Sam (Emma Watson), Charlie (Logan Lerman) and Patrick (Ezra Miller) in a car at night
Film review

The Perks of Being a Wallflower

2012 · Directed by Stephen Chbosky · 1h 43m

In a sentenceThree young actors make us forgive quite a lot of meaningful music

In the early 1990s, Charlie (Logan Lerman) starts his first year of high school, struggling to find a place among the other pupils. Two older students, Sam (Emma Watson) and Patrick (Ezra Miller), befriend him and offer a way into their circle. Charlie wants to belong, but his own troubles make the prospect of a fresh start difficult. With Sam and the quick-witted Patrick taking an interest in him, he begins to discover what school might be like with friends to share it.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Logan Lerman, Emma Watson and Ezra Miller make this familiar high-school drama worth an evening. Its sympathy is persuasive, though Stephen Chbosky sometimes crowds the story with more pain than he gives himself time to explore.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower is a good high-school drama whose young actors make a familiar story feel worth telling again. Stephen Chbosky, writing and directing, takes the business of finding friends seriously, even when his script seems to be consulting a checklist of adolescent troubles. He gives these feelings the space they occupy in a teenager’s life. That can be a great deal of space. The film is at its most convincing when it allows friendship to be enjoyable without immediately explaining why it matters.

Charlie is a first-year high-school pupil whose introduction to Sam and Patrick gives him a chance to belong. Logan Lerman makes his vulnerability convincing through the effort that seems to go into simply joining in. There is a strain in his reserve, as though conversation requires work the others cannot see. We were moved by the friendship offered to him, because his relief at being included feels so uncertain. The performance keeps the boy’s troubles present without making every conversation an announcement of them.

Ezra Miller gives Patrick a comic confidence that also seems to take work to maintain. The jokes could easily leave him performing the same useful service in every scene; instead, his company has an unpredictability that helps the friendship feel lived in. Emma Watson’s Sam completes a trio whose pleasure in one another is the film’s strongest reason to keep watching. Even when the writing sounds prepared, the three actors make affection seem spontaneous.

Andrew Dunn’s cinematography gives the early-1990s setting a nostalgic warmth that occasionally feels too comfortable for Charlie’s distress. It suits the pleasure of finding friends, though the images can soften the discomfort the actors are working to sustain. Inbal Weinberg’s production design is less insistent about the period, helping it feel like somewhere these characters can live. That unobtrusive approach is welcome whenever the writing begins to press a point too hard.

Mary Jo Markey’s editing keeps the episodic story moving, but the heavier material needs more breathing space than it gets. As one teenage concern follows another, the accumulation can make distress feel like a requirement of the school year. Michael Brook’s score is comparatively restrained; it is the prominent songs that sometimes tell us too insistently how to feel. The record collection is carefully chosen, but there are occasions when musical taste has to do work that belongs to the writing. The performances seldom need that assistance.

As coming-of-age dramas go, this is a conventional one, with voice-over, conspicuous musical taste and more trouble than one story can comfortably accommodate. Its sincerity survives because the cast gives the friendships humour and friction, and because Stephen Chbosky does not treat being young as a condition to be mocked. There are passages where a little less explanation would help us feel more. Anyone impatient with teenage earnestness should approach with caution. If this is your kind of school story, make time for the three people at its centre.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

65
Positive
13
Mixed
5
Negative
3

Most critics respond warmly to The Perks of Being a Wallflower, with praise concentrated on its young cast and its understanding of teenage loneliness and friendship. Logan Lerman’s vulnerability makes Charlie an engaging centre, while Ezra Miller draws particular notice for giving Patrick charisma and complexity. Emma Watson also earns praise, and even several less enthusiastic reviews admire the central trio. Supporters find that Stephen Chbosky’s emotional sincerity makes familiar high-school situations feel personal and convincing.

The spread is wide, however, and the main disagreement concerns how much that sincerity excuses. More reserved critics find the storytelling episodic, the direction awkward and the treatment of difficult subjects rushed. The soundtrack supplies atmosphere for some but substitutes for characterisation for others. Collider sees an antidote to coming-of-age clichés; Slant Magazine finds manipulation and condescension. Between those positions, the consensus favours the performances more consistently than the writing or direction.

