Firestarter (1984) User Reviews

Burning Rage

[virek213 · 7/10 · 31 August 2007]

During 1983 and 1984, there were no fewer than four movies released that were based on the works of Stephen King, this era's horror literature maven. The first three were THE DEAD ZONE, CUJO, and CHRISTINE. The fourth, and least commercially successful, was FIRESTARTER, based on King's 1980 novel. The fact that it didn't fare all that well with critics or audiences doesn't diminish the fact that it remains, despite some flaws, one of the best adaptations of King's works, as well as a commentary on the dangerous of government interference and dissembling in people's lives.

Drew Barrymore, who made a star-making turn in E.T.: THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL, is the young girl possessed of a devastating kind of psychic power called pyrokinesis, the ability to light fires just by concentrating long and hard about it. Her power is the result of her parents (David Keith; Heather Locklear) having undergone a bizarre chemical experiment in 1969 conducted by a secret government agency known as The Shop. Since then, eight of the ten patients originally involved have died horrible deaths, and Locklear has been murdered by agents of the Shop. Now, Keith and Barrymore are on their own, with Keith's only ability to protect Barrymore being his own psychic ability. But once in the hands of the Shop, led by Martin Sheen and George C. Scott, they are the subject of various experiments on their abilities. Barrymore gets special attention, of course, because of her fiery power, especially from Scott. In the end, of course, Sheen and Scott, and the rest of the Shop's minions, find out what happens when you play with a power that you don't fully appreciate...

There are admittedly flaws with FIRESTARTER, most of them having to do with the slightly perfunctory way that Mark L. Lester (CLASS OF 1984) directs the actors, this even though he has some superb ones, notably Sheen and Scott. The dialogue is also a little clunky at times too. But overall, FIRESTARTER succeeds more often than it fails, due to King's own narrative genius, Barrymore's credible performance, and the special effects wizardry of Mike Wood. The scenes of the Shop being incinerated at the end by Barrymore's burning rage after her father has been killed are particularly spectacular. FIRESTARTER also benefits from brief but welcome cameo roles by Art Carney and Louise Fletcher, who become her protectors after the firestorm.

However flawed it might be, FIRESTARTER does provide plenty of suspense and atmosphere without an extreme amount of bloodshed (though the fire scenes are quite hair-raising all the same), and is well worth seeing.

Not spectacular, but good

[SkunkWorx · 7/10 · 2 February 1999]

Firestarter is one of those movies that bores critics and often appears as weekend or late night filler on TV. Even so, the movie does have its moments. Give it a chance, and Firestarter will grow on you.

Fans of the X Files will be at home with the movie's plot about an experimental drug given to 60s college students by a secret government agency, known as The Shop. Two of the students (portrayed by David Keith and Heather Locklear) eventually marry and a child is born; a "firestarter" (played by Drew Barrymore) who can set anything ablaze with just one angry thought. Martin Sheen and George C. Scott round out the cast as heads of The Shop, who are now bent on capturing the girl and harnessing her power as a weapon, not to mention using her as a way to get funding for more experiments.

The acting and dialogue certainly aren't award-winning, but they do carry the movie along. The music, written and performed by Tangerine Dream, is perfectly suited to the movie, and in my opinion is some of Tangerine Dream's best work. The special effects are convincing, and at times, chilling. Readers of Stephen King's best-selling novel will be happy to know that this movie is, for the most part, faithful to his original story, despite a rather clipped ending.

In all, if you have a taste for conspiracy thrillers with a healthy dose of science fiction thrown in, you'll like this one, though it probably won't be your favorite.

One of the more accessible King adaptations, but best if you enjoyed the book

[mstomaso · 7/10 · 21 May 2007]

Firestarter is the story of Charlie (Drew Barrymore at age 8) and Andy, her dad (David Keith), and the people who are trying to imprison, control and/or kill them (Martin Sheen, George C. Scott, Moses Gunn, and others). Charlie is a mutant. Her father and mother were part of an experiment on mutagenic substances performed on college students in the 1960s by The Shop. The experiment gave Andy the ability to control others minds, but the mutation, apparently dormant in his wife, was passed on through the sex chromosome to his daughter. Charlie, quite plainly, can combust virtually anything with her mind.

Though all the acting in this film is good, Barrymore and Scott are truly awesome. Scott plays a brilliant sociopath, and can go from a kindly old Viet Nam vet to a ruthless killer with one quick change of facial expression. And Barrymore (at the age of 8, if you didn't pick up on that the first time I said it) gives her character a fully believable person-hood with great depth.

