Sleepwalkers (1992) User Reviews

Here kitty, kitty, kitty

[ragana · 5/10 · 26 April 2005]

An incestuous mother and son (Krige, Krause) of preternatural origin move to a small town to find a young female virgin (Amick) the son may take the life force of and feed the mother with.

It's Stephen King, who wrote the screenplay, at his not bad best. Interesting music; I've never heard Enya in a horror movie before but surprisingly it works. As with Ron Perlman, I'd pretty much sit through anything with Alice Krige in it.

The down side is that although the mother and son are interesting beings the curiosity about them the movie arouses is not satisfied. What are they? A kind of feline lineage is hinted at as they can morph into variations of cat like creatures yet cats are their mortal enemies (a scratch can be fatal). Where are they from? Egypt is hinted at (the origin of the worship of Bast, perhaps). Why are they called Sleepwalkers (origins of the incubus/succubus/vampire mythologies)?

Despite the questions raised and unanswered the film is still an enjoyable gore-fest horror break from reality.

Worth a rent/buy used, especially for fans of Stephen King's work.

The Cat in the Hat Goes Splat

[Jonny_Numb · 5/10 · 3 April 2008]

Director Mick Garris has commented on how "Sleepwalkers" was a troubled production, and one only has to watch in disbelief to see what he means. Before its 1992 theatrical release, I remember the film being heavily hyped as Stephen King's first foray into cinema with a completely original screenplay (and as was true with most adaptations of his work--with or without his involvement--at the time, the reviews were less than sympathetic). Ironically, Garris would become better known for helming TV-miniseries versions of some of King's best-known works ("The Stand"; "The Shining"; "Desperation"), directing right from the author's own scripts. Needless to say, these made-for-TV works outshine "Sleepwalkers," which simply further proves that King's writing style (heavy with internal dialogues and detailed, unspoken perceptions) is better suited to a format that can fully develop his themes and characters. This tale of an incestuous mother/son duo who shapeshifts into bloodthirsty felines, roaming from small towns to dine on virgin prey, is fairly decent for the first 50 minutes--King's use of 'local color' (and the resulting humor) is well-rendered, and Garris does a fine job of creating an atmosphere of mystery and intrigue. But just when "Sleepwalkers" seems headed for the zone of good (if not truly memorable) King adaptations, its final third devolves into overblown, ridiculous action sequences (as though the producers chopped away 30 pages of King's script for explosions and shootouts) and a queasy imbalance between absurd humor and sentimental melodrama. The end result hobbles the overall experience--had King's ideas been thoroughly fleshed-out, "Sleepwalkers" may have been a solid entry in his filmography...but as it stands, it feels like a lament over what could have been. The cats are incredibly cute, though.

not spectacular,but entertaining

[disdressed12 · 6/10 · 23 January 2008]

this Stephen King adaptation was entertaining but not great,by any means.it's worthwhile to pass time.it''s probably as weird as any of the King adaptation i have,and even weirder than others.this movie sort of felt like a fairy tale to me.although not a kid's fable,obviously.i did like the cast,many of whom have gone on to other things,since then.Brian Krause also appeared in the TV show Charmed,Madchen Amick (who could be Kim Delaney's twin sister)has been in several smaller budget pictures.Alice Krige was seen most notably as the Borg Queen in Star Trek:First Contact,while Ron Perlman was previously seen in The TV series beauty and the Beast.his most notable role(In my opinion)was in Hellboy as the title character.like in most King movies,king himself appears in a cameo.at least three other modern horror masters(Jon Landis,Joe Dante,and Clive Barker also have cameos.anyway if you wanna pass 90 minutes or so,i'd say this movie is worth it.for me,Sleepwalkers is a 6/10

Madchen Amick dates a cat hating, mother loving freak of a monster

[Dr. Gore · 26 June 2003]

*SPOILER ALERT* *SPOILER ALERT*

Stephen King must have been petting his cat one day while listening to "Sleepwalk" by Santo and Johnny when he was struck with inspiration. "Cats, cats, cats. I love cats. I love this song. How can I get these two loves in one movie?" Thus "Sleepwalkers" was born.

Two freaky monsters move to a small town so that they can suck the life out of a virgin girl. They both despise cats and love each other. Yes. Mom and son getting it on like all monsters should. The son finds the last supermodel virgin on Earth. The romance is brief as life sucking takes precedence over anything sexual. Besides, he's got a hot mom aching at home. There is much blood and mayhem as super virgin tries to fight off the freaks with the help of an army of angry cats. Go Clovis!

