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.
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.