Angels Don't Sleep Here (2000) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

This is such a low-energy movie that I couldn't keep my hands off the fast-forward, even though I was watching with my daughter, and she wasn't happy about it.

I guess I can best sum up the movie as follows:

1. Two words: evil twin

2. Kari Wuhrer as a forensic scientist specializing in genetics

3. Kari kept her clothes on

As I watched with my daughter, she was trying to solve the mystery of the supposedly dead twin who must be alive because his blood keep showing up at crime scenes where the live twin was not present. Katya said "the dead twin must still be alive. They never found the body.". Poor, naive child.


Kelly Rutherford was topless very briefly on the bottom in a in a dimly-lit sex scene

I had to explain to her the first rule of twin movies - that the one you think is good/alive is actually the one who's evil/dead. And do it was, even though there was really no reason for the one presumed dead to assume the other's identity. He could have accomplished the same end by using his own identity. You see, the other twin really was dead, the live twin knew it, and the killer knew it. But the killer had no idea which one he killed. Since nobody could tell them apart, what did it matter whether twin #1 pretended to be himself or his late brother?

DVD info from Amazon.

  • no widescreen

  • no features

I'll bet you're wondering about the blood thing, right? I explained to Katya that since the "dead" twin had to be pretending to be the "live" one, therefore the blood at the crime scene had to be a plant, although I had no idea why. There is an explanation, although it's minimally satisfying. On the other hand, you won't care. 

The Critics Vote

  • Apollo 52/100.

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 4.2, Apollo users  47/100. 
  • With their dollars ... no theatrical release
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, this film is a D. Too slow and obvious, despite some competent cast members

Return to the Movie House home page