Rating: 
Summary: Stephen King: Not just all blood and guts
Review: Hearts in Atlantis is an excellent film that pulls at your heart-strings and causes you to make parallels with your own childhood. Anthony Hopkins does an excellent job in playing the mysterious character of Ted as well as the rest of the cast who round out this effecting tale of lost innocense and relationships lost. I found the story to be quite interesting and it kept my attention throughout. I found the relationship between Ted and Bobby very moving and sad all at the same time. Even if one is not a fan of Stephen King, give this one a shot. It is more along the lines of "The Green Mile" rather than an "It" or a "Dreamcatcher." The last lines of the movie sum this wonderful film up nicely and leave the viewer feeling a strange combination of sadness and inspiration all at once. I highly recommend this film. One of Stephen King's best adaptations. My complements to director Scott Hicks.
Rating: 
Summary: Subtle & Understated Film Requires Multiple Viewings
Review: First of all, let's get one thing straight: this movie focuses only a very small portion of King's novel, and not necessarily even the best part. Portions of the film are quite faithful to the novel, but much of the nuance of King's excellent novel is lost in the translation to the screen. Still, when considered on its own merits, the film is really quite good. The child actors are very believable, and the interplay between Anthony Hopkins' enigmatic telepath and the children is really quite subtle and very touching. Hope Davis also plays the main character's tortured, conflicted mother tragically and convincingly. Unlike Green Mile or Shawshank, the film does not end with a "wow" moment. The film is much more intimate and subtle than either of these other King adaptations, and that is the beauty of it. While the film may not resonate with all viewers, it is actually a very touching story about a boy's loss of innocence, although it lacks the broader vision of King's novel.
Rating:
Summary: Mirroring moods
Review: Although not a Stephen King fan, the name "Anthony Hopkins" on a DVD label always chains my eye. Hopkins' ability to impart many facets to a character always makes watching him work a keen pleasure. It's disheartening, however, to watch a superiour talent squandered on a weak plot. Hopkins strains to cast off King's sparse characterisations, very nearly succeeding. Hicks and his cinemetographer also struggle to impart life into the otherwise narrow roles. King's insistence on portraying life as if we all lived in a dark Bedlam limits their options. The result is a sequence of tight focus, either through narrow apertures or as mirror reflections, on people and events. Given the plot restrictions, there's little else they could do. It makes for grand visual dramatics, but leaves little scope for the cast to maneuvre. Even a county fair is squeezed into a shill's booth and a Ferris wheel seat. Hopkins, in a supporting role to young Anton Yelchin, is a fugitive. The parable of the kindly old surrogate father with special talents is so hoary it bears whiskers. In this case the "special talent" is that of a psychic with wide-ranging capabilities. Hopkins, as Ted Brautigan, doesn't want to fall again under the clutches of anti-communist J. Edgar Hoover's minions. They're "low men". He enlists bobby [Yelchin], an 11-year old in a mid-sized Connecticut town, to keep nit. The "low men" will put up posters on telephone poles [in the name of reason, why??], wear dark suits and drive flash cars. No stereotyping, here, folks! Yelchin, feeling the first stirrings of testosterone, is caught between lusts - his neighbour Carol and the bicycle in a shop window. Of course, Bobby and Carol are victimized by the local bullies. And, of course, Hopkins . . . whell, you work it out. Child actors like Anton Yelchin are enigmas. If you can't get the little buggers to brush their teeth or go to bed on time, how do you get them to take direction in front of a camera? Especially in a film with all those intense close-ups? In the Special Features with this film, Hopkins and Hicks laud Yelchin for his "natural talent". It's not a contestable point. Whatever Yelchin is to his mum and schoolmates, he's outstanding here. He exhibits no outsized affectations - he appears fully natural. His moods reflect his [too rapidly] growing awareness of the adult world's complexities and disillusionments. As he gropes with these challenges, he matures, but not beyond reasonable bounds. It will be interesting to see what else he achieves. Good fortune will keep him away from further Stephen King enterprises. Perhaps something with Harrison Ford would hone his skills. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
Rating:
Summary: The kiss by which all others in your life will be judged
Review: You can always tell the best movies adapted from Stephen King novels because the advertising for such films never trumpets the author's or puts his name over the title (the trailer points out this is from the author of "The Green Mile," whoever he might be). "Hearts in Atlantis" the film is essentially the first novella from "Hearts in Atlantis" the novel, and tells the story of the last summer of Bobby Garfield's childhood. This is one of King's nostalgia stories, set in 1960 when Bobby (Anton Yelchin) has just turned 11 and been given a library card (an adult library card) by his mother (Hope Davis) instead of the new bike he really wants. His mother launches into what is clearly a standard speech about how the death of his father years earlier left the family destitute, but we cannot help notice that she always has new dresses to wear. Bobby has his best friend Sully (Will Rothhaar) and gal pal Carol (Mika Boorem) to fill the holes in his life, but then Ted Brautigan (Anthony Hopkins) moves into the upstairs apartment. Bobby and Ted become friends, although his mother is uneasy over their relationship from the start. Ted hires Bobby to read him the newspaper each week and also asks him to look out for "low men" (low in the Dickensian sense). Bobby dismisses this later task as some sort of private joke until he learns that there are indeed strange people after his friend. This introduces the element of fear into Bobby's life, not only as he realizes that his friend might have to go away, but as he comes to understand that his selfish mother has no love to share with him. Consequently the film moves back and forth between the sweetness of nostalgia, which reaches its highest point when Bobby and Carol share "the kiss by which all others in your life will be judged," and the fear that Bobby's precarious world is going to crumble apart. When this world does fall apart, in several different ways, Bobby does more that survive. He grows up. "Hearts in Atlantis" is a period piece, but the television being black & white and the cars having fins fades into the background as King investigates the eternal world of adolescence. Ted has a strange gift, the reason why he is being sought out by the shadowy figures that arrive in town, but we keep pushing that out of the way because it only gets in the way of the relationship between Ted and Bobby. Of course, having such a gift bears a price that becomes unavoidable. Director Scott Hicks and cinematographer Piotr Sobocinski invest Bobby's neighborhood with a grandeur that we know is nothing more than the product of young mind's, who insist on seeing things better than they are. The images are reinforced by William Goldman's literate script, which transforms King's story into poetry, and the actors are equal to the words in their performances. The result is a lovely little intimate film.
