their kids that no, you and your boyfriend, are both in high school, and will probably move on in college. Bella, in book two, doesn’t even want to go to college or turn eighteen, because of her eternal love for Edward. Yeah, I understand this is a fantasy, but eternal love in your high school years is often a fantasy.

An aspect of their love I do like, though, is the sexual tension but the decision they constantly make to wait and not do the deed. Too much media is focused on teenagers getting it on and acting like it’s not a big deal, and in Twilight, it’s a very big deal and Meyer’s conviction (could also be due to the fact she’s a Mormon, but that’s not really fair), that teen sex is dangerous (and in this case, would result in a bite from a vampire) is actually not a bad message for teenage girls. A bite from a vampire is a really good metaphor for the unhealthy results of teenagers doing it a bit too early.

However, she keeps describing Bella as a plain girl, up to the level that we really don’t understand Edward’s attraction to her. Edward is like a teenage model, and Bella is a plain looking girl. That big gap in the way they look makes the book feel a bit too much of a fantasy. Meyer didn’t need to make Bella look amazing, but she could have added a detail like beautiful eyes or Bella is a star athlete. I don’t want to sound shallow, but everyone, not just teenagers, thrive on some kind of attraction that’s physical. Bella never really gives us something about her that would attract the hottest guy in school. That makes the book seem like a fantasy for teenage girls that’s a bit unrealistic. We don’t really understand why Bella is dating this guy. This guy can have any girl he wants, and Meyer doesn’t really make anything stand out about Bella. She’s not super smart or attractive in any special way. I’m not trying to be shallow, but the guy with model looks is going out with the girl with model looks. This is high school, and yes, I know, Edward has been in high school for a thousand years, but still.               

Another con I feel is Meyer’s unreliable writing. She doesn’t know how to incorporate back story the way Rowling does. The story of the vampires, with Edward talking about Paris and his past, and his parents dying, and the bite that changed his life, feels kind of pointless, and should have been something the editor should have either cut out or something Meyer should have left as a mystery to the reader. A more mysterious back story would have created some mystique around the character. Also, the Cullens are way too successful. Even their adopted father looks like a model, and he’s a successful doctor. That’s kind of a plot hole too. A vampire can’t be a doctor. They go insane around all that blood. Also, they own nice cars. Sorry, I just don’t buy vampires being this successful. They have way too many issues to do this well in society. I haven’t even started on the other one who tries to win Bella’s heart yet, either. Jacob, her Native American friend, who can transform into a werewolf, is also vying for Bella. Meyer puts too much of this supernatural stuff without proper pacing and mystery around it which makes the book come off as cheesy. Also, Edward and Jacob, these two great looking guys, sorry I’m just not buying that they are battling for this very plain human girl.

So, what do we make of “Twilight”, and if I were to grade it, what would I give it. I think it’s better than a “C”, but not quite an “A”. I would give it a B. Meyer deserves credit, because if she wasn’t a great storyteller (which she is), no one would buy this story. However, her storytelling is really compelling even if her writing isn’t really that great. I think writing a compelling story is a real skill, though, and it’s always valuable to write to a younger crowd. What critics don’t get about books like “Twilight” is that “Twilight” isn’t a great book by itself, but more of a waiting station for kids to get hooked on reading. The language is easy, the story is simple and entertaining, and also, what critics don’t get it that not everything needs to be masterful. “Harry Potter” is a masterful story, as is “War and Peace”. Yet, do we need everything to be a masterpiece? No, sometimes we just need brain candy. If an adult is reading “Twilight”, then it’s just brain candy to them, simple as that. Sometime to help them escape their everyday life. If a kid is reading it, then it’s just a fantasy for them crafted perfectly for them. Stephen King criticized Meyer as “not being able to write a darn”, and that might be somewhat true. He went to praise J.K. Rowling. However, Meyer and Rowling are in the same business. They are in the escapism business because no one is going to Hogwarts and no one is falling in love with a vampire. Both are fiction, but fiction is important, because society needs theses stories. After all, what is a society without stories? It’s real life, and lets be honest, at times, it isn’t much fun.