I enjoyed this simple little movie. Monsters find virgin, virgin fights back and the cats go wild. There was plenty of blood and guts to keep a smile on your face. Speaking of smiling, Madchen Amick is at her hot babe peak in this one. She has one move that lets you know she's a shy, sweet girl: She bites her bottom lip and then slides her teeth slowly off. This move happens at least a dozen times. I could have watched it a dozen more. Mmmmmm...Virgin teasing. The monster was hooked at that point. So was I.

One last thought, what decade is this movie supposed to be set in? The main monster loves "Sleepwalk" and Madchen Amick is shaking her groove thing to "Do you love me?". In other scenes there will be loud modern rock blasting away. King obviously loves his 50's rock and roll but I had a hard time imagining a 90's girl doing the Twist and the Mashed Potato.

Stabbed with a...

[quitwastingmytime · 2/10 · 25 July 2021]

...Corn cob. Seriously....

Snapping a hand off cleanly at the wrist....

Shooting once at a cop car and it blows up...

A man still alive after having a pencil shoved in his ear canal...

Three fingers bitten off at once, on a nice even level...

Eye gouging an obvious rubber dummy....

Impaling a man on a picket fence, when IRL those thin slats would break, and wouldn't do more than give you a bruise...

...And one scene after another of hilarious Cat Fu. Rubber kitties held by the actors while they pretend a cat is attacking them.

These are the absurdities the film asks us to believe. It's truly a Plan Nine level of bad film making.

You watch just to laugh at how bad it gets. No one in it can act. King, at least for this film, can't write worth a damn.

Almost as hilarious are the reviews making excuses for the film. Then again, they do that for most of King's films, no matter how bad they get.

Right up there with Manos Hand of Fate and Troll II as a film you'll get loaded with friends and laugh at.

As Much as I Want to Hate This Film, I Love It

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 6 February 2007]

A shape shifting young man (Brian Krause) and his mother (known as "sleepwalkers" for some reason) arrive in a new town. But the mother (Alice Krige) needs to feed, so her son Charles must find him a pure young woman. But who will he love more, his mother or the beautiful Tanya Robertson (Madchen Amick)? "Sleepwalkers" is a film that has a special place in my heart. I saw it repeatedly on television as a teenager watching our local horror host, Ned the Dead. And while I never thought it was great, I found it entertaining. I place it in the same category as "Maximum Overdrive" -- cheesy and fun, though by no means a great film. And look at the cameos in this film! Mike Mayo tears this film apart, calling it "arguably King's worst film". He says the "script meanders through pointless chitchat scenes." Director Mick Garris "doesn't know how to photograph" and throws in "close-ups of knees." Wow. He has nothing nice to say about this film, giving it a dismal 0 on his one through four scale. I must beg to differ with Mike on this one.

First of all, King's worst film is "Langoliers". Second, I did not notice these pointless chitchat scenes he speaks of. Some of the plot is a bit loose, but nothing is completely pointless. I furthermore do not recall any shots of knees, though if the knees belonged to the beautiful Madchen Amick I think this is forgivable. Mick Garris has made many a bad film, this is true. And "Sleepwalkers" is by no means a masterpiece. But I think to lay down such heavy scorn is misplaced and really ignores the "fun factor" of this picture.

Oddly enough, Howard Maxford, whom I almost never agree with, seems to get this one. He calls the film "silly but quite lively" and points out the "nifty effects" and "gag cameos" (Stephen King, Clive Barker, Joe Dante, Tobe Hooper and John Landis). And there you go -- recognition of the fun this film was and still is.

Ron Perlman ("Hellboy", "Pro-Life") plays a cop and doesn't get nearly enough screen time. Not sure what else to say about that. Clearly they did not foresee the star power in Perlman.

When felines attack in human form.

