The script for Firestarter is a tolerable adaptation of the novel. It keeps intact the major plot elements, story sequence, settings, characters, and much of the key dialogue. A few minor changes don't affect the story, though untidied remnants of excised plot and characters muddle it a bit. Few novel adaptations are as faithful, at least as to structure.
That tepid compliment is the only one I can pay Firestarter. The script adaptation is faithful to what it includes, but what it omits leaves the story leaden. The movie has no use for the novel's depth and finesse. Character depth is absent. Relationships among the characters are cartoonish. The true terror of black-ops government is reduced to "People from The Shop are bad." The science of pyrokinesis, telepathic mental dominance, and pharmaceutical brain alteration -- key elements of the novel's power -- remain only in bits of dialogue.
There's no finesse from the cast either. Their performances, even George C. Scott's, are uniformly dead. Martin Sheen hadn't yet come into his own. Drew Barrymore wasn't up to her role; the cuteness she brought to "E.T." was inadequate for Firestarter. Brian Keith hasn't the talent for a lead role; he should never have been cast. The acting is painful to watch, and the movie drags from start to finish.
It's always tough to judge how effective a movie's score will be, but Tangerine Dream was a terrible artistic choice. Their music is suitable for a mood movie like Blade Runner, but painfully dissonant for a thriller -- as painful to hear as the acting is to watch.
You'd think that a thriller about pyrokinesis would at least have some good fire and explosion effects, yes? Especially when it's made in the same year as Return of the Jedi, with the same special-effects technology available, yes? Sorry, no luck there either. Visual effects are primitive to pathetic, sweeping away whatever suspension of disbelief the viewer has left.
My only real pleasure in Firestarter was, as a reader familiar with the novel, seeing the story and characters that I knew brought to life, however imperfectly. The nine year-old Drew Barrymore's cuteness was still appealing, though inadequate, and she showed a quality of intensity that got my attention. For those two things, I rate the movie 3/10.
That tepid compliment is the only one I can pay Firestarter. The script adaptation is faithful to what it includes, but what it omits leaves the story leaden. The movie has no use for the novel's depth and finesse. Character depth is absent. Relationships among the characters are cartoonish. The true terror of black-ops government is reduced to "People from The Shop are bad." The science of pyrokinesis, telepathic mental dominance, and pharmaceutical brain alteration -- key elements of the novel's power -- remain only in bits of dialogue.
There's no finesse from the cast either. Their performances, even George C. Scott's, are uniformly dead. Martin Sheen hadn't yet come into his own. Drew Barrymore wasn't up to her role; the cuteness she brought to "E.T." was inadequate for Firestarter. Brian Keith hasn't the talent for a lead role; he should never have been cast. The acting is painful to watch, and the movie drags from start to finish.
It's always tough to judge how effective a movie's score will be, but Tangerine Dream was a terrible artistic choice. Their music is suitable for a mood movie like Blade Runner, but painfully dissonant for a thriller -- as painful to hear as the acting is to watch.
You'd think that a thriller about pyrokinesis would at least have some good fire and explosion effects, yes? Especially when it's made in the same year as Return of the Jedi, with the same special-effects technology available, yes? Sorry, no luck there either. Visual effects are primitive to pathetic, sweeping away whatever suspension of disbelief the viewer has left.
My only real pleasure in Firestarter was, as a reader familiar with the novel, seeing the story and characters that I knew brought to life, however imperfectly. The nine year-old Drew Barrymore's cuteness was still appealing, though inadequate, and she showed a quality of intensity that got my attention. For those two things, I rate the movie 3/10.