Like the novel, this is more of a horror-thriller than classic King ghost stories - like The Shining. It is also less classic King horror - like Carrie. And its also not a great drama like Dolores Claiborne, Misery and Stand By Me. Though it fits into roughly the same category as Hearts in Atlantis, it is not a literary as this much later King work and the characters are not as well developed. Although the book could be said to be one of King's earlier experiments with what would become a formula for his lesser works, King's writing is so lucid, and his characters are so interesting, believable and nicely examined, that his 'B fiction' is still somewhat above the average best-seller. The film follows the book very closely, and, like the book, is sort of a prototype for the more formulaic films in the King portfolio.

The directing is very good, the cinematography (especially the effects) is excellent, and the film is, as a whole entertaining. But, for those who have not read the book, the film will likely come off as 'no big deal.' As with many of the more formulaic King-derived films, this is best seen as a cathartic summary of the original work (like Dreamcatchers, Running Man, The Stand, Maximum Overdrive, The Mangler and others).

Young prodigy starts fires in one of the best Stephen King adaptations!

[The_Void · 7/10 · 19 July 2006]

Despite the fact that the films usually revolve around good and interesting stories, film adaptations of Stephen King's works are often not the best horror movies. Firestarter isn't the best known of his books, and that's slightly odd as this film adaptation is one of the best based on his stories. The film takes obvious influence from Brian De Palma's 'The Fury', as aside from the fact that this one is about a young girl that can start fires, and De Palma's film features a boy with psychic abilities; the way that both plots play out is very similar indeed. The plot has a number of problems, and the characters don't always act logically; but this is offset by the likable nature of the film, and characters that are easy to get along with due to their relatively simplistic nature. The film follows the aftermath of an experiment in which people were given an experimental drug. The ultimate result of this experiment was a child born of Andy and Vicky McGee; a child with a unique ability known as 'pyrokinesis' - the ability to start fires at will.

The film benefits from a range of cult stars. A young Drew Barrymore takes the title role, and although her acting skills hadn't been honed by the time this film was released, and she is more than a little bit wooden; she provides an interesting lead. David Keith and Martin Sheen back her up well in supporting roles, but the main acting plaudits go to the great George C. Scott who is good in what is probably the meatiest role of the piece. The running time is a little long for a film like this, but it's well used and the fact that the story doesn't get caught up with needless elements such as the girl's mother and father falling in love is definitely a good thing. The plot is very relaxed for most of the way through, and director Mark L. Lester seems content to just let things play out. That is until the last fifteen minutes; when the plot reaches its full potential and explodes with a fun and exciting finale. The film does feel more than a little bit like a TV movie at times; and the dumbed down techno soundtrack doesn't help this. Overall, the film definitely isn't perfect; but it's an enjoyable watch and King films have definitely been a lot worse!

Nicely made sci-fi with a terrific child star

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 17 October 2014]

Andrew McGee (David Keith) is on the run with his daughter Charlie (Drew Barrymore) from a secret government agency called 'The Shop'. He has the power of suggestion. She sets fires. Back in college, he was in Dr. Joseph Wanless (Freddie Jones)'s experiment with Vicky Tomlinson (Heather Locklear) taking an injection called Lot 6. They start communicating telepathically. Everybody hallucinates and they are the only two survivors. Later they got married and had Charlie. After they killed Vicky and tried to kidnap Charlie, Andrew goes on the run. Dr. Wanless wants to kill off the family fearing the powers of the little girl. Captain Hollister (Martin Sheen) scoffs at the possibilities with the support of John Rainbird (George C. Scott). They want to experiment and use her as a weapon.

This is such a nicely made sci-fi giving child star Drew Barrymore the staring role. It doesn't have the big flash and the sizzle. It's mostly a road movie. There are some nice fire work. The explosions could be more impressive. The flashbacks work well. The acting is generally very good with some terrific actors. Drew does an exceptional job as a child actor. It probably could use more shoot outs and high speed chases. However it works very well without them.

Above-average.

[gridoon · 7/10 · 14 February 2002]

Good special effects and a great cast make this film above-average, as Stephen King adaptations go (well, it's certainly better than "Maximum Overdrive"). The story may be a bit predictable, partly because King had visited similar territory before ("Carrie", anyone?), but you have to admire the way the film puts you into the action right from the start, omitting any slow introductions, and George C.Scott is such a strong, perverse and eccentric villain that you can't help watching him. (**1/2)

Underrated King adaptation

[mnpollio · 7/10 · 24 July 2019]

Released at a time when Stephen King adaptations seemed to be showing up at the movie theater every month, Firestarter was not considered either a prime King novel or an especially great film. Yet ironically, through the mists of time and perhaps nostalgia, there seem to be a number of viewers who hold a soft spot for the film. I am one of them.