[lost-in-limbo · 5/10 · 30 January 2010]

There's something about the b-grade sleeper "Sleepwalkers" that keeps me from liking it, but not enough to entirely hate it either. It kept me entertained, but I wasn't all that satisfied. Director Mick Garris' handling might come off stagy (which took any sense of atmosphere) with an almost TV-like feel, but remains crisp and well paced in its actions. Some imagery shows moments of creativity with the illustrative camera-work with its scopes and tilts. I just wished it had been much more darker in its visual styling. Stephen King would adapt his own book, where the premise creates a wickedly novel concept that would turn upon its sly tone with nonsensical and over-the-top dramatic lashings. This goes for its outrageous, if clumsy climax. While the jolts are grisly, they do come off quite risible with it being punctuated by sadistic heavy-handedness. The eccentric make-up FX is decently pulled off, even with some cheesy and blotchy trimmings. The script is rather ill-defined, but still has a neat touch of morbid humour and a sexual charge thanks to the seductively deranged performances by Alice Krige and Brian Krause in their mother and son relationship. Mädchen Amick is suitably appealing in the victim role. Ron Perlman makes a short, but commanding turn. Also keep a look out for some amusingly interesting cameos by Stephen King, Tobe Hooper, John Dante, John Landis, Clive Baker and Mark Hamill.

Admit it, this was fun

[Dragoneyed363 · 7/10 · 26 June 2010]

WARNING: I advise anyone who has not seen the film yet to not read this comment.

Director Mick Garris brings to us a nostalgic feature from the mind of Stephen King that sets new rules to the term "blood-thirsty creature", however lame they may be. All the way from dialogue such as tacky one liners like, "Cop-kabob!" and juicy delivers such as, "This doesn't have to hurt. Just think of yourself as lunch!" to scenes of mother- son incest between supernatural, flesh-eating whatever they are and murder by ear of corn, Sleepwalkers takes us on a quirky, poorly done, but overall enjoyable adventure with tons of undeniable mediocrity and shines of sheer camp brilliance along the way that gives us that icky, "Why do we like this?" feeling.

Sleepwalkers is just so fun and it's entertaining cheesiness is ultimately rewarding in the utmost sense. The hunky Brian Krause is so likable and cute as the son who wants the flesh of a local teen girl, but Alice Krige is even more likable and amazing as the controlling, yet oddly loving mother who takes pleasure in the part time hobby of having sex with her son. I wanted Tanya to die, I'll say, so badly did I want her to die, and usually when a horror film does that it ultimately fails in being pleasing to the audience, yet that's not the case with Sleepwalkers. The characters are bland, and the actors/actresses know that, so they overact to make them more likable, which in turn does not work, which in turn works! Understand what I'm saying? Anyone? Oh, nevermind.

The movie has an assorted collection of nice, memorable cameos, humorous anti-satire and cute, killer cats! What more could you want in a film?! You either love it or hate it, regardless of what you rate it, and I can understand both sides of the scale in different ways. I personally thought it was pure bliss that put smiles on my face, but here again, I enjoy most things.

Based On An Unpublished Stephen King Story ....

[Theo Robertson · 2/10 · 15 August 2004]

.... And after seeing this pile of crap you won't be surprised that it wasn't published

!!!! SPOILERS !!!!

This is a terrible movie by any standards but when I point out that it's one of the worst movies that has the name Stephen King in the credits you can start to imagine how bad it is . The movie starts of with two characters staring open mouthed at a scene of horror :

" My god . What happened here ? "

" I don't know but they sure hate cats " *

The camera pans to the outside of a house where hundreds of cats are strung up dead and mutilated . Boy this guy is right , someone does hate cats and with a deduction like that he should be a policeman . Oh wait a minute , he is a policeman and when a movie starts with a cop making an oh so obvious observation you just know you're going to be watching a bad movie

The reason SLEEPWALKERS is bad is that it's very illogical and confused . We eventually find out the monsters of the title need the blood of virgins to survive . Would they not be better looking for a virgin in the mid west bible belt rather than an American coastal town ? Having said that at least we know of the monsters motives - That's the only thing we learn . We never learn how they're able to change shape or are able to make cars become invisible and this jars with the ending that seems to have been stolen from THE TERMINATOR . Monster mother walks around killing several cops with her bare hands or blowing them up via a police issue hand gun ( ! ) but if her monster breed is immune from police fire power then why do the creatures need the ability to change shape or become invisible ? The demise of the creatures is equally ill thought out as there killed by a mass attack of household cats . If they can be killed by cats then why did the monsters not kill all the cats that were lying around the garden ? There was a whole horde of moggies sitting around but the monsters never thought about killing them . I guess that's so the production team can come up with an ending . It was that they started the movie my complaint lies

We're treated to several scenes where famous horror movie directors like John Landis , Clive Barker and even Stephen King make cameos . I think the reason for this is because whenever a struggling unknown actor read the script they instantly decided that no matter what , they weren't going to appear in a movie this bad so Stephen King had to phone up his horror buddies in order to fill out the cast . That's how bad SLEEPWALKERS is

* Unbelievable as it seems that wasn't the worst line in the movie . The worst line is - " That cat saved my life "

no vegetables, no dessert.....

