Something like Stephen King’s Firestarter may seem, at first blush, to be the perfect candidate for a remake. Here’s a minor novel by Maine’s Master of Horror that still. has a hefty amount of name-brand recognition. Given that it looms large in the memories of Gen X . Elder millennials as either childhood theater viewing or a VHS.  That stared at them creepily from the racks at their local video store. Its hook, a young girl with telekinetic powers. her father are on the run from the government.  More powerful than its rating, and as such. it became the kind of viewing one would have at sleepovers provide. The had permissive parents willing. shell out the cash for an R-rated rental. It’s not a particularly. great film  blaze the fact that John Carpenter.

‘Firestarter’ Review: The blaze, extinguished

which he’d been offere by Dino DeLaurentis while he was completing The Thing, is the kind of sticking point that never quite escapes one’s craw  but it remains influential. Hence, it shouldn’t have surprise anybody that Blumhouse, in their quest to pivot from theatrical risk-taking to the same IP-bound caution that all other production houses and studios have found broad success with, announced that they’d be remaking it. The new Firestarter, directed by The Vigil‘s Keith Thomas, isn’t terrible, but it does offer a proof of the hypothesis that many critics offered up when things like John Carter hit theaters and failed at finding an audience.


Firestarter’ Review: The blaze

For starters, it’s nearly a full half-hour shorter than the original, and goes to gory lengths that the original couldn’t: There are some impressively brutal moments here, though they’re really just limited to the film’s back-half, once Charlie (Ryan Kiera Armstrong) puts her power blaze le you watch this on Peacock, or you may cross some wires that will lead you to get prion diseases when you embark on your cannibal-craving spree. Her father, himself a victim of government experimentation and was given the ability to “push” the minds of others by these tests I.E., influence them to do whatever the hell it is he wants them to do. it shooting their partner or giving them shelter  is play. by Zac Efron, who feels miscast here even if he does a pretty decent job when the moment calls for it dad in the original. . Their escape is kicke off when Charlie throws a tantrum at school and nearly kills a teacher. The government sends another experiment, a man named John Rainbird (Blood Quantum‘s Michael Greyeyes, taking over from George C. Scott in genuinely welcome change), who happens to kill the girl’s mother during their first encounter. He’s hunting them, with the government closely behind him as well, and Dad’s forced to impart life lessons on the little girl while actively fearing for her safety.


Yet the problems reveal themselves pretty quickly. Though the action is competent, the gore metal, and the screenplay fast-pace. Thomas has trouble making the film compelling for what I believe are three main reasons. The first is the film’s look. which is digitally desaturate and bisexually lit. say nothing of what it must be like in a theater. The second is that Thoma understand how to make Charlie. compelling as a character. defaulting to well-establishe cliches about how. should act on screen in lieu of making her any more than she absolutely has to be