People seem to equate being passionate and knowledgeable about certain things as something negative. I am proud of my love for movies, comics, books, tv shows, video games, and music, and I celebrate that love here.
The only thing I know about Firestarter is that there was this TV miniseries you mentioned in the end that got advertised a lot on SciFi Channel. The ads were kind of intriguing, but for some reason, I never wound up watching it.Also, I find it interesting that you said that Firestarter film adaptation followed the book pretty closely, but wasn't as good. It just shows how much difference acting and directions make.
My DVD is a double feature that also contains the mini-series, but I still haven't brought myself to watch it. Maybe if Noel gives it a decent recommendation, I'll work past my "But Rainbird died!" protests and actually watch it.There's also the fact that just because something works well in a novel doesn't mean it's cinematic. Though I do think the direction was a large part of the problem here.
I don't really have anything to add here to what you've already said. I do enjoy the film more than you do, finding it a decent enough and watchable adaptation of one of my favorite King books, but yeah, it really is quite clunky, with inconsistent skill and too languid a pace. And I agree with putting most of that on the director. It would have been interesting to see what John Carpenter's version would have been like, though you'd probably dislike its pace just as much. ;)
I even gave this film a second watch a few months later, thinking that perhaps I had judged it a little too harshly the first time around. But yeah, as much as I want to like it for being faithful, I just don't find it enjoyable. And we'll talk about Carpenter when I get to Christine. :P
I'm a huge Carpenter fan, so I'd love to know what his version would have been like. However, since he instead made "Starman," which is one of my favorites of his, I guess I'm glad things worked out the way they did.I like "Firestarter" pretty well. The novel is good, but it's not one of my favorites, so the movie being a little flat doesn't bother me all that much. I agree that it's a shame they didn't get a genuine Native American for the role of Rainbird, although I guess it's easy to see why the studio felt they needed a star in the role.He's certainly better than Malcolm McDowall is in the "sequel," at least.
I will go ahead and nod you in the direction of Noel's Masters of Carpentry podcast before he has a chance to do so. :)
Oooooooooooohhhhhhh...I like the sound of that!