The story centers on young Charlie McGee, whose parents Andy and Vicky foolishly participated as college students in a drug experiment for easy money. The drug causes wildly divergent results ranging from nothing to full on psychosis to the development of certain psychic abilities. Andy and Vicky are able to communicate without speaking and, in Andy's case, he can influence another person's thinking. Charlie is born with the ability of pyrokinesis - the ability to start fires at will - which makes the family the targets of shadowy government operatives with plans to exploit Charlie as a weapon. The film opens with Andy and Charlie on the run from said operatives and Charlie's ongoing struggle to contain her ability, which spills out when she becomes angry or emotional. And given that Charlie is a child, a temper tantrum can be deadly.

The film has its faults - notably that it is uneven. Viewers who do not stick with it past the opening third will be missing out though because the film slowly but surely course corrects.

One would feel that the moments with Andy and Charlie on the run would be the most effective and exciting, but oddly that is not the case here. Drew Barrymore is ideally cast as Charlie, but she is strangely uneven in these moments with David Keith, as her father. To be honest, Keith is simply dreadful. His acting is stiff, his line readings are stilted and he feels like a bargain basement Patrick Swayze here. There are endless moments of him getting down on one knee and giving Charlie pep talks that are just plain excruciating to watch or listen to.

Ironically, the film picks up substantially after Charlie and Andy are captured and separated at the government facility. With Keith's godawful performance temporarily sidelined, it allows the better actors to enter the fray and right the listing boat. Martin Sheen heads the facility as a weaselly government lackey and Moses Gunn is an oily unctuous doctor, who wants to test the limits of Charlie's abilities. These scenes are actually pretty fascinating.

The film also has one of the best villains to appear in a King work courtesy of George C. Scott as the wily assassin John Rainbird. Rainbird sees Charlie as a force of nature that he longs to control, manipulate and ultimately destroy. He masquerades as a sympathetic custodian to win her empathy and her trust, and strings her along until he is granted the go-ahead to annihilate her. Whereas Barrymore is uneven in her scenes with Keith, the opposite happens in her scenes with Scott. She positively blossoms and the relationship between the two of them becomes the most interesting thing in the film. We know that Charlie is won over by Rainbird and feels affection towards him, but strangely it also appears that Rainbird (while never deviating from his original goal) develops an affection towards her as well. Of course, the viewer knows that all hell will break loose once the deception is revealed.

Mark Lester's direction is solid without being overly original. The sequences of Charlie unleashing her powers are all exciting and nicely choreographed. The concluding battle is especially well done. The script sticks close to King's novel without being slavish. Tangerine Dream's score seems a bit bizarre at first, but ultimately enhances the overall action.

Barring Keith's dismal effort, the cast even down to the smaller supporting parts is extraordinary. Barrymore and Scott truly hold everything together and give you a rooting interest in the action and a watchability factor that the film otherwise may not have had. Heather Locklear brightens up a few scenes as Charlie's mother. Oscar winners Art Carney and Louise Fletcher show up in brief roles as a kindly couple that temporarily offer shelter to Andy and Charlie and then have a pivotal role later.

As King adaptations go, you will find better, but you will also find a lot worse. And I think you will be surprised at how well the film holds together, especially in the latter two-thirds. It is definitely an entertaining effort.

An Awkward Adaptation

[akpiggott · 5/10 · 26 October 2004]

The main problem with "Firestarter" is it tries to adapt the story of the book faithfully, at the expense of character development. It is impossible to cram a five hundred page book into one two hour movie and make it work favourably. For much of the picture, the pacing feels awkward and rushed, more interested in moving the plot along than developing the characters.

Brian De Palma's "Carrie" followed the story of the book just as closely. But seeing as "Carrie" is less than half the length of "Firestarter", it made for a much more comfortable adaptation.

Stanley Kubrick had the right idea with "the Shining". The book was about the same length as "Firestarter", and as a result the plot was butchered heavily to make it work for the screen. Stephen King (and much of his loyal fanbase) have misgivings about Kubrick's adaptation, a lot of people who love film (and recognise it as the different medium that it is) regard it as a masterpiece.

Mark Lester's "Firestarter" isn't all bad however. George C. Scott's John Rainbird is inspired casting, and probably the best thing this film has going for it. The scene at the Manders' farm, and the conclusion at the Shop's headquarters make for enjoyable viewing and are handled capably.

It's a shame, that as a whole, the film doesn't work too well. I'd definitely like to see this re-adapted into another film or a mini-series. The book isn't exactly King's best, but it has a lot of potential for another screen outing. 5/10

A Good Stephen King Adaptation

[destinylives52 · 7/10 · 12 February 2017]

Manny's Movie Musings: "Firestarter" adapts Stephen King's book of the same name, and stars Drew Barrymore playing the title role and David Keith as her protective father. Both father and daughter have super powers (Barrymore can set almost anything on fire) due to a government experiment, and now they are hunted down for more experimentation and ultimate disposal. My most memorable, movie moment of "Firestarter" is the scene when Barrymore walks out of a burning barn, ready to kill and burn everything and everyone she sees — a little girl with an adorable face but with the power of the devil. Although "Firestarter" has the feel of a movie of the week and has several shenanigans (e.g., the bad guys make the laughably bad assumption that Keith has lost his powers and therefore doesn't need that much supervision), overall it is very entertaining (mostly due to Barrymore's adorable portrayal of her character), and the part when Barrymore goes off on the bad guys is very satisfying.

