Like many movie fans, I’ve probably seen 1994’s “The Shawshank Redemption” and 1986’s “Stand By Me” about five billion times. And of course, I’ve also seen stuff like 1989’s “Pet Sematary,” 1987’s “The Running Man,” and 1998’s “Apt Pupil.”

So sometimes adaptations of Stephen King books don’t always work out. They can be cool at times, but overall bad films. But for the most part, King’s books hold up. But I must admit, I have not read his “Hearts in Atlantis” book, a collection upon which the new movie is based. The guy writes more books in a year than most of us write term papers.

The new movie is an adaptation of part of that collection of stories, focusing on Anthony Hopkins as Ted Brautigan, a new neighbor with a strange gift, and 11 year old Bobby, played by Anton Yelchin. Bobby has been without a father for years, and his mother Liz (Hope Davis) is so self-obsessed that she gets Bobby a free library card, instead of his long-wished-for bike, for his birthday, lying and saying that his father left them in debt. Meanwhile, she goes on weekly shopping sprees to buy all the latest fashions to wear to the office.

While there is a spooky element to the story, the duration of the film concerns the relationship between Ted and Bobby. Of course, when you’ve got Anthony Hopkins taking the role of Ted, you’re already looking to swat one out of the park. Is there any other reason to see 1999’s “Instinct,” this year’s “Hannibal” or 1997’s “The Edge?” Hopkins is one of few marquee actors who can make a movie great simply by appearing in it, and the weight of this picture rests on his shoulders.

While the movie is a strong effort, it lacks the intimacy fostered in “Stand By Me” and “Shawshank,” arguably the two best adaptations of King’s work. King does have a strong ability to write children, and he does it here, but while Bobby is well-written and well-acted, his friends are underdeveloped, a key weak point in the flow of the film. When his friends are gone, it is difficult to care all-that-much.

Ted’s abilities and concerns are also underdeveloped. We have no fear of the “low men,” as Ted puts it, and the urgency that should be created for Ted’s departure is also lacking. As for his psychic abilities, save for a few sequences, it serves only as a blunt tool for explaining why he arrived, and will inevitably leave, in the first place.

The biggest problem with the flick is the obvious aiming at awards. Directed by Scott Hicks (1996’s “Shine,” 1999’’s “Snow Falling on Cedars”) whose previous efforts were showered with accolades, as were some of screenwriter William Goldman’s past work (1976’s “All the President’s Men,” 1969’s “Butch Cassidy and The Sundance Kid” being the most notable).

Add in a top actor, and you’ve got a formula that can’t be beat, right? The only problem is that it seems to be missing some of the depth and soul that make a good movie great. It is an admirable effort and far from failure, but by no means a powerhouse of a drama that any audience will enjoy.

I suspect that most who venture to see it will not be completely disappointed, but for myself, I may just go grab my copy of “The Shawshank Redemption,” with the box worn around the edges, and check it out again. Or better yet, actually read the whole “Hearts in Atlantis” book for myself, letting one of today’s best writers give me the story directly.