[FlashCallahan · 7/10 · 27 February 2011]

You have to love this film. It starts with a mother and son making love, and then cuts to Amick dancing whilst cleaning a cinema, or thereabouts.

Plotwise, it's about a pair of cat things called Sleepwalkers (never explained) whose kryptonite is cats, and the son has to suck glitter from virgins, and then have sex with his mom to feed her.

And thats the plot.

It's an awful film, but there is something about this that has car crash movie written all over it. For all it's bad acting and silly lines and unintentional laughs, one cannot help watching it right to the end, and then want to watch it again when it pops up on TV.

It's not scary in the slightest and it suffers from post terminator 2 morphinitis, a term used for films released during 92-95, thinking that a bit of CGI morphing would equal a hit. The effects here are very bad, but add a little more fun to the film.

There are cameos galore from big name directors, Luke Skywalker, and King himself, playing himself saying the film wasn't his fault or something like that.

The three leads are okay, even if Krause is a bit wooden, the scene in the cemetery is very funny and camp.

But Kridge is the best thing in the whole mess. she is very alluring and keeps a straight face when she is delivering the poor script.

The deaths are funny too, and despite the gaping plot-holes and the overall badness of it all, it's a very watchable movie and far from the worst King adaption made into a film.

Who could resist a woman running around screaming with a dummy cat on her back and then killing by stabbing him with an ear of corn.

silly, pointless, but fun.

Well-cast, but inappropriately bright and snappy

[moonspinner55 · 3/10 · 15 October 2005]

I have nothing against a fast-paced fright-flick, but this Stephen King-derived nonsense is too freshly-scrubbed, too bright and modern. The plot, about a new teenage boy in a small town who is a "Sleepwalker"--sort of a cross between a vampire and a werewolf--and who feeds on the blood of female virgins, begs for a more mysterious, ambiguous treatment. This thriller is given an inappropriately colorful look and feel, with hardly any atmosphere. The kids are predictably pretty and energetic, but the big plus is Alice Kridge as the boy's mother; Kridge, from "Ghost Story", never broke out of the filler-female mold, and it's a huge loss that she hasn't been used more. Her performance is creepy and intense, and gives hint that "Sleepwalkers" might've been a much better film with a different focus and tighter direction. It's too over-the-top and commercially-driven, with an uneven tone that swings wildly from thriller to comedy to drama. Stephen King pops up in a cameo, as do real-life directors John Landis and Tobe Hooper. *1/2 from ****

''I lied! It does have to hurt!''

[Marincho97 · 8/10 · 19 March 2017]

I was 9 when I first saw this movie; a friend recorded it from TV with his VCR and then brought it to my place (it was ages ago, as you can see). It was pretty scary, or at least that's what the nine-year-old me thought.

Last night, I saw it again for the first time in centuries. It went well, kinda.

For some reason, I forgot about the relationship between mother and son and found myself a bit disturbed by it through the whole movie, it was probably because of how they portrayed it. The story was actually pretty interesting, although I felt they didn't explained it that well (the rose for example, why the dead girl at the beginning had one and why did the mother gave one to Tanya?). The acting was good, everyone gave their best with what they had; but, as much as I love Mädchen Amick, she wasn't that convincing as the leading/final girl. It's like they wanted her to act as dumb as possible.

The effects were great, they might look dated nowadays but they were cool for the period. The sleepwalkers were menacing, but they kinda looked like a giant Sphynx cat; the scene where Tanya is at the Brady's house and they reflect on the mirror killed me, I screamed.

The film's length was OK, not too long but not too short, and the pace...well, it was good for the most part.

Everything was fine until Charles attacked Tanya and killed the officer in the cemetery, it went completely apeshit from there. It's like they thought ''OK, the movie started an hour ago and we haven't had enough action so let's do it all together RIGHT NOW''. It was non- sense; the mother went to Tanya's house, killed the officers, blew some cars up, killed Tanya's father, threw her mother through the window (I laughed, a lot) and stabbed the other officer with an ear corn (no vegetables, no dessert!); I couldn't catch a break, to be honest, it was all too much in so little time.

