Film Review: "Firestarter" (2022)

Grab an extinguisher and put this one out.

The world of horror has its household names: John Carpenter, James Wan, & the late Wes Craven. One name that comes to the mind of many, is Stephen King. If that name sounds familiar, it may be because of the classic 1990 miniseries, “IT” starring Tim Curry as the iconic killer clown, Pennywise. As a horror fan, I’ve never had as much unwavering fealty to King or his work as much as others but, I admire and respect the man for the legacy he has established. Ever since 2017, with the release of the “IT” remake, Stephen King’s stories have had a bit of a resurgence. From the remake of “Pet Semetary” to the upcoming “Salem’s Lot”, it was inevitable that we would eventually get a remake of the 1984 film starring Drew Barrymore, “Firestarter”.

A couple has spent years doing everything in their power to hide their daughter from a shadowy federal agency. All seems well until an incident at school involving supernatural powers begins to draw attention to the organization. As Andy (Zac Efron), his wife (Sydney Lemmon), and his daughter Charlie (Ryan Kiera Armstrong) are rediscovered by the agency and their top assassin, John Rainbird (Michael Greyeyes), the family must flee to safety or risk losing their daughter to the agency that plans using her as a weapon.

The plot seems conventional, huh? Well, that basically describes most of this film: conventional as hell. However, before I go over what I didn’t like, I’ll go over a few of the positives. For starters, I hope that Michael Greyeyes has a chiropractor on speed dial because he literally carried this entire film. None of the performances are great but, Greyeyes was a standout by default. Plus, they actually cast a Native American actor to portray Rainbird this time around. John Carpenter kills it with the musical score here, proving that after over 50 years, he’s still got it. That’s basically it. Abandon all hope from here on out.

I am so glad that Blumhouse elected to drop this on Peacock because I wouldn’t even put a free ticket on this. The plot, as I have mentioned before, is conventional. It’s your typical federal boogeyman chases alien/child plot that was very popular in the 80s. Unlike most of those films, however, “Firestarter” lacks the compelling characters to keep things going. The film’s pacing is absolutely dreadful: for the entire time, almost nothing happens until the last 15 minutes. In other words, this is basically 2015’s “Fant4stic” with a Stephen King filter.

The acting here, is mostly subpar with most of the performances being flat. Zac Efron looks embarassed to be in this movie and Ryan Keira Armstrong did her best with a script that gave nobody any sort of favors. I also felt, just like the plot, that the characters were hollow. There was a scene where a man’s traumatic past is revealed and Charlie becomes empathetic and forgiving to him. This is supposed to be a heartfelt scene but, I ended up feeling nothing in the end. The reveal was rushed and even afterwards, we aren’t given time to care about what was revealed because we need to have another sequence where Charlie uses her powers.

Blumhouse’s “Firestarter” remake is by far the most boring horror film I have seen all year. It may clock in at around 96 minutes but, this felt longer than “The Batman”. The pacing was absolutely horrendous: nothing happens throughout the film. The characters are bland and hollow. I found myself not caring about anyone throught this movie. The only good things about “Firestarter” are John Carpenter’s score and a decent performance by Michael Greyeyes. Everything else feels empty and lifeless. This film is basically the “Fant4stic”of horror.

Final Verdict:

“Dull, hollow, and aggressively boring, “Firestarter” is an inconsequetial remake that serves nothing to neither fans of the 1984 original nor anyone else.