Vulture
20 September 2012 · David Edelstein
85*

Chbosky captures the exquisite feeling of belonging among friends while sensing its fleeting nature and the pain of loss. The film nails teenage alienation through strong performances and a nostalgic yet pained evocation of early-90s misfit life.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
20 September 2012 · Betsy Sharkey
80*

The film is a smartly observed study of a troubled teen’s first year in high school thanks to strong performances from its young cast. Ezra Miller in particular brings jolts of electricity to teen conversations.

Read the full review →
Evening Standard
3 October 2013
70*

The film is a compendium of high-school coming-of-age tropes but executes them with rare intensity, sweetness and purity. It earns its sentimentality through strong performances, especially from Ezra Miller and Emma Watson, and a convincing central trio.

Read the full review →
Film Comment
27 August 2012 · Violet Lucca
70*

The adaptation is more restrained than the source novel in its handling of trauma and omits some darker elements. It benefits from strong performances by the young cast and a focus on showing rather than telling Charlie's story.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
8 September 2012 · festival review
70*

The review notes that while the film offers little new on adolescent angst, it potently captures the immediacy of teen life through strong performances and emotional observation. Ezra Miller’s turn as Patrick is highlighted as a standout for its charisma and complexity.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
21 September 2012 · Manohla Dargis
70*

The adaptation is likable and unsurprising, serving mainly as a showcase for its young cast. Ezra Miller stands out with texture in his role as the witty gay quipster.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is The Perks of Being a Wallflower worth watching?
The Perks of Being a Wallflower is worth watching for anyone who likes a sincere high-school drama, and we scored it 76. Logan Lerman, Emma Watson and Ezra Miller make a familiar story of finding friends feel worth telling again, though Stephen Chbosky crowds in more adolescent trouble than he has time to explore. Anyone impatient with teenage earnestness should approach with caution.
How long is The Perks of Being a Wallflower, and what is it rated?
The Perks of Being a Wallflower runs 1h 43m. It is a drama film.
Where can I watch The Perks of Being a Wallflower in the UAE?
The Perks of Being a Wallflower is streaming on Netflix in the UAE. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.
How violent or frightening is The Perks of Being a Wallflower, and is it suitable for children?
The Perks of Being a Wallflower is a 12A drama with no violence or frights to speak of, and it suits teenagers rather than younger children. The difficulty is emotional: Charlie carries troubles of his own, and one teenage concern follows another until distress starts to feel like a requirement of the school year. Younger viewers may find the weight of it hard to follow.
How does The Perks of Being a Wallflower compare to Booksmart?
The Perks of Being a Wallflower is the sadder and more earnest of the two, while Booksmart is the funnier and the warmer. Both are carried by friendships that feel lived in, but Chbosky's film piles on pain it does not always have time for, and Wilde's tidies its characters' mistakes a little too neatly. Choose Perks for tenderness and Booksmart for laughs.
What should I watch after The Perks of Being a Wallflower?
After The Perks of Being a Wallflower, try Booksmart (2019, Fi1m 81): For another close friendship tested by the awkward business of leaving school. Then Ghost World (2001, Fi1m 84): A drier, less comforting account of outsiders discovering the limits of their friendship; and Beautiful Thing (1996, Fi1m 80): A tender romance with awkward young people and a welcome shortage of condescension.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. Booksmart (2019, Fi1m 81)For another close friendship tested by the awkward business of leaving school.

  2. Ghost World (2001, Fi1m 84)A drier, less comforting account of outsiders discovering the limits of their friendship.

  3. Beautiful Thing (1996, Fi1m 80)A tender romance with awkward young people and a welcome shortage of condescension.

  4. Linda Linda Linda (2005) · not reviewed yetSchool friendships given room to develop, with music that earns its place.

  5. The 400 Blows (1959, Fi1m 91)For a less reassuring account of a boy struggling to belong.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever