-
Scene of “Firestarter”, based on the novel that King published in 1980.
After “It” It became a true success at the world box office, the interest in other adaptations of the works of Stephen King was great. Every studio was looking for suitable material to capitalize on the horror master’s rediscovered popularity. again one or another work that had already been filmed. The remake of the series “The Stand” and “Pet Cemetery” they are already on the street.
A new version of “Salem’s Lot” he is scheduled for the fall. In the meantime, fans can already see “Firestarter”, based on the novel that King published. in 1980.
This is also a second film adaptation. Some will know the story through the film adaptation released in 1984 with the same title.
A remake even made sense in this case. More than other King stories, this one rises and falls with realization. and here is where things went wrong in 1984.
The special effects of “Firestarter” they were very mediocre and everything looked like a B movie.
Of course, a few decades later, the story had entirely different possibilities. Even then the enthusiasm was limited.
Although the $12 million budget was higher and the film starred Drew Barrymore, who had become a star with “E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial,” the film flopped. in theaters.
Other earlier King film adaptations also suffered from the limitations of the technology of the day. But while the TV version of “It,” for example, enjoys cult status, not least thanks to Tim Curry, feelings of nostalgia for Firestarter are limited. It was too boring for that.
For years, Andy (Zac Efron) and Vicky McGee (Sydney Lemmon) have led a secluded life.
At home there is no internet or phone. ;smartphones, much to the annoyance of her daughter Charlie (Ryan Kiera Armstrong), who is always an intruder.
They both have good reason to minimize contact with the outside world, after all they have special abilities that no one can know about. But the time of the isolated idyll ends when, as feared, Charlie develops special powers of his own and cannot control them. As the family searches for a way to cope with the difficult situation, John Rainbird (Michael Greyeyes) has been hot on their heels for some time…
that there was a lot of room for improvement. In addition, some illustrious people joined the project.
Director Keith Thomas, for example, demonstrated in The Vigil who knows how to create a beautiful atmosphere of terror.
Zac Efron is a true Hollywood star who, after “Extremely cruel, evil and perverse”, shows again that he wants to break with his image of “High School Musical-Beautiful”.
The soundtrack, for its part, comes from the hand of the legend John Carpenter, his son Cody Carpenter and Daniel Davies, who the last time he provided the soundtrack. He brought atmospheric synth sounds to the audience in Halloween Kills.
“Firestarter” It was also produced by Jason Blum, who has become as synonymous with modern horror cinema as no other. All in all, there was a lot to look forward to.
The result is quite sobering, the film is not a disaster as recently feared, but when a film is not shown to the press in advance and there is no criticism at the beginning, it is a disaster. very bad sign. it will not be so bad here. But it didn’t work either. It turned out to be the high point of terror that was expected.
However, there are positive things that can be said about the film. The special effects are, as expected, a clear improvement.
The background music is quite nice, assuming you have a weakness for those retro sounds. The acting is pretty solid.
A slight change in narrative structure from 1984 provides a slight mystery factor at the beginning, when you don’t know what’s going on. everything goes.
However, the film cannot live up to the original expectations. After a still fairly successful opening, the suspense curve is flattening more and more.
Although the family is being persecuted at all times and Michael Greyeyes (Wild Indian) looks emphatically threatening, the nerves are hardly affected. And the tragic aspect, which Firestarter certainly has, never quite becomes.
Part of this is no doubt due to the King original itself. itself doesn’t have the most exciting story to tell.
However, more could have been done. Even at the end, when everything goes haywire, the horror thriller remains lukewarm.