And then, the final showdown; it was hysterical, for reasons unknown to me I found the fight scene with the cats really funny, with the neck snapping and everything. I gotta admit I was really scared when the mother told Tanya to dance with the dying Charles.

Oh, I almost forgot about the cameos! I loved Stephen King's scene.

All in all, it was a pretty entertaining movie and I would definitely watch it again.

Features the only 'death by corn cob' scene you'll probably ever see.

[BA_Harrison · 7/10 · 17 April 2018]

The first of several Stephen King adaptations to be directed by Mick Garris, Sleepwalkers is dated somewhat by its (then cutting-edge) CG morphing effects of the kind seen in Michael Jackson's music video for Black and White, and later in the Buffy the Vampire Slayer TV series. Creaky CGI trickery aside, the film is actually a whole lot of silly fun, with a daft story about a shapeshifting mother and son, Mary and Charles Brady (Alice Krige and Brian Krause), the sleepwalkers of the title, who must feed on the lifeforce of female virgins to survive.

Moving to a new town, Charles quickly sets his sights on schoolgirl Tanya (the gorgeous Mädchen Amick), but his nefarious plans are thwarted by the local cat population, who gather forces, their scratches deadly to the sleepwalkers.

Things get off to a wonderfully sordid start with a spot of incest between Charles and his mother, and the bonkers fun continues with hilarious attack by Charles on Tanya at a local graveyard make-out spot, some very silly gore (a pervy teacher loses his hand, a cop is stabbed in the ear with a pencil, Charles has his face seriously messed up, Ron Perlman gets his fingers chewed off, a guy is stabbed in the back with a corn cob, and a sheriff is impaled on a picket fence), several pointless cameos from horror luminaries (Stephen King, Joe Dante, John Landis, Tobe Hooper and Clive Barker), and a completely nutzoid finalé that sees the cats launch an all-out attack on Mary Brady, who has assumed her true reptilian/feline form.

To summarise: Sleepwalkers is by no means a classic King adaptation, but it's never a boring one.

6.5 out of 10, rounded up to 7 for IMDb.

Calling all cats...hurry, hurry to the scene of the crime...

[Doylenf · 5/10 · 4 September 2009]

SLEEPWALKERS starts out promisingly enough to be a creepy tale about a mother and son vampire team--needlessly involved in an incestuous relationship--played by BRIAN KRAUSE and ALICE KRIGE. These two handle their roles extremely well and the creepy atmosphere of the story makes you believe you're in for a good Stephen King thriller about a small town about to be devastated by vampires seeking nourishment.

There's even a pretty girl (MADCHEN AMICK) who flirts with the new boy in town, first at the movie theater where she works and then at high school--and these three characters carry the first part of the film nicely. You start to wonder whether the girl is going to be an easy victim of the mother and son team or whether she'll fight them off.

But as the plot thickens, so does the absurdity of the whole thing, all directed in comic book style so that none of the characters have any dimension beyond being puppets in a horror story that is so grotesque and over-the-top, particularly in the last half-hour, that you'll wonder whether a sane hand had any part in these proceedings. All of the business involving a menagerie of cats that sit on the couple's front lawn becomes laughable before the story uses them in a way that lacks any credibility at all.

To be fair, there are some scenes that do hold the interest, usually because a quirky supporting character, such as the black cop with his trusty traveling companion Clovis (a cat), provides some much needed humor--but those moments are few and far between. And any attempt to provide humor by having Stephen King play an obnoxious local man seeking help from a sheriff, fails utterly to do anything but convince the viewer that King should leave bit roles to professionals.

Whatever potential it had as a thriller is diminished by the outlandish ending which has Alice Krige losing her marbles completely. She hasn't had an eerier role since she played the girl who came back to life to haunt men in GHOST STORY ('82). But as good as she is, she can't save a trashy horror film from looking absurd.

Surprisingly Good for a Horror Picture

[Baron3000 · 20 January 2004]

`Sleepwalkers' is a film whose main plot thrust comes from the pre-opening credits description of what the film's title means. Just about all character backstory and motivations are given here, and we are then treated to a ninety-minute entertainment vehicle that plays out these events in a simplistic but interesting manner.

