Thanks for the memories!

It's no definitive masterpiece but it's damn close.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

The story is good for this film and for the time the special effects are good. But it lacks acting and it does get boring at times. Its worth a watch!

Great special effects almost "save" a very stupid movie. "The Fury" made 6 years earlier is a far better concept film. Like the still-popular "X-Men" type films, how or why such genetic abnormalities and powers exist is never explained. Mutated parents=mutated kid. Blame the government! King usually mentions the original author in his forwards to avoid outright plagiarism charges. Big deal. Too much like "Carrie" which has a far better premise and delivery. Here, cute and angelic Drew Barrymore is in reality a cold-blooded killer and has repeated temper tantrums with horrific results. I am unable to have any sympathy for her character "Charlie". The fireball ending kills off 50 to 100 people or so. Mostly faceless agents, firefighters and cops, not to mention most of the principle players. I just don't like it because the special effects are too good for the weak premise. Why would she "turn herself in" to The New York Times at the end? She would certainly be jailed, killed or institutionalized for the rest of her natural life! Would Shirley Temple have made a movie like this? Fun only if you like to see miniature pyrotechnics and hysterical extras running around in fire-suits. I guess that's why it's a horror film?

Film versions of Stephen King novels can be a tricky thing. Often they're half assed, clunky miniseries (ever tried to sit down and watch The Langoliers??), and when they're given the lofty cinema treatment, he has famously turned his nose in the face of Kubrick's might. I feel like Firestarter escaped unscathed, and still holds to this day, if a bit achingly retro now. It's a thriller perceived in a childlike manner by its young protagonist, Charlie Mcgee (Drew Barrymore). Charlie can start fires with her mind, and certain shadowy agencies just can't wait to get their hands on her. Her father (David Keith) once participated in some scary drug testing related to telekinesis back in the day, and some of whatever altered his DNA has been passed on to her. He will do anything to protect her, as the two frantically race across the country to safety, pursued by forces working for Hollister (Martin Sheen), a spook with too much power and nasty ideas about what to do with it. Also on their trail is pseudo spiritual whacko John Rainbird, who wants to absorb Charlie's abilities, man what a freak. Rainbird is a native American in King's novel, so white haired yankee boy Scott is an odd choice, but he does a fine job all the same. Two things are what makes this one really stand out in a special way. Tangerine Dream provides yet another ultrasonic, elemental synth score that has since become legendary. It accents the story in an almost fairy tale like way, gilding the danger with a fable style sound, but never stamping out the real menace. Barrymore is the other leg of the table, giving one hell of a fierce and vulnerable performance for such a young girl, her childlike honesty a prism for the audience to see the evil around her through innocent eyes. It's great stuff, and one of the most solid King adaptations out there. Now there is a sequel (not sure if the man wrote a second book?) called Firestarter 2: Rekindled, which pales in comparison and runs about 45 minutes too long (!), but it's worth a look for the casting of Marguerite Moreau as a grown up Charlie, Malcolm McDowell taking over from Scott as Rainbird, and Dennis Hopper as well.

Now,to be fair, I loved the book this film was based on. I'm a fan of movies and books about people with psychic powers, I've published a few fiction books myself on the topic. Stephen King is an excellent author, but this movie... It sticks to the plot to the best of its ability, but it just seems way too far-fetched at times. It's fiction, but the idea of secret agents murdering a woman and kidnapping her daughter is a bit hard to believe. Also Drew Barrymore, some people love her and find her adorable, I beg to differ. She has that cheesy way-too-angelic personality that no kid in reality would ever have. When she uses her powers, her hair always blows in a breeze that comes from nowhere, even in enclosed spaces where that would never happen. The fire starting scenes do have a rushing-adrenaline atmosphere to them, but still... it's just too difficult to take this film seriously, not to mention it's lousy remake in 2002. If they chose a different actress for Charlie and tried to stick more to the story and less on special effects, I could see this film being more successful. You can't go wrong with the soundtrack though, Tangerine Dream's music written for the film is beautiful and suspenseful all at once. I always did love the ending, where she burns up the Shop, it focuses less on the girl herself, who is an overused child star, and goes more with the events taking place, her power that blows up entire laboratories, knocks a helicopter from they sky and tosses cars into the air like ants off a sandwich. Stephen King's works often feature kids or adolescents with bizarre powers, like Carrie with her telekinesis, Sarah from Children of the Corn who predicted the future with her crude crayon sketches and Danny with his little imaginary friend who warned of ghosts and insanity in the Shining. All in all Firestarter is a film worth watching at least once, but not one of my favorites.