Protraph Lack of good storyline.

SoftInloveRox Horrible, fascist and poorly acted

JinRoz For all the hype it got I was expecting a lot more!

Ghoulumbe Better than most people think

TheBlueHairedLawyer I was never a fan of the first Firestarter (1984). I thought it was highly melodramatic, Drew Barrymore was a whiny brat and the only good side was the amazing soundtrack by Tangerine Dream. I highly doubt I'll enjoy the supposed 2015-16 remake, either. However, I loved King's Firestarter novel, and thought that maybe this would be a different experience...Man, I should've known better when I found it in a bargain bin at the local Dollar Store.Technically Rekindled was a TV miniseries, incredibly and unnecessarily long but somehow it was fit onto a DVD. It features the now college-aged Charlie as she researches her pyrokinetic abilities. Meanwhile an old enemy whom she assumed was dead long ago has come back, with a whole new gang of kids, and each kid has a "wild talent" all their own.The actress who played Charlie herself was pretty pathetic, and her character was obviously designed to appeal to pervy guys. There is one pointless scene where she has sex on the roof of a random guy's car (no idea who the guy is, is she a prostitute?) and making love makes her want to go burn down some buildings. What the...? Also, as a kid the nickname Charlie (Charlene) might be "cute" but you'd think that as an adult she would no longer be going by Charlie.The annoyingly bad CGI, obvious green screen, sex comments that took away from the story, lousy soundtrack and generally bad acting built up to the point where by the end of the movie I had already made plans for the bonfire. I was very lucky to be burning the DVD's of that god-awful Hunger Games series crud the same day, so Firestarter 2 really "rekindled" the burning movie heap of bad ones in my backyard. I would've sold it except I doubt anyone would've bought it.Firestarter was good enough on its own in 1984, the sequel here and the supposed upcoming remake is all just garbage and a cliché attempt to interest people with the plot of psychic powers. I don't recommend watching this, and if you decide to, well, I wish you the best of luck in not having a breakdown right in front of your television.

tigerman-6 Watched this movie today from the "Firestarter- The Franchise Edition" ( A 2 Movie set with both the original, & the Sequel. My comments are reflective of the sequel- Firestarter 2 Rekindled.I don't even understand why this movie was made. It is way too long, has some of the worst acting and story plot I've ever seen. It neither follows the book or the established storyline laid out in the first movie.It is so bad that I just bet the Producers of the First movie absolutely refused to allow them to use any footage in the flashback segments, which the details of the story were greatly changed.Also the part of the villain- John Rainbird goes from a brutal assassin with devious charm, to some kind of Pencil stabbing Hannibal Lector. It just didn't work for the part of that particular character.Also Charlene sure takes quite a while to unleash her powers and "free herself" from the unrelenting agency that has tracked her down and killed everyone and everything she ever cared about. Just a bit hard to swallow.I just kept asking myself and my wife..... How much of this movie is there left???? That is never a good thing!

carol-cuttress I was totally disappointed when I watched this film. This sequel in my opinion does not do the first movie nor the book any justice. If the film industry read the book and also took references from the first film properly and did a decent story, and had Drew Barrymore in it, the film may have been spectacular. In my view, this film just insulted the book, the first film and the fans of them. Rainbird was killed in the book and in the first movie. He should not of been brought back to life. As for the relationship between him and Charlie in this film in my opinion is stupid as he killed her father in the 1st movie and in the book. I felt I was let down and betrayed after watching this film. Oh yes, and they should of stuck to Drew Barrymore playing Charlie McGee. Is it really a wonder why she didn't???????

domino1003 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.