Mannysmemorablemoviemoments

The conclusion is rather explosive.

[Aaron1375 · 5/10 · 16 February 2004]

This movie is about, of course, a girl who can start fires with her mind. Through a series of flashbacks we see how she came about these powers and why the government is now pursuing her. This movie features a few stars such as the title character Drew Barrymore, David Keith, George C. Scott, and Martin Sheen. Keith plays Barrymore's dad and he also has special abilities mainly consisting of a strange ability to control a persons mind. Through the first half of the film we see these two chased by this organization called "the shop" which is actually referred too in a couple of other King novels (never read this one though). The second half has them captured by this organization and performing tests on Barrymore's character. For the most part this movie is very slow moving and a bit confusing. I have watched it a few times and I still am unsure of George C Scott's motivations. You see Charlie (Barrymore) use her powers here and there, but nothing to grand, that is until the end where the movie really ends with a bang.

Above-average Stephen King theatrical fare.

[FiendishDramaturgy · 8/10 · 1 September 2003]

Psychological and psychedelic testing produce some amazing results. Now those results are walking and talking and very unhappy with the agency who created it.

Delightfully triumphant, wonderfully destructive forces are about to be tapped, honed and unleashed against the government who has created and now hopes to utilize these frightening powers upon the world.

Charlie McGee (Drew Barrymore at the age of 9) is the product of psychological and psychedelic drug experiments performed by the US government upon her parents before her conception.

After witnessing the murder of her mother, she and her father are on the run from the mysterious bunch of gun-carrying miscreants known only as "the Agency."

Her father (David Keith) is also a telepath as a result of these experiments, who enjoys telekinetic abilities as well. These abilities help, but not well enough.

Will Charlie be able to save her father? Herself? Will they make it through this, or be forever torn apart by the Firestarter?

Excellent movie. Excellent performances by Drew Barrymore (if a little hesitant and deliberate at times), George C. Scott (hated, Hated, HATED his character!! that must mean he played it very very well *lol*), Martin Sheen and David Keith.

The effects were quite good, though in post-StarWars 1984, I had hoped for better; as was the plot and storyline.

As Stephen King adaptations go, it varied from the book just enough to make it one of the FEW adaptations of King's work through which I don't find myself cringing.

It gets a solid 8/10 from...

the Fiend :.

Thrillling story about a little girl whose parents acquired phenomenal mental powers and who herself can set anything on fire

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 21 October 2012]

Suspenseful and terrifying entertainment that goes beyond its genre , dealing with a girl who has the unwanted and often uncontrollable gift of Pyrokinesis, as a result of a government experiment , lighting fires by mere thought . A couple Victoria 'Vicky' Tomlinson McGee (Heather Locklear of Dynasty) and Andy McGee (David Keith , he was 14th choice) who participated in a potent medical experiment gain telekinetic ability and then have a child named Charlene 'Charlie' McGee (Jennifer Connelly , Taylor Neff were considered and Bridgette Andersen, the star of Savannah Smiles, tested for the role of Charlie, ultimately played by Drew Barrymore) who is pyrokinetic . Charlie McGee (whose character was modeled on King's daughter Naomi) has an extraordinary power (or is that haunted) , sometimes uncontrollable and an evil destructive force . Meanwhile a secret government agency known as "The Shop" led by Captain Hollister (Martin Sheen took over at a late stage from Burt Lancaster who had to withdraw following heart surgery) and send a sniper named John Rainbird (George C Scott) and plot to kidnap the duo for study them and testing their abilities.

This exciting tale packs noisy action , explosions , suspense , thriller , chills , poignant plot and results to be an enjoyable though frightening entertainment , including some silly and embarrassing scenes . The movie delivers the goods with hair-rising thrills as when the little girl executes the astonishing abilities . It stars Drew Barrymore in one of her first roles after E.T. , as the gifted child of the title who has the ability to ignite objects around her . David Keith is good as the daddy who attempts to protect her from the nasties . Secondary cast is frankly excellent as Freddie Jones as Doctor Joseph Wanley , Art Carney as Irv Manders , Louise Fletcher as Norma Manders , Moses Gunn as Doctor Pynchot and Antonio Fargas as a Cabman . The fire special effects , themselves , of course , are the real protagonists , and they're surprising , astounding, and quite convincing . The special effects gave work to a great number of technician people and lots of stunts . This film was originally going to be directed by John Carpenter. According to Carpenter, Universal executives removed him from the project in the wake of the box office and critical drubbing they received for The Thing ,Carpenter had reportedly talked to his Assault on Precinct 13 actor, Darwin Joston about taking on the role of John Rainbird, which was ultimately played by George C. Scott . Strange soundtrack by Tangerine Dream was composed and performed by means of synthesizer ,they never actually saw the film and sent filmmaker some music and told him to choose whatever he liked . It was followed by ¨Firestarter 2 : rekindled¨ (2002) by Robert Iscove with Marguerite Moreau as Charlene "Charlie" McGee , Malcolm McDowell , Dennis Hopper and Danny Nucci and in which Charlie has been in hiding for nearly all her life from a top-secret government fringe group headed by a maniacal who wants to find and use her as the ultimate weapon of war.