The film's acting, for a horror picture, is remarkably good. Brian Krause and Alice Krige give standout performances as the titular feline troublemakers who also share a disturbing Oedipal relationship, cult favorite Madchen Amick gives a wonderfully nuanced performance as Krause's troubled love interest, and the cameos by many famous faces from the horror world will give fans something to look for and smile about. Even the supporting cast members seem to be having a good time, including Ron Perlman and Glenn Shadix in relatively small but amusing roles.

The make-up effects are very good, although not top-notch. They're certainly nothing amazing, but they serve their occasionally-gruesome purposes well. The optical effects look pretty dated by today's standards, but it's still interesting to see CG effects in some of their earliest forms. The transformation sequences now look like something out of a made-for-TV movie, but they don't significantly detract from the film.

Where this picture does tend to fail is in its plot and dialogue. Just about all of the mystery of the story dissipates by its halfway point, leaving the audience to predict and anticipate just about everything that happens in the rest of the film, essentially destroying the tension and suspense aspects. And since this is a horror picture written by Stephen King, one would expect these two elements to be the strongest components of the film. The dialogue is at times campy and at other times overly-serious. This has the effect of making some of the characters unbalanced in many ways, something that detracts from the film as a whole. It seems the director and/or writer was/were having difficulty deciding whether or not to play this film up as a comedy or a true horror movie, and so as it stands it awkwardly lies somewhere in between.

`Sleepwalkers' is not horror at its finest, either in terms of ability to truly frighten or to provide fun campiness. It straddles the line between the two, existing somewhere equidistant from both. It is never too over-the-top for us to laugh out loud with it, nor is it ever truly scary enough to make us shiver. As it stands, it is an extremely simple and very entertaining work of filmmaking, something that horror fans will enjoy and others should probably avoid.

You'll need a shower after this one...

[hexfield · 3/10 · 21 October 2000]

If you're the kind of movie-goer who enjoys original content and intelligent suspense...then look elsewhere, kids, cause Sleepwalkers really sucks. Usually I'm more eloquent than that, but...wow...this was bad. I especially love it when Charles offers Tanya a ride home, she declines, and then he is seen WALKING HOME. Where's his car?? Anyway, just don't see it, folks. I really want to be more specific, but words escape me. Cats jumping on people. A guy getting stabbed by corn. Cheesey lines up the proverbial "wazoo". Just don't see it. Wait, I take that back! See it for writer Stephen King's cameo as the guy who owns the graveyard. He's actually pretty good. Even with guest appearances by Mark Hamill and Ron Perlman, King gives the best performance of the film. But, other than that...wow...BAD.

Silly and fun

[rose-294 · 7/10 · 31 March 2008]

Although written by Stephen King, an overrated writer if there ever was one, this is actually quite entertaining B-movie. Vampiric, incestuous creatures who live in the candle-lit house and drain the life-force of virgins, great graveyard scenery, heroic cats and very pretty virgin. The soundtrack even has Enya's music, an idea which I found quite... nice. I'm sure King is disappointed to this little movie, although it HAS crappy dialogue and ideas, all of them from a true and tedious King potboiler. (Albeit Sleepwalkers, if I'm understood right, is a script without any novel or short story behind it). Still, those touches of sewer-odors show he DIDN'T use a ghost-writer after all...

Unbelievably horrible

[jimkis-1 · 1/10 · 9 June 2007]

This film has its share of negative comments and I have to agree with those who consider it one of the worst movies ever made. True, most of the films based on the works of King are pretty bad, but this one goes beyond bad into the realm of horrible. There is not one scary moment in it unless you consider stupidity scary. It is typical King garbage -- myths twisted around that made no sense in the first place, mixed with obvious and belabored so-called "scares" that are about as shocking as PeeWee's Playhouse (which, at least, is entertaining). It is full of ridiculous moments, not the least of which is Alice Krige's character. When she goes on a rampage and starts quipping like the villain in an old Batman TV show, it is so absurd as to be sickening. All the people who had cameos in this (including John Landis)are lucky they still have careers. But the most absurd part has to be the cat costumes towards the end, which look like cheap rubber outfits someone bought at K-mart. The best part of the movie is the appearance of some real cats who actually out-act the people in the movie.

It's just you and me, Clovis.

[Hey_Sweden · 7/10 · 30 November 2023]

Brian Krause ('Charmed') and Alice Krige ("Star Trek: First Contact") play a son-and-mother pair, the title creatures who are vaguely feline in origin. They live a nomadic existence, moving from town to town and obtaining sustenance from the life force of teenage virgins. Their one weakness? Cats. Apparently any substantial scratch from a cat is enough to kill a Sleepwalker. Trouble arises for Krause and Krige when their current intended victim (Madchen Amick, 'Twin Peaks') turns out to be a real fighter.

