Dorathen Better Late Then Never

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

NateWatchesCoolMovies The one great benefit that any film based on a Stephen King story has is just that: it's based on a Stephen King story. The guy is just such a prodigy of fiction that even if the film version of one of his books doesn't deliver, one can still see the brilliant blueprint lurking beneath the frames. When the filmmakers are successful, however, we get a visually stimulating project founded on the tale he has weaved to support all the other elements. Hearts In Atlantis is based on an anthology volume of his, and in fact the story the film follows isn't even called that, it's actually 'Low Men In Yellow Coats'. I can see why the director went with Hearts In Atlantis though, as it's much more akin to the ethereal, sentimental tone he was going for, and less of an ominous hook. The story itself follows a mysterious man named Ted Brautigan (Anthony Hopkins), a recent tenant in the home of young Bobby Garfield (Anton Yelchin) and his wayward mother (a miscast Hope Davis). The setting is Midwestern America, in the dead heat of a 1950's summer. Bobby spends his days cavorting in the local woodlands with his fastest of friends, Carole (Mika Boorem) and Sully (Will Rothhaar). He takes a shine to Ted though, who pays him a dollar a week to read to him, and warns him of shadowy 'low men', threatening figures who doggedly pursue him for nasty reasons. Ted becomes a father figure for young Bobby, whose mother has questionable ideas about not only raising a son, but taking care of her own affairs. Now the film may seem a bit thinly plotted to some, and there's a reason for that. This story is actually a tiny fragment in a much larger tale, King's magnum opus The Dark Tower. Ted and Bobby have important parts to play in that saga, in which the events of this film are but a sentence long. Some viewers may feel slighted by a lack of context, but the filmmakers here still find a way to make this its own story, crafting a touching coming of age story melded with whispers of otherworldly intrigue. The fusion of beguiling nostalgia and the vague menace that advances on Bobby and Ted makes for a unique tone, something just south of a thriller which can't quite be pinned down by genre labels. Hopkins can be both terrifying and tender depending on the role. Here he is kindness incarnate as a man whose worldly intuition goes beyond telekinesis into the kind of qualities reserved for the best and brightest. Yelchin and Boorem, who would star alongside each other again a few years later in the lacklustre Along Came A Spider, are the superb heart of the film. Yelchin has shown a constant progression of strongly realized, believable work and the quality of his craft can be traced back to this stunning genesis role. Boorem is highly underused these days, and one need only watch her light up the screen with emotional sincerity in this to see why she should be working far more. There's neat supporting work from Tom Bower, Celia Weston, Alan Tudyuk and David Morse as an older version of Bobby who yearns for days gone by. I found myself deeply enjoying this one whilst constantly drawing back to the knowledge and context I have for it via The Dark Tower, but the film on it's own is enough to provide a rewarding experience for anyone who isn't familiar with the multiverse. Amid King's favourite topics and settings are Midwest adolescence, idiosyncratic nooks of Americana and the ever present supernatural aspect, dynamics which Hearts In Atlantis gives us aplenty, along with an open invitation to explore the universe farther, should one want to venture along the path to the Tower. I'd recommend it.

