Watch Sleepstalker For Free

Wonderful character development!

The acting in this movie is really good.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

This is quite possibly the worst film I have ever seen. The fact that I saw it quite late at night without falling asleep halfway through is probably due more to the power of caffeine than any qualities inherent in this film - of which there are zilch. It is clichéd, abysmally acted, frighteningly dull and rather confusing. It is one of those films where you cant quite believe that during the course of filming no one in the production company stopped and said "hang on, this is rubbish, people wont buy this!". The only circumstance in which someone would voluntarily sit through this movie would be if they had just arrived here from Mars and had never seen a movie before and had no concept of what a movie was. Now let us never mention this film ever again - "Sleepstalker" never happened.

STAR RATING: ***** The Works **** Just Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** Lagging Behind * The Pits As a child, Griffin (Jay Underwood) was sent to sleep by his parents who rested his troubled little mind and told him there was no such thing as 'the Sandman.' On that same night, a serial killer going by that very name breaks into their home and 'puts them to sleep.' Now, seventeen years later, he's executed on death row and Griffin, now a successful writer, is able to lay his past to rest. Or so he thinks-the 'Sandman' just made a pact with the devil to be resurrected and come back to finish the task and kill Griffin. But, as the story progresses, twists and turns occur that shed a different light on the whole topic...I've been in a horror kinda mood all of this week, and so, out of the many films I've had piled up to be watched, I selected this little horror piece.I can't say it succeeds in being really scary in any way, and the soundtrack is kinda irritating ('sleeeeeeeeeeep, baby, sleeeeeeeeeep'-I'd turn into a serial killer if I heard that all the time!) And some of the character motivations and dialogue shed a whole new light for me ('I've heard all the serial killer excuses in the world...ate too much fast food...', never heard that one before!!!) As for the performances, they're generally all pretty terrible with the exception perhaps of Michael Harris as the Sandman, even though he kept reminding me of Henry Silva out of Nico and Morty out of The Fear.But, there is a clever twist at the end of it, I suppose, and some okay effects in places. So generally not much to write home about, but not a completely wasted horror experience.'Ate too much fast food...' **

It's a haunting movie, rather fascinating and I fail to understand why the ratings are so abysmal. There's more depth and subtlety to it than people would expect from this genre (maybe that's the problem), and the supernatural elements never seem forced or out of place. The antagonist is the kind of antagonist you're expected (and given every reason to) hate and fear and although you do, at the same time you don't because understanding him comes naturally. The storyline is far from predictable, the acting is good, and the soundtrack has its moments of brilliance. However, in my experience the ambiance was what made Sleepstalker unique. I saw it once on TV a year after it was released and it's been with me ever since. Highly recommended.

"Sleepstalker" is somewhat of a guilty pleasure of mine.**SPOLIERS**Fifteen years ago, as a serial killer attacks and kills a whole family except for the son before the police arrive and catches him. Now in the present day, the same kid, Griffin (Jay Underwood) is a writer trying to catch his big break by getting an interview with a notorious gang leader. He and his girlfriend Megan (Katherine Morris), a photographer, head out on the interview. That night, the same man who attacked his family, the Sandman (Michael Harris) is being put to death for his crimes. He is visited by the Preacher (Michael D. Roberts) and is given a special necklace and the last rites, which are actually a spell used by the Preacher to transfer the Sandman's soul into another body before being sent to death. In order to pass onto the next world, the Sandman must kill the lone surviving member of his last attack, Underwood, and goes after him and his friends, killing them in a variety of methods using sand (Drowning in a sea of sand, creating hurricane force winds with sand, sand projectiles, etc.) Griffin learns that the Sandman is a close family relative who was abused by his father earlier on, snapped, killed him and became a serial killer to silence the pain he felt. Eventually, the search leads him to the Preacher, who gives Griffin some advice on how to stop the Sandman. Now with only Griffin and Megan left alive, the Sandman chases them into an abandoned where house, where Griffin is killed and Megan saves the day by drying up the Sandman in a giant fire when they learn fire can kill him.The Good News: I have to give props to the FX department, as the Sandman's make-up effects are pretty scary. Harris also gives a chilling performance, making the Sandman appear even creepier. Underwood does an okay job, but doesn't get a whole lot to work with. He is basically a hysterical man running from an impossibly created being, so is naturally treated with a crazed man's attitude. Morris is actually better, though like Underwood isn't given a lot to emote. The Preacher fares better than both, due to Robert's dead-on performance and the colorless contact lenses used to turn his eyes white. The gore is, for a change, not blood and guts, but instead having your skin stripped away from being caught in a windstorm, leaving bone, marrow and ragged clothes behind. Several killings are unique and done creatively. Also, the hero is killed instead of barely surviving the ordeal with his girlfriend.The Bad News: When I first heard that the killers name was the Sandman, I had flashes back to an action film several years earlier, Van Damme's 'Death Warrant,' where serial killer in the film is also called The Sandman. This immediately struck me as weird, since it would make no sense that two films, in different genres, would be made so close to each other would have a character of the same name and occupation. Aside from the three leads and the Preacher, the rest of the acting is dull and uninspired. No one came across as convincing, a major no-no in a film where the believability of a character drives the film along. Also, the clichéd part of the Sandman being Griffin's relative (I won't give it away, but based on what I've just said, most of you can immediately know) is, well, clichéd. A dull beginning after the Sandman is caught also dooms the picture to boredom.The Final Verdict: See this one only if you watch horror movies religiously, like me, and have very undiscriminating tastes in your preferences. I mean, I like it, but several of you out there will disagree and say it's dull, boring and without imagination.Rated R: Graphic Violence, Language, Adult Situations and brief nudity