I sonnambuli

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.

Sleepwalkers (1992)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

When this film was released there was a lot of hype because it was the first time Stephen King had written something directly for the screen. The hype quickly faded when everyone realized that it was a dud. A son and mom (Brian Krause, Alice Krige) move to a small town where they need a virgin (Madchen Amick) to keep alive. It turns out the duo are "sleepwalkers," which is a form of cat people. The entire story to SLEEPWALKERS is rather stupid and silly and I often wonder if King or director Mick Garris were taking it overly serious. I've heard that there was a lot of trouble with the production so perhaps this is the best that they could turn out but there are so many questionable and rather silly moments here that you can't help but call this a dud. The horror elements are extremely silly, never make too much sense and I wonder what King was even trying to do with this. I mean, were these creatures supposed to be something between werewolves and vampires? Did the son and mom have to have so many sex scenes together? Was this meant to be dark humor? For some strange reason when the son does start to attack the virgin girl, instead of any drama or suspense we're given really bad one-liners and attempts at humor and it just doesn't make any sense. I say no one took it serious because this is followed by a long line of horror cameos including King, Tobe Hooper, Joe Dante, John Landis, Clive Barker and Friday THE 13TH PART 2 fans will notice Stuart Charno. Both Krause and Krige are good in their parts but Amick easily steals the film as the victim. SLEEPWALKERS is a real mess of a movie and it's a shame that King's first direct screenplay was such a bust.

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.

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

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.