Don't take this screen original from Stephen King seriously - at all - and it's possible to have a generous amount of fun, as I did. It's positively goofy stuff, with some incredibly groan-inducing moments, but since most of the laughs do seem to be intentional, I was able to forgive this sort of thing. It's pretty predictable, to be sure, with most of the adult characters or authority figures proving to be completely useless. The visual effects by Apogee are pretty good, and Tony Gardners' Alterian Studios supplies some decent-looking monsters. Another bonus: "Sparks", the cat who plays Clovis, is every bit as appealing as human protagonist Amick.

A solid assortment of familiar faces helps matters: real-life former couple Cindy Pickett and Lyman Ward, who'd played Matthew Brodericks' parents in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off", as Tanyas' folks, Ron "Hellboy" Perlman as a moronic state trooper, Jim Haynie ("The Bridges of Madison County") as the sheriff, Rusty Schwimmer ("Jason Goes to Hell: The Final Friday") as a housewife, Stuart Charno ("Friday the 13th Part 2") as a crime scene photographer, and the late Tim Burton favorite Glenn Shadix ("Beetlejuice") as a creepy teacher. There's also a handful of quick cameos from genre icons, and Mark Hamill appears unbilled in the opening pre-credits sequence.

I would tend to agree that BY NO MEANS would this ever be considered a "great" film, but it provides ample entertainment for horror fans. It does make great use of Enyas' haunting song "Boadicea".

Seven out of 10.

Very weird story

[raypdaley182 · 1/10 · 7 April 2007]

OK, I taped this off TV and missed the very start. The film was about 10 or so seconds into the titles (I assume) so if anything happened before that I missed it.

Lots of people say Mark Hammill is in this, I didn't see him. I did recognise Clive Barker, John Landis and obviously Stephen King doing some really awful acting as the graveyard attendant.

Alice Krige looks lovely apart from the scenes where she has the cat face or is in full alien make-up.

Even with the opening titles it's never really explained very well exactly what Sleepwalkers are or where they come from. From the title sequence I assume they are catlike bipeds who live by extracting life-force from humans. I assume they live a long time and these particular 2 are possibly the last of their kind.

Add to this a very large dose of incest (Yes! I thought it was a bit suspect too), shapeshifting, killer cats and invisibility and you have Sleepwalkers.

It's a very bad story that has no real explanations behind the main 2 characters and far too many cameo's to try and distract from the simple fact that not enough is explained to the viewer.

Avoid.

Good Fun From the 90's

[bayardhiler · 7/10 · 7 November 2012]

While I can't say that Stephen King's "Sleepwalkers" is a great film, it certainly is not the worst one either. In this movie Stephen King actually does try to do something original, in that he creates a race of supernatural beings who for some unknown reason call themselves sleepwalkers. These beings are psychic vampires (meaning they feed off of psychic energy as opposed to blood) who can transform themselves into bipedal were-cats. In addition, they also possess powers of telekinesis and invisibility, which makes things more interesting. This film follows two of these creatures, Charles and his mother, Mary, who are forced to live nomadic lifestyles because it turns out that regular house cats are deadly to them and always seem to find them in their new neighborhoods. Another constraint is that they can only feed off of the life force of young, female virgins such as young Tanya Robertson, who "Twin Peaks" fans will recognize as Madchen Amick. She happens to meet Charles in her creative writing class, thinking that he's falling in love with her; little does she know that Charles (played decently by Brian Krause) wants to suck the life out of her. All the actors play their parts well, however the real star of the movie is the talented Alice Krige, who plays the deliciously evil matriarch who will do anything to protect her son. A number of people have expressed dismay over the film and there is some truth in that: the direction by Mick Garris does not always flow right, the early CGI effects, although not terrible, seem a little dated today, and a few plot holes are present, such as what is it about cats that make them so deadly to sleepwalkers? Still, the movie never drags, the physical makeup they used for the creatures was very convincing and probably more so than some of the effects you see today, and the creatures are a pretty cool idea. One other thing that adds to the movie is the theme song, done by Enya, I think, that manages to be both beautiful and haunting. I'll admit that I'm a little biased in that I love just about anything from the 90s. Yet, give "Sleepwalkers" a chance. Besides, there are worse Stephen King Movies out there; just watch "Rose Red' and you'll see what I mean. 7 out of 10

Catfight

[petra_ste · 2/10 · 6 August 2007]

While many adaptations of his books are mediocre, screenplays written by Stephen King himself include Rose Red, a fun haunted house tale, and the creepy The Storm of the Century. Sadly, Sleepwalkers is an unwatchable film with no entertainment value whatsoever.

