In my age group, I doubt there’s another media property talked about anywhere near as much as Stephen Chbosky’s 1999 novel The Perks of Being a Wallflower. More so than the grossly popular Harry Potter and Twilight series, Perks, from what I could tell before seeing the movie, deftly reached into the hearts and minds of teenagers and really struck them emotionally.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower tells the story of Charlie’s freshman year in high school, and how his new friends Sam and Patrick change his life. The book delivered its narrative through Charlie’s letters to an anonymous pen pal, and since film’s can’t get away with constant narration quite as well as literature, it’s structured more like a traditional film, and even includes some narration from Charlie that were lifted directly from the book.

The film is a combination between a traditional coming-of-age story and a high school party movie, and the result is a movie that feels conventional in a lot of ways but often goes beyond its influences and predecessors into more meaningful territory, likely due to its primarily dramatic trappings as opposed to comedic ones.

It’s the story of a broken teenager and the people he meets, the people who help him grow and become stronger, despite being broken themselves. It feels like it’s on a grander scale than it actually is. In the same moment, the movie can feel down-to-earth and larger-than-life.

The main performances are excellent across the board. Logan Lerman plays awkward teenager about as well as Michael Cera, and may have the best lip-quiver since Mark Margolis in “Breaking Bad.” Jokes aside, he does do a great job with the character, and is a compelling central figure.

Emma Watson performs marvelously in her first role since Hermione Granger in the “Harry Potter” series, though her accent does occasionally slip.

My personal favorite, however, was Patrick, played by Ezra Miller. He portrays the character’s arc well and is a great mix of the comedic relief character, as well as the deeply flawed teenager trying to make his life less of a living hell.

Paul Rudd plays the small but significant role of Charlie’s Language Arts teacher Bill, and while he is, as usual, a fine comedic actor, it occasionally feels as though he doesn’t fit in this story. His nigh unbending joviality throughout always seems directly at odds with the consistently somber school scenes, and in these sections I couldn’t tell exactly how I should been feeling. I’m saying that I enjoyed Paul Rudd in the film, but I’m not sure I should have.

The film doesn’t really do anything knew with cinematography, but there aren’t any steps back either. It’s all serviceable, but what does truly stand out is the excellent soundtrack. It’s filled with songs that complement each moment beautifully, including the tunnel scene, arguably the book’s most famous segment.

Something of note, however, is that while the soundtrack is superb in its own right, it has been changed quite a bit from the novel. “Asleep” by The Smiths, Charlie’s favorite song, is brought up in dialogue, but isn’t present where book readers will be familiar. Other little things like that didn’t bother me, as I haven’t read the book, but they were points of contention that I heard from fans of the novel.

I had odd expectations going into the film. I didn’t think it would blow me away based on what I’d seen, but I know people that say the book has had a huge impact on their lives and swear by it being the best thing they’ve ever read. I’m sort of glad to say that both sets of expectations were subverted.

I had a lot of fun with The Perks of Being a Wallflower, but I doubt it will go on to be truly life-changing for me. It’s not a poorly made film, but it does have flaws. I think the bottom line is that if you’re waiting for something new to see (which I wouldn’t believe, as, since The Master through the end of November, we’ve got a promising movie releasing each week), you won’t be disappointed with Perks.