Alright, I'll admit I saw the movie before I read the book. I know, I'm a terrible person. Now, the movie was fantastic, heart-wrenching, and overall a very enjoyable and believable film. I was expecting the book to be a lot better than it was.It's not to say it's a bad book, but it just wasn't quite as heart wrenching as the movie was. I mean the book did have its moments, and I still think the most quoted line "We were infinite" speaks volumes about how I can relate to this work. I also think it's a good line because its the truth, we are infinite if we put our minds to it. At the same time the book was decently good, but the movie was great (amazing even). I think Stephen Chbosky should stick with film, he knows how to make a good film with a good script. I don't think it came across as well in a book format. I think one of the reason's why is that in the movie Charlie came across as socially awkward, but not as emotionally handicapped or unstable (well except in certain parts when he wasn't having a good day) as he does in the book. There were parts in the book that were pretty unbelievable, like Charlie at fifteen not knowing what masturbation was as a subject. I mean, one would think he would have had that lecture (even if he was really sheltered, which I doubt since he had an older brother and sister). It does seem pretty hard to believe that he'll become instant friends with some seniors, and in the movie it came across differently than being instantaneous. I also believe the author was trying to pack every single issue one could think of into a tiny book. In the movie, it didn't feel like it was all thrown at you at once. Maybe because I had to read it, it felt completely different and in a movie you just experience it. The way the book was written in the letter format was a good way to write the book, but I am really surprised for a student who is supposed to be in an advanced English class doesn't have a better vocabulary when he writes his letters. Then again, Charlie did mention that he doesn't understand why people use some words instead of others. Still, one would think that instead of fifteen Charlie was a lot younger. It's an issue I know a lot of people have with this book, and I do--but not to the same extent. Some of it, I blame is on Charlie's back history with his friend and Aunt Helen. He went through a lot as a youngster, so I think that can be the partial blame. That and his parent's not helping entirely either.At the end of the day, I liked the book but I expected a lot more because the movie was so amazing. I think it is one of those books were the movie adaptation excelled where the book couldn't. It's still a good book, but I think I'll be re-watching the movie than re-reading the book.