The motion picture was well produced by Dino Laurentiis and professionally directed by Mark L. Lester. Director Mark L. Lester confirmed that this is his most difficult film that he ever made . He's a cool director and producer -American World Pictures- of B movies , his greatest success was during the 80s when he directed hits , such as ¨Commando¨, ¨Showdown in Little Tokio¨ and ¨Class of 99¨ and this ¨Firestarter¨.

Could have been...

[kittenkongshow · 3/10 · 19 July 2019]

...a lot better than it ended up.

I've never read the Stephen King story so can't judge on the adaptation.

Until they get captured it's not a bad film but afterwards it just fizzles out the final revenge section is marred by it's length and the mixed quality of the effects, Maybe a tighter script and direction would have pulled this up a level.

The brightest thing in the film is Drew Barrymore - 9 years old and out acting the rest of the cast.

Forgettable is the word I'll choose for this.

Drew Barrymore, the most powerful X-Men of them all.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 6/10 · 29 June 2011]

This is a movie with not the best reputation out there. It feels and looks like a late sequel to Brian De Palma's "The Fury", which was still a movie I liked better than this one.

Seems that one of the foremost reason why this movie isn't well liked is because it has some controversy in it. Drew Barrymore, who still was a 8 or 9 year old kid at the time, is killing a lot of people with her kinetic powers in this movie. Sort of the same reason why there was some controversy about "Kick-Ass" at the time. She kills by literally setting people on fire and blowing stuff up, with her powers (never thought I would ever been seeing Drew Barrymore blowing up George C. Scott). People tend to not like seeing kids doing stuff like that, even when it's in 'just' a movie. I personally have no problems with it, so it's nothing I hold against the movie but I of course can still see the reason why some people have issues with it.

But still I also didn't liked this movie all that much. I was still really liking this movie during its first half, when it was being a movie in which the main characters were on the run but I really started to loose interest fast the moment they got captured and locked up for research. All of the pace and excitement seemed to be gone after that and the movie just never really recovered.

You can definitely 'blame' the fact that this movie is being based on a book for that. I'm sure the story and character development and emotions all worked out fine in Stephen King's novel but it just isn't a type of story that translates well to the big screen. It makes too sudden big jumps in its story, has too many distracting and pointless sidetracks and characters and the contrasts between the first and second half of the movie are just too big. Apparently a remake of this movie is currently on the way but I have a scoop for you; It will bomb! The story just isn't good or interesting enough movie-wise and too many elements within it really don't work out too well on film.

It's pretty amazing to see how much talent was involved with this movie, while at the same time it also had a quite low-budget. It's based on a novel by Stephen King, has action expert Mark L. Lester as director, Frank Capra Jr. and the Dino De Laurentiis Company behind the movie its production and it's starring David Keith, Drew Barrymore, Heather Locklear, Martin Sheen and George C. Scott. So lots of big names behind this movie, which make it perhaps a bit of an interesting 'failure' without at the same time calling this movie an horrible one though.

No, it really is not an horrible movie by any means but it at the same time just isn't working out well either. It's a movie that you can definitely watch but when you don't, you're not missing much with it.

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

O. K. Flick

[camraman · 6/10 · 26 June 2000]

Here is another screen adaptation of a Stephen King literary work that has fallen short of it's potential to truly entertain. To read his work and then wait in high anticipation of the cinematic interpretation, only to be disappointed after viewing, can cause one to remain biased with screen adaptations. Though I was disappointed with the overall production of this movie, there are a few strong points I'd like to mention. I was thoroughly impressed with Drew Barrymore's acting ability at eight years of age. She was a natural and carried this movie. Because of the depth in which she played her character, I will give this movie a six- I give her acting a ten. A weaker actress would have made this movie more difficult to watch. Charlie Sheen and George C. Scott helped the movie along too. Otherwise the movie lacked the direction and mood that Stephen King usually generates in his books.

"Wood chips. They should have given me something harder."