Rating:
Summary: Could be better...
Review: Right from the start I have to admit that this movie is not a bad one at all (which is why I - somewhat begrudgingly - give it four stars.) However, it has several very noticeable flaws, which need to be pointed out. I had rather high expectations for this film - as I will for any film made by the director of "Shine" and/or starring Anthony Hopkins. Hopkins did not disappoint at all; his performance is excellent, even if somewhat reminiscent of his other similar roles. The directorial work of Scott Hicks, however, leaves a lot to be desired. He is a director capable of work that is nothing short of brilliant; yet in this film he seems to overlook (or is it conscious?) such obvious flaws in the actors' performances that one begins to wonder if hasn't lost the touch. It is especially noticeable in the performances of Anton Yelchin (Bobby) and Hope Davis (his mother.) Anton seems to be a gifted young actor, but he constantly switches between playing a sort of 11-year-old adult (most of the scenes involving his mother) and a kindergarten kid (the scene where he crosses his fingers in response to Ted telling him about "The Kiss".) Hope Davis behaves so strangely on screen that I suspect that she never had any children of her own; granted, she is supposed to play a bad mother, but the character she ends up creating onscreen is simply not a believable mother at all, bad or good. One does not need to be a professional psychologist to notice that. Both of these performances are deeply flawed, but in both cases it seems to be mostly the director's fault. Overall, there would be no harm done if the movie was made a little longer, if that allowed the creators to explore the characters' relationships and especially certain obscure parts of the story (of which there are quite a few) a bit further. Having said all that, I need to say that I enjoyed the movie very much, and it really is "a breath of fresh air" (as one reviewer put it) among the great hordes of mindless, pointless and useless flicks that Hollywood insists on producing. It really is a fascinating story, the cinematography is breathtaking, and all in all the film is truly beautiful, in the fullest sense of the word. It's just a little sad that something that had a great promise was simply underdeveloped.
Rating: 
Summary: Great soundtrack, but something missing overall...
Review: Just watched this movie for the second time and remembered why I didn't add it to my list of favorite films. The movie has the potential to be great but seems to try too hard to be another "Shawshank Redemption", losing focus and glossing over parts of the film that might deserve more, while paying too much attention in other areas that don't improve the viewer's experience. The oldies-filled soundtrack is one of the best things going for the movie, offering familiar and mostly upbeat tunes, even if the placement might feel too obvious. Others have mentioned what a fantastic job the younger actors do, and Anthony Hopkins is competent here, though it has to be noted that he wasn't working with stellar material to begin with. Overall, Hearts in Atlantis offers some good scenes and music, but serious Stephen King and Anthony Hopkins fans are likely to be disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: Disappointing tale, but features two excellent child actors
Review: Very disappointing movie gets a second star only to commend the marvelous acting by the young actors playing the 11 year-olds Bobby and Carol. The movie is another coming of age story from Steven King; maybe he should have stopped with "Stand By Me". I have not read the book, and was fascinated by a review here that detailed the differences in the book and the movie. This actually sounds like an exciting story, coherent, and with a nice touch of King's supernatural stuff. As it stands the plot involves an upstairs renter (Hopkins) in a Bridgeport, CT home circa 1960 and his involvement with the son of his downstairs landlady - a young widow. The plot is driven by mysterious men who want to capture Hopkins and take advantage of his psychic powers. It is strongly implied that these men are FBI agents intent on using an unwilling Hopkins to help them catch Commies for J. Edgar Hoover. It occurred to me while watching that it would be difficult to force an unwilling psychic to do his thing. Picture it; Interrogator: "OK psychic person, what are the Ruskies thinking?" Psychic: "I dunno." Maybe the movie seemed disjointed to me because they were trying to stuff too much of the book onto the screen. There is an overly long scene in which young Bobby outwits a three-card Monte hustler at a carnival. This apparently is meant to show that Bobby has received a little psychic power of his own, but we'd already seen that. The card hustler screams that he's never been outguessed on a certain move before. I did some math at that point, there are three cards - the hustler is going to lose one time in three if hides his moves perfectly. The movie overflows with unlikely little flaws like those. Nothing was more flawed however, than the acting of all but the two kids playing Bobby and Carol. The evil older teenager role (a requirement in all King coming of age stories, Steven must have been a tormented child) was badly written and acted. And I disagree with most of what I've read about Hopkins' work here - I felt he mailed it in. In the end the movie earns a second star for the skills of the two youngest actors. In the final scene between those two I thought to myself that I'd be seeing a lot of those faces on the big screen in the future, and that is all to the good.
