SummaryFor more than a decade, parents Andy (Zac Efron) and Vicky (Sydney Lemmon) have been on the run, desperate to hide their daughter Charlie (Ryan Kiera Armstrong) 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, ...
SummaryFor more than a decade, parents Andy (Zac Efron) and Vicky (Sydney Lemmon) have been on the run, desperate to hide their daughter Charlie (Ryan Kiera Armstrong) 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, ...
There is plenty of good meat on the bone here for the hungriest horror hounds. If you have some time to burn, the new Firestarter is definitely worth it.
I always wonder if people have ever seen bad movies. Like ACTUALLY bad movies. This isn't a 0 or any negative score. A 2.3 aggregate? Are we being serious? The movie is well acted (especially Effron), well shot, had some solid effects/gore, great music, what else do people want? At worst the pacing needs to be improved. It is a 7/10.
Doesn’t really give you enough depth to be a really good film. Maybe it’s because the source material wasn’t up to much. Not read the book so can’t say.
Director Keith Thomas and writer Scott Teems found a way to turn the fun source material into a lethargic parenting drama that’s completely devoid of warmth.
When it’s a cautionary tale about an unusual family who’ll never know a moment’s peace because of their past choices, Firestarter is worthy of its source material. When in its last half-hour it turns into chapter one of a potential new superhero franchise, it joins the long list of Stephen King movies that are all gimmick, no guts.
This movie is pretty average. The acting is pretty good, the vfx are stunning at times but there's not a lot going on. The movie feels like the director wants to give off a "stranger Things" kind of vibe but it just feels cheap and out of place. However the music is really good and up to John Carpenter's standards. The story also isn't told really well and it makes liking the characters harder. Even though it has some flaws, this movie is enjoyable and isn't particularly bad, nor good either but it could be worse and I got some enjoyment watching it.
Weak remake of a film that wasn't that good in the first place as a family with powers try to keep their daughter (who has fire powers of her own) safe from the US government.
The Stephen King remake parade continues with another addition to the horror genre, Firestarter. With the financial success of IT Chapter I and II it’s not surprising we’re seeing more King adaptations and even though there’s plenty of new material to bring to the big screen for some reason we’re stuck with yet another dull remake. No, Firestarter isn’t quite as bad as Pet Sematary but then again that’s not saying much.
Carlie (Ryan Kiera Armstrong) is a young girl trying to understand how she has the power to set things on fire with her mind. After years of staying under the radar, Charlie’s parents Andy (Zac Efron) and Vicky (Sydney Lemmon) fear her power is becoming too strong for her to control and the risk of being discovered imminent.
Films like Firestarter are the reason many people believe originality in Hollywood is dead. There is literally no point to this movie at all, it’s bland, boring and honestly not worth your time. Considering we already have a decent version of Firestarter it seems like rather than remaking this perhaps something new would have been more successful. The whole secret lab of evil scientists kidnapping children with telekinetic powers could have been done for the big screen by adapting the 2019 novel, The Institute by King, which has a very similar theme but with less fire. It’s a book that hasn’t yet been adapted for either film or TV and it would have been far better to have a new idea rather than yet another cash grab remake. IT saw the potential to reinvent itself and it’s a remake worthy of your time, Chapter I definitely is anyway. Pet Sematary was a catastrophic failure and now Firestarter is the very definition of “meh”.
I really don’t see the point in this remake at all, Firestarter just shows up and presents a mediocre version of a story you’ve already seen before. Blumhouse productions have done far better movies than this, and putting “from the producer of The Invisible Man” on the poster isn’t fooling anyone. That’s a far better movie which you’d be better off watching and skipping Firestarter altogether. Also for all the Efron fans, don’t be tempted, his performance is nothing special and he’s a better actor than this. Not recommended.