I've read many books by Stephen King including "The Stand", the first five of the "Dark Tower" series, "Thinner", "Misery", etc. All of them have left me speechless about how someone could weave a story from nothing, into something that left me craving for more. After my completion of Firestarter however, I was not wanting more, and in fact, I could've done with less. Many of Stephen King's novels are written in a sense that he had some sort of great inspiration, but sadly "Firestarter" seemed to lack inspiration of any sort. If you've read the story, you're well aware that it's about a little girl named Charlie that has the ability to create fires using only her mind... I hope this strikes you as weird, considering it's so basic compared to some of King's other wiritings, such as "The Stand" where he wrote 1000+ pages about an apocolyptic plague that overthrew the better part of the planet, it just strikes me as funny that King would even joke about writing about a mutant who really can't even be called a mutant, seeing is that she has every human charactaristic everyone else did, except the ability to light fires. The plot was was well written, I can give him that, but his development of the characters was something I cannot give him. The story starts off talking about Andy and Charlie, and throughout the entire book, you only learn a few things about them. Overall I think this book could've been written better. I'm giving it a three out of five because I think King was in a slump, and we all get into those time after time.
