This book is particularly interesting because it is written in the form of progress report updates, almost in diary form. This structure is lost in the film and play adaptions. When reading the book, the reader is presented with a near-holistic perspective of Charlie's experiences, but the play and movie lose this perspective, as his thoughts are implied and have to be translated in other ways.
Without the help of voiceovers and with the curtailment of the story into a less than two hour film, much of the descriptive element of stories is lost. However, a visual element is added with scenery that books lack. Many movie directors use colors to set the emotional state of a scene. (See Wes Anderson, who has a different color palette for each film.) Additionally, more emotions are conveyed in close-ups and subtle facial expressions.
However, in plays, the subtle reactions are even more difficult to convey. Whereas facial expressions, tone, and setting take precedence in movies, plays are all about motion and vocal inflections. On top of that, the instances in which there is a time change or scene change are even harder to convey, and inner thoughts have to be reflected entirely through movement. Take the following passage for example. This was condensed and translated into a monologue used for transitional purposes:
This weekend, I am at the Illinois High School Theaterfest, a convention where the weirdest of the theater kids gather to watch plays and take theater classes. I'm interested to examine how the plays I recognize are adapted, and how subtle details are altered to best convey the message.