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 5 June 2019]

"Firestarter" is the film version of the Stephen King novel about Charlene "Charlie" McGee (Drew Barrymore). Her parents, Andy (David Keith) and Vicky (Heather Locklear) participated in a drug experiment while college students, and now Andy has strange mental powers, and Charlie has similarly been cursed with the ability to start fires through the power of her own mind. Naturally, this makes them targets for "The Shop", one of those shadowy government organizations common in movies.

Designed by movie mogul Dino De Laurentiis as a vehicle for young Barrymore, who was still basically learning how to act at this point. She was just a kid, so she can be forgiven, but out of all the solid actors assembled here (Martin Sheen, Art Carney, Louise Fletcher, Moses Gunn, George C. Scott, Freddie Jones), only some of them don't seem to be having off days. Scott has the most interesting role in the picture, a cold, calculating and creepy "exterminator" who earns Charlies' trust by endearing himself to her. (He's good, if undeniably miscast.)

The story is not a great one, but it is reasonably entertaining, and The Shop do make for perfectly despicable villains given their desire to thoroughly exploit this poor child. But don't fear: scores and scores of them get their just desserts by the time this is over. The stunt people and special effects technicians definitely earned their pay, giving us a plethora of fire gags and explosions. The finale is an over the top circus of horrors, and should entertain viewers quite nicely on a purely visceral level.

Give the filmmakers some credit for their opening: the story is already well under way as the movie opens, with Andy and Charlie on the run, and a couple of flashbacks along the way to show us how the characters got to this point. Overall, the movie is fairly slick, but its best asset may be the atmospheric Tangerine Dream soundtrack.

As buffs may already well know, this was originally supposed to be directed by John Carpenter and scripted by Bill Lancaster, but Universal dropped them like a hot potato when their previous collaboration "The Thing" was an underwhelming performer at the box office.

Followed by a TV movie, "Firestarter: Rekindled", in 2002.

Seven out of 10.

Let Stephen King light the fire

[bhernandez2216 · 6/10 · 16 May 2022]

This movie was alright, but Drew Berrymore is on fire with her performance. I haven't read any Stephen King's novels, but this movie brought a lot of fire power in one little girl in the movie.

Really good!

[geeked-out-4-movies · 9 April 2022]

Firestarter is a really good movie with amazing special effects, and a great cast. Drew Barymore played her part of Charlie really well. The movie is based on a book by Stephen King which looks interesting too. I'm excited for the remake.

7/10 stars.

Pyromania chiller with little bite.

[barnabyrudge · 4/10 · 5 May 2003]

Firestarter the movie and Firestarter the novel (written, of course, by Stephen King) have a common hindrance. Both are fine for their first half, with plenty of pace and action and even a few scares. But both book and film peter off in their second half, as the chase scenario which dominates the opening segment becomes a slow, tedious and frequently unconvincing cat-and-mouse affair set in a secret scientific centre known as The Shop.

David Keith is a strange choice for Andy McGee, a father with mysterious powers (courtesy of an experiment gone wrong) whose daughter Charlie has even greater powers which enable her to set objects alight at will. The Shop want her so that they can kill her, as they have reason to believe she has no true control over her powers and may one day inadvertently nuke the planet Earth. As Charlie, Drew Barrymore is reasonably good, especially in the scenes where she gets mad and starts off a blaze. Best performance of the lot comes from George C. Scott, as a seemingly educated assassin who occasionally says something which hints that he well and truly out of his mind. It's a calculated and chilling display. Less worthy are the roles of Freddie Jones (bizarre and exaggerated) and Martin Sheen (bland and boring).

I would say that Firestarter is worth catching if you're a fan of King or Barrymore, and although I shouldn't say this I'm sure pyromaniacs will revel in it. However, for the discerning audience there's little here worth making a special effort to see. It just comes and goes like the wind and, for want of a better word, doesn't really ignite.

"You're gonna have to burn it all down, baby!"

[classicsoncall · 7/10 · 24 October 2021]

It's surprising the number of 'A' listers that appeared in this movie, all in support of nine year old Drew Barrymore in her first starring role following the success of "E. T. the Extra-Terrestrial". Based on the Stephen King novel, the story concerns a young girl who inherits her extraordinary power of pyrokinesis from her parents as a result of a secret government experiment. The back story is kept to a minimum as it thrusts Charlene 'Charlie' McGee (Barrymore) into a mad dash from authorities with her Dad Andy (David Keith) in an effort to evade their quest to exploit her powers. George C. Scott has a prominent role in the story as John Rainbird, seemingly with his own agenda for pursuing Charlie, although quite honestly, that wasn't really made clear. I had to chuckle a bit over one scene in which he turned the tables on that old adage of going postal because he did so on a postal worker. Given Charlie's supernatural ability, you pretty much know from the start where this picture will eventually lead, as it slowly begins with minor fiery confrontations and builds to a sensational conflagration to cap the story. As with the Rainbird agenda though, no explanation is offered for Charlie's ability to deflect bullets fired at her a la Wonder Woman, so I guess you have to take it as a given along with her mental pyrokinetic powers. For a Stephen King adaptation, this was okay though far from the best. Of the nearly three dozen films I've seen and reviewed based on King's works, this one clocks in (as I write this), at number twenty six out of thirty four based on IMDb viewers ratings. You can check my list for a fuller rundown.

