The new Stephen Chbosky film, “The Perks of Being a Wallflower”, based on the novel of the same author and name seems like a much needed update of J.D. Salinger’s novel, The Catcher in the Rye. The film provides a fresh perspective on the many heavy topics such as death, mental illness, and growing up brought up in Salinger’s novel. However, although “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” is a more relatable and heartwarming version, The Catcher in the Rye still proves to be the most groundbreaking tale of coming-of-age that literature has seen up to date.
After viewing Chbosky’s film, I would agree with the many people that prefer it over The Catcher in the Rye. Like a large part of the population, I’m a sucker for the Hollywood endings where everything works out in the end, which is exactly why I prefered “The Perks of Being a Wallflower”. Both stories have a strikingly similar premise; a teenage boy suffering from mental illness due to a traumatic childhood experience trying to find his place in the world. At a glance, these stories seem to be basically the same, but upon further analysis, it becomes clear that, although these stories both accomplish the same …show more content…
Holden Caulfield never fully realizes the extent of his mental illness, and he definitely doesn’t take it upon himself to change his mentality to try and get better like Charlie does. Although it may seem a little pessimistic, I think for the most part Holden is the more realistic of cases. Most people aren’t really all that happy with life either, but in general, people don’t change, people don’t want to fix themselves to fit in better with society like Charlie did. Most people are just like Holden, who believes that his outlook on life is the right one and who’s so scared of conforming with society that he’d rather self destruct than ever fit
After viewing Chbosky’s film, I would agree with the many people that prefer it over The Catcher in the Rye. Like a large part of the population, I’m a sucker for the Hollywood endings where everything works out in the end, which is exactly why I prefered “The Perks of Being a Wallflower”. Both stories have a strikingly similar premise; a teenage boy suffering from mental illness due to a traumatic childhood experience trying to find his place in the world. At a glance, these stories seem to be basically the same, but upon further analysis, it becomes clear that, although these stories both accomplish the same …show more content…
Holden Caulfield never fully realizes the extent of his mental illness, and he definitely doesn’t take it upon himself to change his mentality to try and get better like Charlie does. Although it may seem a little pessimistic, I think for the most part Holden is the more realistic of cases. Most people aren’t really all that happy with life either, but in general, people don’t change, people don’t want to fix themselves to fit in better with society like Charlie did. Most people are just like Holden, who believes that his outlook on life is the right one and who’s so scared of conforming with society that he’d rather self destruct than ever fit