Firestarter

Firestarter

For more than a decade, parents Andy and Vicky have been on the run, desperate to hide their daughter Charlie from a shadowy federal agency that wants to harness her unprecedented gift for creating fire into a weapon of mass destruction. Andy has taught Charlie how to defuse her power, which is triggered by anger or pain. But as Charlie turns 11, the fire becomes harder and harder to control. After an incident reveals the family's location, a mysterious operative is deployed to hunt down the family and seize Charlie once and for all. Charlie has other plans.

  • Released: 2022-05-12
  • Runtime: 94 minutes
  • Genre: Fantasy, Thrillers
  • Stars: Ryan Kiera Armstrong, Zac Efron, Sydney Lemmon, Kurtwood Smith, Michael Greyeyes, Gloria Reuben, John Beasley, Tina Jung, Hannan Younis, Gavin MacIver-Wright, Jeremy Ferdman, Jamillah Ross, Morrissa Nicole, Sheila Boyd, Darrin Maharaj, Danny Waugh, Lanette Ware, Hunter Smalley, Isaac Murray, Nicholas Vilord, Vas Saranga, Shane Marriott, Moses Nyarko, Claire Armstrong
  • Director: Keith Thomas
 Comments
  • silverton-37959 - 18 April 2024
    Lost in transliteration
    I think I read the novel in the late '70s and saw the film in the '80s, and the story was well suited to those days. It seems that people I knew back then were much more aware of what obscure federal agencies were capable of doing.

    For these times, this story doesn't fit with the average person's idea of what our federal agents would do. People today seem fearful of being thought of as a "conspiracy theory" buff. I think that this is what causes writers to muddle through a story like this one instead of confidently laying out a cogent story line.

    This story just doesn't arouse the same kind of feelings today as it did in the late '70s-early '80s. That's why the screenplay of this remake just doesn't connect with lots of people, I think.
  • vegas1day - 18 December 2023
    So...why'd you bother watching it?
    Some of these reviews are longer than the movie's screenplay. "Worst movie ever....", "I couldn't get past the first ten minutes...", "Stephen King deserves better".... Such self serving commentary. Frustrated film school drop outs.

    I haven't posted many reviews because I can't possibly know as much as these "experts". What do I know? I like movies and try to find something I like for each one I see. I'm a fan.

    I wasn't crazy about the book or the first movie. Drew Barrymore just wasn't that cute.

    Someone wrote that this version lacked the humor of the first one. Humor?

    I was fine with this remake. It took me away for a little more than ninety minutes. It didn't change my life.

    These negative reviews just about sucked my brain dry.

    I've gotta stop reading them.
  • michaelarscott76 - 13 June 2023
    Set fire to the production
    I think there was a script written that needed lots of meat added to the bones. Choppy, heartless, and mindless as characters go through emotionless motions in this poorly lit, dreary uninvolved recreation of Stephen King's classic.

    We wanted to really like our new hero, but the journey she takes shows a lack of growth as she follows a nonsensical "superhero" origin story to its foggy conclusion.

    With some care to the script and pacing in the story, we might be able to feel for these characters, even the most evil ones. Unfortunately, the execution is just that.... An execution. I sincerely hope another remake is made that sets this franchise back on fire and gives us a version that glorifies Stephen king's vision.
  • LilithSeaborne - 30 December 2022
    Sucked
    This was extremely boring. I read the book and watched the original movie and I can not fathom why they made this.

    The girl was too old and her acting was so plain that I felt nothing for her.

    I love Zac Efron, but not in this.

    There was no connection between Charlie and Rainbird, which, I felt, was vital to the story.

    There was just not enough of anything to be honest. If I didn't read the book, I would be very confused and bored, instead of just bored.

    It felt like a 90's monotone movie with a monotone score.

    I will not recommend this to anyone. I only gave it a 2, because I like looking at Zac Eron.
  • silicontourist - 7 November 2022
    Not Enough Spark To Ignite Any Real Interest In An Uneccessary Remake Of The 1984 Release!
    Its not a terrible film, its not a bad one either, but it certainly wasn't worth the money it cost to warrant a remake!

    The major fault of this film is that it never gives you any shock vibes and there is no tension/tenseness throughout. The most important aspects in a horror film are frights, being scared, tension and shock; which this lacked in every department. You have to be quivering with that creepy scary feeling of being horrified; in the way the "The Exorcist" terrified people around the world 49 years ago.

    Things like camera work and acting are fine but whats the use of it, if the film does not deliver the creeps, chills and excited scariness that a horror should.

    The 1984 original release was supposed to be directed by John Carpenter who strangely enough wrote the music for this 2022 release.
  • Maddie_Zadvinskis - 12 October 2022
    One of the Worst Reboots Ever
    This remake completely spits on Stephen King's novel and the original 1984 film. I had watched both the 1984 film and read the novel this past spring and I thoroughly enjoyed them both. Though the 1984 film is not perfect, it for the most part, captures the tone, the plot, and the characters of the novel quite well in my opinion.

    Everything that made the novel and the original 1984 film interesting and memorable is completely sucked out of this horrible remake, with the exception of John Carpenter, Cody Carpenter, and Daniel A Davies' score. The score of the film is the only reason why I am giving this film a 2/10 instead of a 1/10. Their score at least somewhat captures the spirit of Tangerine Dream's score from the 1984 film. I wish their score was used in a film that deserves their talent instead of this trash fire.

    None of the characters and their actions make much sense in this version. I get that they were trying to avoid just simply adapting everything from the novel and the 1984 film and wanted to add in something different to their version. However, instead of putting thought and effort into developing characters, creating interesting plot points, and writing memorable dialogue, it's very obvious they wanted to cut corners and just dump this movie out. I can't even begin on how much they've butchered all of the characters, especially Charlie and Rainbird. They made Charlie in this version to be one of the most unlikeable little girls I've ever seen in a movie. Rainbird is an absolute far cry from how he is depicted as a villain in both the novel and the 1984 film.

    The dialogue in this film is absolutely painful and cringe. None of the scenes are interesting and the entire film looks so ugly and dark. I could hardly see anyones' faces in some scenes. The fire effects used whenever Charlie lights something on fire, my god... it's one of the most horrendous special effects I've seen in awhile. It looks worse than a Snapchat filter.

    I recommend staying far away from this one.
  • Topaz1922 - 4 October 2022
    A bunch of crap! I'm sure Drew Barrymore is NOT happy
    First off, I'm sick of remakes being made of classics and being poorly done. This movie, like the new candy man is awful! Zac Effron is barely out of puberty and we're supposed to picture him as a dad? Who picked this cast? Why was this even allowed past pre-production? This movie was such a disappointment! Please don't waste your time or your money renting it or Firestarter Rekindled for that fact.

    I watched it free on Peacock and couldn't get past the first 20 minutes. Snooze fest! I'm sure Drew is NOT pleased! If you wanna fall asleep, this is the perfect mo in for you to watch as it will have you asleep in no time.