Almost Flammable (Spoilers Ahead!)
The Sci Fi Channel almost had a hit with "Firestarter: Rekindled."
Almost. For those who read the Stephen King novel or has seen the 1984 movie version of the novel with Drew Barrymore, stop right where you are. They have taking a HUGE liberty with both. In the novel, there were only 3 remaining subjects of the Lot 6 program (Charlie's parents and Richardson). This version has an agency that is bumping off the original participants by promising a cash settlement from the program. Danny Nucci plays Vincent Sforza, working for the agency in finding these people, although her doesn't know what happens once they're found. One of the people on the list is Charlie McGee, now a young woman (Marguerite Moreau). Seems that Charlie has some issues of her own. Whenever she gets "excited," she gets VERY hot, so hot that things catch fire (In one instance, she smolders an entire hotel room). She's also been living her life on the run ever since her parents were killed by the government agency known as The Shop. One of their operatives, Rainbird (Malcolm McDowell), wants Charlie, even after she turns him into a charred lunatic. He wants Charlie bad enough to kill (And he likes using a pencil as a weapon!). He's also done something else with the Lot 6 experiment: 6 boys with individual powers (One is an energy vampire, another with a killer voice)that are being used to create an ultimate weapon. A lot of questions were left unanswered: What happened to The Shop and the Manders? There are a lot of plot holes: Are we supposed to swallow the fact that Rainbird who, in both the novel and 1984 version was burnt to a crispy critter, yet manages to survive without looking MORE disfigured? And what's the thing with Richardson(A bored looking Dennis Hopper)? He doesn't really serve any real purpose other than to claim that he knows what's going to happen. They recreate Charlie's early story rather than use the footage from the original to keep the story in balance, also changing her parent's fate. If you could get over these problems, then you could really enjoy the film on a decent level. If you're a purist of the novel and the 1984 version, then you are going to spend all of your time picking the film apart. The saving grace is the 6 boys. They don't know the real story behind Rainbird, that they could possibly end up in the same situation as Charlie.. Denver Catt watch Forces Of Nature movie
Firestarter the orginal was better.
yaune_sauri@yahoo.com watch Pooh's Heffalump Movie movie
really love sci-fi movies.
Meh
This movie was indeed interested and well done, but as far as a sequel to
the original movie in 1984, it was pitiful. Acting was great, but the storyline didn't even come close to the idea Stephen King gave to the movie world. Everything was different. From beginning to end. People who have read the book and seen the first movie with Drew Barrymore as Charlie will probably agree with me. I still say it's a good movie, just not a decent sequel. I say watch it, but don't go into it expecting it to be a sequel. Approach it as a whole other movie. If you have that approach in mind, you may enjoy it. Oh, and in response to a comment I read at some point about this movie. Firestarters or Pyrokinetics (if one does research) are known to unintentionally turn things into cripsy critters when they get excited or upset. So when Charlie burns the alley because of getting sexually aroused, it's not ridiculous. It's actually pretty true to the facts about pyrokinesis. And here is where I bring a close to my little comment. If you're into the supernatural and things like that, see it. If you loved the Stephen King book, and the first movie, don't look at this as it's sequel. You will be severely disappointed.. |
Trailers: |
