Film Review: Firestarter

Images courtesy of Universal Pictures Australia.

Thanks in no small part to the success of 2017’s IT: Chapter One and homages like It Follows and Netflix’s Stranger Things, Stephen King adaptations are back in style. Everyone and their mother was looking for untapped potential in the earlier slew of silver screen reimaginings ever so prevalent in the 80s and 90s; a remake of Firestarter seemed inevitable.Released in 1984, the original Firestarter is mainly notable for its production troubles, having first been offered to John Carpenter to direct, only for this offer to be revoked upon The Thing’s poor box office performance, and its casting of a young Drew Barrymore. It was also my first introduction to the world of King outside of his more palatable fare like Shawshank and The Green Mile, having watched a copy of it on DVD whilst home from school sick.

Chronicling the story of the young Charlie McGee and her father as they go on the run from The Shop, a government organisation hell-bent on capturing Charlie and controlling her latent powers of pyrokinesis, it’s a film that stretches its decent premise out too thin. In an ideal world, the 2022 remake should’ve had its work cut out for it. How hard can it be to surpass a film that’s average at best?This remake of Firestarter tries to take things in a new direction… by turning it into another superhero origin story, a formula so overplayed that even the comic book movies themselves aren’t doing it any more. Sure, this one has Zac Efron playing a Daddy- erm, I mean, a father, and a John Carpenter synth score to boot (thank heavens), but it brings little we haven't seen before, and usually done better.

The basic set-up of Charlie and her parents' powers being a result of an MK-Ultra-like testing program remains intact, which we're shown in a brief but mildly exciting VHS montage during the opening titles. Obvious similarities can be drawn to Eleven's backstory in Stranger Things and even 2015's indie grindhouse flick The Mind's Eye, which, despite clearly taking inspiration from the source material Firestarter is adapting, are far superior products. It begs the question, why show us this glimpse at some schlocky 80s fun if what comes after is so benign?

Granted, there are a few moments of unintentional hilarity - the film starts off with a dream sequence that ends in a baby's head cheaply bursting into flames. Other standout scenes include Charlie accidentally exploding a cat while still discovering her powers, and an exchange between Zaddy and a drunken farmer ("Yer tellin' me I can't trust the TV?!" "Shocker!"); kudos to Efron for delivering such dreadful lines with so much conviction. Unfortunately, though, it all boils down to a severely underdeveloped threat and a grey, bland mess of a final act where every revelation seems telegraphed miles ahead, even for those who might not be familiar with the story.

It's a true shame, as director Keith Thomas' prior work on the Jewish paranormal horror The Vigil managed to wring potent scares and atmosphere out of a fairly simple premise. His work here is noticeably amateurish in comparison, exacerbated by Scott Teems' (writer of last year's Halloween Kills) woeful scriptwork. As a result, Firestarter is a disappointingly damp affair, a film that's all fuse; frustratingly flickering between stupid and boring.

Follow Eli on Letterboxd, Twitter and Instagram.

Firestarter is screening in cinemas from Thursday May 12th. For tickets and more info, click here.