Not as hot as it could have been

[gcd70 · 4/10 · 7 August 2007]

This fantastic Stephen King yarn translates rather poorly to the cinema screen. Director Mark L. Lester and screenwriter Stanley Mann fail to convey the tension and intrigue that would not allow me to put the book down.

The special effects are quite impressive, however they are utilised poorly in what turn out to be poorly organised action sequences.

Martin Sheen is always a pleasure to watch, but we do not see enough of him. Drew Barrymore shows some signs of very early talent. Worthy support from George C. Scott, Art Carney, Louise Fletcher, Freddie Jones, Moses Gunn and lead actor David Keith.

Sunday, September 29, 1991 - Video

Take "Carrie" one step further...

[lee_eisenberg · 9/10 · 16 January 2007]

If you thought that "Carrie" made incredible use of conflagrations, you ain't seen nothing yet! In Stephen King's other combustion-themed story, "Firestarter" portrays the daughter (Drew Barrymore) of a experimental guinea pig (David Keith) using her ignition abilities to get her way. When the government kidnaps her and her father, things really get ugly.

On one level, this movie seems a little preachy, with the shadowy agents going after the man and his daughter. But I would call that an accurate depiction of things. And you gotta agree with what the girl does, no matter how extreme she gets (and I'm talking really extreme). So I definitely recommend this movie. But if you're a pyromaniac, don't let this movie encourage you.

Also starring Heather Locklear, Martin Sheen, George C. Scott, Art Carney and Louise Fletcher.

Not the Best Stephen King Adaptation But Has Enough Nostalgia For a Cult Following

[eric262003 · 6/10 · 2 October 2022]

College student Andy McGee (David Keith) and Vicky Tomlinson (Heather Locklear) try to get some extra cash by signing up for an experiment with the LOT-6 drug. After they gor married and had a daughter named Charlene "Charlie" (Drew Barrymore) and soon realize that the drug they induced gave them superpowers especially Charlie who has the gift of setting fire by way of using her mind when angry or provoked. Andy too can use his mind to get people to do thing for him and now with Vicky dead, Andy and Charlie are now on the run from a government known as The Shop who want to isolate them and use their powers for their own personal gain. Under the leadership of Captain James Hollister (Martin Sheen) and hired assassin John Railbird (George C. Scott) to either bring her in or have her killed.

Under the direction of Mark Lester "Firestarter" is a sci-fi, horror,thriller based off of a 1980 Stephen King novel of the same name and was met by mostly negative reviews. John Carpenter was originally going to direct this movie, but he was labeled "box-office poison" after the poorly received reception he got with the 1982 movie "The Thing". The movie was composed by a German synth band called Tangerine Dream.

I was a very small child when I saw the novel "Firestarter" on display at a bookstore. That along with "Cujo" was the first time that started to get invested in the works of Stephen King. Like the novel, the movie was not very well made, but the nostalgia has enough material to be identified as a cult classic, and the campy nature delivered here prevented this movie from becoming generic.

The pacing tends to extremely convoluted and the blame has to do with the abysmal editing. The exciting scene are when Andy and Charlie are being chased by The Shop, but then, the movie hits a dead end once they get captured. They proceed by giving Charlie some tests, while Rainbird uses some kind of manipulative forces that make his character an interesting fellow abeit a very disturbing one. The ending is anything but satisfying and when you leave, you'll feel like they left something out. It's unknown whether it's intentional or not, but it will leave you completely underwhelmed.

Though she was still very young in age, Drew Barrymore performed a very complex and emotionally versatile role. Her sadness and tears felt very organic and authentic in its delivery. However, her anger and other emotions felt very forced and seemed like she was having a hard time pulling off these emotions. Maybe she naturally felt emotionally sad and dreary while making this movie. David Keith turned a fine performance as a protective dad defending his daughter every way he could. Martin Sheen was convincing as a corrput government official. Heather Locklear is only on for a brief moment as Charlie's mother and Andy's wife, but gets killed off very early. The worst cast choice was George C. Scott as the villain character of John Rainbird. Though Rainbird was supposed to be Native American, Scott never looked or even convinced the audience that he was. Maybe it was to protect the image of Native Americans by keeping them protagonists so be hiring a non-Native actor to play the villain was a way that Hollywood could save face by not villifying a certain group of people by saving face either through fear of retribution. Besides that Scott is just too good for this B-movie and deserves much better roles than what was given to him. The creepiness to his character is also over-the-top in his obsession with the young girl. Okay I get it, we need a villain to keep the story with some level of interest which he does deliver. However, the way he handles Charlie comes very close to the tactics pedophiles use to seduce their young victims, even though he would like nothing more than to kill her.

