From: sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan)
Subject: Re: Sleepwalkers: A Review (no spoilers)
Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 21:30:34 GMT

In article <rauser.703107833@sfu.ca> rauser@fraser.sfu.ca (Richard John Rauser) writes:
>    What makes this film such an abysmal failure are two main weaknesses:
>(1) It is a STUPID film   (2) Nothing in the film is ever explained to the
>audience (gee, this is sounding like Basic Instinct all over again).

I disagree.  While I felt the film had shortcomings, it wasn't stupid, not
really.  And things were explained adequately for me.

>    Before I begin to sound like an unintelligent reviewer, let me
>explain. Point 1. This film is stupid. It's that simple. Sleepwalkers is
>a silly story. Without giving away anything that happens (though I really
>should to prevent anyone from seeing this piece of garbage) let me give
>you a few tidbits: savage cat-people called "sleepwalkers" (we don't know
>why) come into town. 

Why not?  They need a name, don't they?

>They are terrified of cats (we have no clue why) 

Uhm, actually, that was explained within the first two minutes of the film.
Maybe you missed it.  The little written text that said they were only
vulnerable to a cat's scratch.  If a cat could kill me with a scratch, I'd
probably be terrified of them, as well.

>and
>to survive they suck "energy" (my best guess) 

"Life force."  Also explained in the beginning.  Next time you see a movie,
maybe you should watch *all* of it, first, before slamming it.

>from "pure, untainted" 
>virgins (again, we have no clue why). 

Why do unicorns amble up to virgins?  Because they're *pure*.  It happens to
be a traditional element in legends and myths.  But, again, I guess you
missed that.

>There are two sleepwalkers in the 
>film, a mother and son. They have an incestuous relationship. (We don't know
>why and don't WANT to know. This is typical King-esque grotesqueness...
>usually effective. But this time it doesn't wash). 

Did for me.  As the mother remarked, they hadn't seen any other sleepwalkers
(even though she wouldn't admit that they were the last).  Since they were
outsiders, not truly part of human society (humans were *FOOD*, not
companions!), who else did they have to turn to?  Also, it allowed the
mother to have a hold on her son.  More, the sleepwalkers seemed to have had
a presence in ancient Egypt (you know, the place where cats were considered
sacred, where one of the gods had a cat's head, where the royal families
were incredibly incestuous?).

>    The son is infatuated with a cute high school girl 

I don't think infatuated is the right word.  He seemed to feel about the
same way towards her as someone else might feel about a turkey or pig:
somewhat attached, so let's not kill and eat it ok, oh, you're hungry then,
ok, well, I can always find another one.

>We have scary sixties "horror"
>music every time one of the sleepwalkers appears on screen 

You mean, like Boadicea, by Enya?

>   This film slips into absurdity with the sleepwalkers' fear of cats. Cats
>are drawn to the sleepwalkers until by the end of the film there are about
>one hundred cats lounging around their home and yard (again we have no
>explanation for this and by this time we don't want one). 

Why can't vampires stand garlic?  I assume, by that paragraph, that you've
negatively reviewed each and every vampire movie ever made because they
didn't such things (or, for example, why vampires can't cross running
water).

>The cats are supposed to be a premonition of 
>doom, a symbol of bizarre cosmic justice (remembe the cats in Pet Sematary
>and Cat's Eye?). 

What symbol?  That cats are the natural enemies of the sleepwalkers.  I
think that's a good reason for them to be frightened of them.

>The problem is that real cats are much less scary than the
>hissing demonic felines portrayed in the movie poster. 

Never been attacked by an angry cat, I see.

>When the cats attacked the sleepwalkers,
>jumping at them screaming MEEEEOWWW! (this happens throughout the film)

This happened at two distinct places in the film:  one towards the middle,
and then towards the end of the film, where it was necessary for the
conclusion.

>    How's this for intelligent dialogue? Son sleepwalker in his trans am
>offers a ride home to beautiful  high school girl. He jumps in the car
>without opening the door. 
>
>    Girl: You know, some people use doors (smiling).
>    Boy: Do they? I've heard that.
>    Girl: Have you? (smiling).

Gosh.  You're *right*!  There is *never* any corny dialogue between
teenagers when they've just met and are trying to make a favorable
impression for the other!

>    I almost forgot to mention: the sleepwalkers can alter their appearance
>as well as their surroundings (they can turn invisible and change a car
> from a Mustang to a Trans Am). Again, THIS IS NEVER EXPLAINED.

Once again, it is mentioned, at the beginning of the film, that the
sleepwalkers are shapeshifters, and the probably source of the vampire
legend.  But since it was written, I guess you didn't see it.

And they don't turn invisible.  They become _dim_.  (A concept King uses a
lot in most of his later books and stories; it's not invisible, it just
convinces people to look elsewhere.  Make an unusual noise, however, and
you're likely to be noticed anyway.)

>Point 2. We are given so many little
>clues and hints and suggestions about these strange creatures with their
>strange powers and incestuous relationship (yes, we actually see mother
>and son in bed) yet we are never told about their origins, their background,
>their history...it's like the last half of the film was chopped out.

Really?  Gosh.  You know... just from the opening shots, I came up with a
theory or two about them.  Maybe, for example, the Egyptian gods were real,
and interbred with the Egyptian royalty.  But, gosh, you're right.  A movie
is *so* much better when they explain *EVERYTHING*.  Can't have the audience
thinking, you know.

>    Stephen King has a very short cameo which is quite humorous (this time
I happened to enjoy the movie.  It was a bit light and fluffy, but I didn't
really object to anything in it.  On a scale of -5 to +5, I'd give it about
a 2.  And I will most certainly buy the book, if/when it comes out.

-- 
Sean Eric Fagan  | "One form to rule them all, one form to find them, one
sef@kithrup.COM  |  form to bring them all and in the darkness rewrite the
-----------------+  hell out of them" -- sendmail ruleset 3 comment from DEC.
Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.