Ree Vuer A traditional reason for a film to use symbolism and metaphor is because it is dealing with a subject that is too controversial to refer to in a plain manner.This film is carefully set up with the following situation: 1. We see only a negative view of adult sexuality. 2. Youthful interest in the subject is romanticized and idealized. 3. An aging single man spends his time overseeing the life of a boy during a key developmental stage, and the guy is keenly interested in how the boy handles his problems,including romantic ones. 4. In the process, a metaphorical secret is shared between both of them, and the end of the film is set up to imply that this mystical quality will get passed on to the next generation. (A misguided stereotype here, but one that many persons actually believe...)5. Although the film includes scenes in which the mother questions the propriety of this arrangement, her doing so is cast purely in negative terms. Superficially, this viewpoint is supposed to rule out the theme that is otherwise obvious on its surface, and the handling of the film's details is actually quite consistent with her initial suspicions. Her initial reference therefore serves a useful literary function in that it defines one of the main metaphorical themes of the film. Since the film has the mother sexually assaulted, it is suggested to viewers that the mother's traditional sexuality is not at all a good thing, and her judgement is untrustworthy (and that it's okay for some alternative form of love to be sought).The script's handling is very interesting, because if this film is not dealing in metaphor than it is overloaded with contrivances, including things that make no sense whatsoever, such as the "lost pet" flyers. The flyer is portrayed late in the film as if the mother had called the number on it to report Anthony Hopkins' character. This strongly suggests it's true nature, as a kind of wanted poster, or "missing child" poster. The "mind reading" has evidence as a mere ploy by a guy who collects and then uses information to gain trust and set things up just right. For example, it appears that the entire scene in the bar could have been set up by him so that the boy is given a different story about his father (and a photo), thus planting distrust and resentment in the boy toward his mother. The grown-up boy at the end echoes this by meeting a teen girl and providing her with a photo and interpretation of her own parent and background. The boy had said flat out that he had come to love Hopkins, toward the end. But because there is also a girl around, audiences are supposed to accept Hopkins' trustworthiness? Did that thin blouse of hers really need to be unbuttoned in order to adjust her shoulder? Was Hopkins' mind reading really just the research he had done along with the reading of people so that everything was "just so?" For example, he identifies the teen bully's insult patterns as a probable reaction-formation. The strongest hint of actual mind-reading comes in the idea that he could somehow read that the girl needed help. The reason she would be attacked in the first place is never explained; could Hopkins have set up things so that the rescue scenario could play out, just as he had suggested a romantic role for the boy in one of their earliest meetings?Almost everything in the film is therefore consistent with a darker, more ordinary scenario rather than the fantasy. Hopkins' character is a wanted man, because of unnamed crimes that keep him on the go. His power that must be controlled is not a telepathic one, but his urges that probably involve controlled intimacy with young persons. Now it is made clear that this is not portrayed in the stereotypical manner of violence or coercion, but is instead done in a more insidious fashion through the power of gradual suggestion, trust, and friendship. Rather than a swift attack that could be easily interpreted and thus possibly recovered from, the relationship takes on a form in which the boy is seeing things according to the man's vision, and in a way that makes the boy willing to defend him. It's a very classic circumstance well-known to actual police investigators. The fact that there may be some actual friendship, and even love, does not un-do the fact that the relationship most probably went beyond that which is legally permissible, or appropriate for our contemporary culture (which is not ancient Greece, after all).Since this is a carefully written script, and not a traditional genre film, these elements are quite suggestive of a controversial agenda. It's interesting that no one seems to comment on this. Given the large number of persons who like this film, this issue is worth discussing. What indeed is the message of this movie? The answer seems to be evident from the elements listed above!

thinkerv0 Hearts in Atlantis is a movie which has many appreciable sides to it. On one hand it's a great mystery movie and on the other it's a great tale of one innocent child who happens to meet a psychic. Two scenes stand out 'perfectly' in my memory and they seem to be some of the best scenes I have ever witnessed on screen: In first one three kids are playing and walking on a railway track which has a shape like a snake and at the end of this railway track there seems to be a horizon with a Neptunian yellow glow of setting sun. This scene is very sensitive and beautiful scene. The scene at the climax where kid drives his bike and disappears is also a very affecting one.This is a mystery movie because many a things are not known. Who the psychic was and why he was being searched by some mysterious bogey-man type agents, where did the father of the kid go and some other things remain unclear. The movie however has a very touching tale of the relation between the kid and the psychic. The kid has a difficult childhood because his mother is not only poor but also mean. The character of the kid has been played very efficiently by Yelchin. As for the psychic, one of the greatest and most charismatic actors of all time, Anthony Hopkins was playing it and he does not let you blink with his majestic style. This is a sentimental movie imbued with colors of mystery. And yes, Stephen King did this one with a bit less of horror and paranormal and he did it brilliantly!

andrew-herbst I loved this movie, with Anthony Hopkins playing Ted a mysterious renter in the house with Bobby Garfield and his mother. There is a mystery surrounding Ted which we slowly learn more about, and the rest is small town kids growing up. There are some wonderful lines in the movie, presumably penned by Stephen King. The acting is superb by everyone. Anton Yelchin as "Bobby-O" is outstanding, but you will also be charmed by Mika Boorem's Carol. Hope Davis is terrific as the self-centred mother. Hopkins character is very likable, but he doesn't dominate this tale because he treads lightly throughout.All of the supporting characters are interesting and convincingly portrayed. The story will probably leave you misty-eyed, and wishing there were more movies like it.