The technical features can come across around the borders of average to highly impressive. The pyro effects are quite fascinating, but it seems to only really take charge through the climax when Charlie goes on a vengeful rampage and starts burning up everybody and every building she feels threatened by. There are some great visuals in the movie, however the only thing that annoys me the most is the blowing hair from Charlie's long blond locks.

Though "Firestarter" has a place in the annals of fans of Stephen King novels and movie adaptations and fans who love Drew Barrymore in her younger days, the movie didn't go completely unnoticed. In 2002 a long awaited sequel happened called "Firestarter 2: Rekindled" which was a direct-to-video. This year they rebooted "Firestarter" under the Blumhouse Productions which also wasn't met with positive feedback.

Tragically bad

[chrissch · 3/10 · 3 December 2011]

The script for Firestarter is a tolerable adaptation of the novel. It keeps intact the major plot elements, story sequence, settings, characters, and much of the key dialogue. A few minor changes don't affect the story, though untidied remnants of excised plot and characters muddle it a bit. Few novel adaptations are as faithful, at least as to structure.

That tepid compliment is the only one I can pay Firestarter. The script adaptation is faithful to what it includes, but what it omits leaves the story leaden. The movie has no use for the novel's depth and finesse. Character depth is absent. Relationships among the characters are cartoonish. The true terror of black-ops government is reduced to "People from The Shop are bad." The science of pyrokinesis, telepathic mental dominance, and pharmaceutical brain alteration -- key elements of the novel's power -- remain only in bits of dialogue.

There's no finesse from the cast either. Their performances, even George C. Scott's, are uniformly dead. Martin Sheen hadn't yet come into his own. Drew Barrymore wasn't up to her role; the cuteness she brought to "E.T." was inadequate for Firestarter. Brian Keith hasn't the talent for a lead role; he should never have been cast. The acting is painful to watch, and the movie drags from start to finish.

It's always tough to judge how effective a movie's score will be, but Tangerine Dream was a terrible artistic choice. Their music is suitable for a mood movie like Blade Runner, but painfully dissonant for a thriller -- as painful to hear as the acting is to watch.

You'd think that a thriller about pyrokinesis would at least have some good fire and explosion effects, yes? Especially when it's made in the same year as Return of the Jedi, with the same special-effects technology available, yes? Sorry, no luck there either. Visual effects are primitive to pathetic, sweeping away whatever suspension of disbelief the viewer has left.

My only real pleasure in Firestarter was, as a reader familiar with the novel, seeing the story and characters that I knew brought to life, however imperfectly. The nine year-old Drew Barrymore's cuteness was still appealing, though inadequate, and she showed a quality of intensity that got my attention. For those two things, I rate the movie 3/10.

Great Cast but the Film is a Flop

[Michael_Elliott · 1 October 2012]

Firestarter (1984)

** (out of 4)

Weak adaptation of the Steven King novel about a young child named Charlie (Drew Barrymore) who has the special power of being able to set things on fire by just using her thought. She's on the run with her father (David Keith) from various government people wanting to exploit her talent as she tries to control her gift. I haven't read the novel that this movie is based on so I can't comment on what this got right or wrong. However, I'm one who never expects a movie to follow the book 100% so with that in mind I can only say that this film is a complete mess. Thankfully this thing offers up an all-star cast including some legends because without them this film would be nearly impossible to get through. Clocking in just under two-hours, the film feels twice as long and I think a lot of the blame has to go to director Mark L. Lester. His direction is all over the place and not for a second did I feel any tension in the story and I also thought the pacing was pretty bad. I will say that not all of this might be his fault because the screenplay itself has a fair number of problems. One such problem is that the entire thing never really seems to know what it wants to do. Is it a horror film? Science fiction? Is it trying to be some sort of hard, negative look at the government and their powers? The film is all over the map in regards to what it's trying to do but sadly it doesn't do any of them very well. The performances are actually pretty good and are the best thing in the film. Barrymore delivers a strong and believable performance as the haunting girl and I've always liked Keith in just about everything he's done. Heather Locklear does a nice job in her scenes as the mother and we get vets like Martin Sheen and George C. Scott offering up fine performances. The highlight of the film deals with a couple farmers played by Art Carney and Louise Fletcher. Yes, FIRESTARTER has three Oscar-winning actors. The special effects are another plus and help give the film some energy. I must admit that the entire story struck me as being silly and especially early on as we see Keith's character getting nosebleeds from doing his psychic powers and Barrymore crying from setting people on fire. These scenes really made me laugh the majority of the time and once we keep seeing the same thing over and over it just gets boring.