Charles (Brian Krause) and his mother (Alice Krige) are vampire-like creatures, able to assume both monstrous and human appearance. Hilariously, they are also afraid of cats, their mortal enemies. The two monsters move to a new town, where Charles befriends a classmate (Madchen Amick), planning to kill her.

Not much happens, so the movie tries to stretch itself as long as possible with ludicrously gory scenes of vampires killing extras, plus endless shots of cats meowing and running around the house of the evil family.

Sleepwalkers is campy but tedious; although the "vampires versus cats" encounters should be hysterical, the stupidity is also partly intentional. If you are making a lousy horror movie, at least have the decency to play it straight, because the moment you wink at the audience ("Hey, we know it's garbage!"), you kill the fun.

Buried behind overacting, stupidity and bad taste there is an attempt to humanize monsters and show their solitude and sadness: a potentially interesting idea, but it couldn't have been executed worse. Avoid this one like a plague.

2/10

terrific

[NateWatchesCoolMovies · 8/10 · 4 December 2016]

Stephen King's Sleepwalkers has a reputation as one of the lesser quality adaptations of his work, which led me to put off watching it for years. Well I don't know what film the critics saw, cause the one I watched was wicked good. Nestled in that perfect area of 80's horror where the blood was corn syrup, the flesh was latex, there wasn't a pixel or rendering in sight and atmospherics mattered more than excessive violence, this is one serious piece of horrific eye candy with the backbone of King's wicked imagination to hold it steady. The story tells of a small Midwestern town (is there any other kind in the man's work?) That falls prey to a pair of vampire werewolf hybrid creatures who subside off the blood of virgins and morph into slimy behemoths that conveniently show off the impressive prosthetics. Brian Krause is one of said creatures, drifting into town with his creepy mother (the wonderful Alice Krige) and setting his sights on severely virginal schoolgirl Madchen Amick, by dialing up the charm past eleven. People and animals start to die all over town and the suspicions arise, but the pair are cunning and have most likely been doing this for centuries almost unnoticed. It's nothing too unique as far as the concept goes, but the fun of it lies in the gooey special effects and one demon of a performance from Krige, a veteran stage actress. She is one part beautiful seductress (even to her son, in one unsettling scene) and one part volatile banshee, setting your nerves on edge time and time again throughout the film. Krause does the demonic James Dean thing nicely and Amick shows blossoming reilience beneath the required mantle of terrified scream queen. The three of them run amok in a beautifully realized fever dream of psycho sexualized terror, small town atmospherics and a classic old school horror climate. This film loves it's cameos, so watch for Clive Barker, Ron Perlman as a grouchy state trooper and King himself as the world's dumbest graveyard caretaker. Baffles me why this was panned upon release. It's actually one of the best films I've seen based on King's horror work, and there's a lot to compete with.

Solid, entertaining, and fun

[bwallarab · 7/10 · 24 September 2019]

Sleepwalkers is no masterpiece, but it is a fun, well-put together little B horror flick. The acting is solid, the practical make up effects are effective and not overly cheesy and the pacing allows the movie to zip right along. Horror buffs will love the cameos as well. Kitty cats rule!

Just Plain dumb

[Nordicnorn · 2/10 · 27 November 2006]

There are no spoilers here... Because there is no plot to spoil. Madchen Amick is living proof a face can make a living acting-- no talent required. The only bright spot are a few really good one-liners delivered very nicely by Alice Krige, but then again, she IS Alice Krige. Her soft dreamy voice gives the only hint at just how seductively dangerous these odd creatures can be. She is believably creepy in this otherwise unbelievable plot. How they got her to agree to this project remains a mystery. The screenplay writers must have been medicated when they submitted this script. It has major continuity problems, superficial stereotypical characters, horror formula writing, and simply falls short of making any sense what-so-ever. The creatures, while they have neat skills like going "dim", the question of where they come from and what they are is never so much explored.

Don't waste any time on this one.