Firestarter Reviews

I wasn't really sure what to expect from this flick but since it was a Stephen King story and since I have a weak spot for Drew Barrymore, I thought I might as well check it out. Well, eventually, I was actually surprised by how underwhelming this movie turned out to be. I mean, right from the lame and poorly put together intro, I already knew that the damned thing would be really weak. Seriously, even though the concept definitely had some potential, pretty much nothing really worked in this flick. For example, back then, there was no CGI yet so everything was done with some pratical effects and even though the viewers might have been impressed at the time, nowadays, it just looks cheesy and unconvincing. I mean, on one hand, you have David Keith holding his head with using his ability and, on the other hand, you have a ventilator blowing Drew Barrymore's hair away and, in both cases, it just looked really silly.  Concerning Drew Barrymore, of course, you could argue that she was only 8 years old when she played this part but, seriously, she was just so weak. In fact, the only interesting character was the one played by George C. Scott who was some kind of creepy war veteran and possibly a child molester, this guy was just so weird and I wonder if it was actual intentional. Anyway, to conclude, the damned thing was just really weak and I don't think it is really worth a look. 

I'm actually surprised with how much they stuck to the story line in this novel adaption. It was also comical when ever Charlie (Barrymore) or her father used their abilities. You could 'see' the effects from it ie; Charlie's hair blowing around and the father having to hold the side of his head. Quite amusing it was, but that's what you get for a 1980's movie.
I'd recommend it mostly for people who like cheesy, tacky thrillers if thriller is really the word for it.