Rating:
Summary: Great soundtrack, but something missing overall...
Review: Just watched this movie for the second time and remembered why I didn't add it to my list of favorite films. The movie has the potential to be great but seems to try too hard to be another "Shawshank Redemption", losing focus and glossing over parts of the film that might deserve more, while paying too much attention in other areas that don't improve the viewer's experience. The oldies-filled soundtrack is one of the best things going for the movie, offering familiar and mostly upbeat tunes, even if the placement might feel too obvious. Others have mentioned what a fantastic job the younger actors do, and Anthony Hopkins is competent here, though it has to be noted that he wasn't working with stellar material to begin with. Overall, Hearts in Atlantis offers some good scenes and music, but serious Stephen King and Anthony Hopkins fans are likely to be disappointed.
Rating:
Summary: Mirroring moods
Review: Although not a Stephen King fan, the name "Anthony Hopkins" on a DVD label always chains my eye. Hopkins' ability to impart many facets to a character always makes watching him work a keen pleasure. It's disheartening, however, to watch a superiour talent squandered on a weak plot. Hopkins strains to cast off King's sparse characterisations, very nearly succeeding. Hicks and his cinemetographer also struggle to impart life into the otherwise narrow roles. King's insistence on portraying life as if we all lived in a dark Bedlam limits their options. The result is a sequence of tight focus, either through narrow apertures or as mirror reflections, on people and events. Given the plot restrictions, there's little else they could do. It makes for grand visual dramatics, but leaves little scope for the cast to maneuvre. Even a county fair is squeezed into a shill's booth and a Ferris wheel seat. Hopkins, in a supporting role to young Anton Yelchin, is a fugitive. The parable of the kindly old surrogate father with special talents is so hoary it bears whiskers. In this case the "special talent" is that of a psychic with wide-ranging capabilities. Hopkins, as Ted Brautigan, doesn't want to fall again under the clutches of anti-communist J. Edgar Hoover's minions. They're "low men". He enlists bobby [Yelchin], an 11-year old in a mid-sized Connecticut town, to keep nit. The "low men" will put up posters on telephone poles [in the name of reason, why??], wear dark suits and drive flash cars. No stereotyping, here, folks! Yelchin, feeling the first stirrings of testosterone, is caught between lusts - his neighbour Carol and the bicycle in a shop window. Of course, Bobby and Carol are victimized by the local bullies. And, of course, Hopkins . . . whell, you work it out. Child actors like Anton Yelchin are enigmas. If you can't get the little buggers to brush their teeth or go to bed on time, how do you get them to take direction in front of a camera? Especially in a film with all those intense close-ups? In the Special Features with this film, Hopkins and Hicks laud Yelchin for his "natural talent". It's not a contestable point. Whatever Yelchin is to his mum and schoolmates, he's outstanding here. He exhibits no outsized affectations - he appears fully natural. His moods reflect his [too rapidly] growing awareness of the adult world's complexities and disillusionments. As he gropes with these challenges, he matures, but not beyond reasonable bounds. It will be interesting to see what else he achieves. Good fortune will keep him away from further Stephen King enterprises. Perhaps something with Harrison Ford would hone his skills. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]
Rating: 
Summary: Awful
Review: This film was especially depressing to watch considering the talent involved. But Hopkins gives his standard low-eyelid performance (he used to have energy. Rent THE LION IN WINTER). William Goldman writes the laziest script he's written yet. He was great once upon a time, but he's been in decline for awhile now, and I've given up on him with this one. In a recent interview he said he stopped writing novels because, "There's a lot more white space on a script page, so it's less work. A novel is much more work with all those words per page." Yes, he actually said that! People can be lazy even when they're earning million dollar pay checks! Well, his once brilliant prose started to turn lousy years ago, and now that laziness has crept into the "easy labor" scripts of his, so now they're crap, too. I think if they weren't phoning it in, both men could still do great work. But I've given up. This film stinks.
| 
