CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
4.5/10
3.7 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Jackie Cassidy y sus amigas son acosadas por un asesino en serie mientras están en una pijamada.Jackie Cassidy y sus amigas son acosadas por un asesino en serie mientras están en una pijamada.Jackie Cassidy y sus amigas son acosadas por un asesino en serie mientras están en una pijamada.
Michael Harris
- Morgan
- (as M.K. Harris)
Alexander Folk
- Detective Davis
- (as Alexander Falk)
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
The Slumber Party Massacre series will never be known as one of the most life changing horror franchises of all time. They're mindless fun at best and Slumber Party Massacre III attempts to do something slightly different by keeping the gratuitous boob shots and gore, but taking away a lot of the fun.
The basic set up is typical slasher stuff with a group of girls hanging out on a beach and getting ready for a big sleepover at one of their parents' houses that night. They're semi-stalked by a creepy guy and, on the way back to the house, one of the friends is murdered. Obviously, once the party kicks off, a few boys show up to crash the party and check out the girls dancing in their underwear (and less) and the killer decides to crash it, too.
Unlike the first two films in the series, there's an element of whodunit mystery here. Could the killer be the aforementioned creepy beach guy with the ponytail? Perhaps the nosy neighbor across the street who spies on the girls with a telescope and seems really interested in checking out the house to see if he wants to buy it? Or maybe it's one of the goofy guys who have showed up to crash the party? This element does help it stick out from the other two films and keeps things pretty fun at first.
It's only once the killer is revealed that things take a slightly darker turn and it begins to feel more home invasion than slasher. If you're into that sort of thing, maybe you'll enjoy it, but I found it left a slightly bitter taste in my mouth.
The basic set up is typical slasher stuff with a group of girls hanging out on a beach and getting ready for a big sleepover at one of their parents' houses that night. They're semi-stalked by a creepy guy and, on the way back to the house, one of the friends is murdered. Obviously, once the party kicks off, a few boys show up to crash the party and check out the girls dancing in their underwear (and less) and the killer decides to crash it, too.
Unlike the first two films in the series, there's an element of whodunit mystery here. Could the killer be the aforementioned creepy beach guy with the ponytail? Perhaps the nosy neighbor across the street who spies on the girls with a telescope and seems really interested in checking out the house to see if he wants to buy it? Or maybe it's one of the goofy guys who have showed up to crash the party? This element does help it stick out from the other two films and keeps things pretty fun at first.
It's only once the killer is revealed that things take a slightly darker turn and it begins to feel more home invasion than slasher. If you're into that sort of thing, maybe you'll enjoy it, but I found it left a slightly bitter taste in my mouth.
This is a great example of why you should always try to hire fans. Watching behind the scenes interviews, it's clear that the director didn't really want to be apart of this, leading to a bland and uninspiring film.
Slumber Party Massacre III's gravest sin is that it lacks what made the first two special. It doesn't even attempt at subverting the conventions of what it is (the first one started as a satire and got trashier in production but stuck to enough of its original intent to be unique) or be really out-there in its badness (the second one, which may be one of the most entertaining rockabilly slasher neo- surrealist movies of 1987). All this is is exactly what you might expect, and yet it only puts in the minimal amount of effort possible in its run- time (ironically the longest of these movies).
Corman sold out with this one - not surprising he would do this of course, but at least this series, all helmed by women, had some teeth and, you know, *ideas* - and either didn't allow the filmmakers to get more creative or never hired anyone good in the first place. Its just a dumb, tired slasher with a final 20 minutes filled with such dumb and *mean* stuff (why do the girls stand by while that one kill happens that could have been stopped in the five real time minute lead up?)
It's only for genre completists, or those who might dig watching what is in effect everything that made Scream necessary, from its "twist" third act reveal (think you know who the killer is? F*** off, like I should care) to the inane conversations the characters have are meant to make them sound like real people and not types; its not really fun enough to be a guilty pleasure or something to put on at a party (like, again, the second one was), and its 350 grand budget feels as cheap as that sounds. Its also not a total crime or offensive (hey, it could be worse - imagine Eli Roth putting his taint all over this), but you could be doing better things with your time.
Corman sold out with this one - not surprising he would do this of course, but at least this series, all helmed by women, had some teeth and, you know, *ideas* - and either didn't allow the filmmakers to get more creative or never hired anyone good in the first place. Its just a dumb, tired slasher with a final 20 minutes filled with such dumb and *mean* stuff (why do the girls stand by while that one kill happens that could have been stopped in the five real time minute lead up?)
It's only for genre completists, or those who might dig watching what is in effect everything that made Scream necessary, from its "twist" third act reveal (think you know who the killer is? F*** off, like I should care) to the inane conversations the characters have are meant to make them sound like real people and not types; its not really fun enough to be a guilty pleasure or something to put on at a party (like, again, the second one was), and its 350 grand budget feels as cheap as that sounds. Its also not a total crime or offensive (hey, it could be worse - imagine Eli Roth putting his taint all over this), but you could be doing better things with your time.
This movie was so hilarious. The guy who wore all black was really weird. I never thought that I would be surprised at who the killer really turned out to be. The title of this movie does have a significance to it, that this is a movie made not only for slumber parties (very much so it is), but also for people who love slasher flicks (like myself). On a scale of 1 to 10, I give this movie an 8 (good enough to view).
Hmm. What to say without having a "direct to video" bias. Well, on top of how incredibly cheesy(yet fun)Slumber Party Massacre III turned out to be, there is also a fairly lengthy cameo from busty F13 vixen Marta Kober, who played 'Sandra' in the second 'Friday the 13th' film. I could tell right away by her voice, and with a closer look I could tell the face, too. So that was cool.
Furthermore, aside from the highly predictable premise of the film, I actually appreciated the characters because, although they are two-dimensional, idiotic buffoons who have NO idea how to dance...or act, they still stood out enough so that I knew who was who when it came to 'driller-killer' time. It's also pretty violent in a few scenes.
Anyway, I would definitely recommend renting this title one night if you happen to find it at your local video store...and if you are a slasher fan then I would recommend buying it if you can find it for a decent price. And by decent I mean under four dollars.
5/10 is my vote. Better than I expected it to be.
Furthermore, aside from the highly predictable premise of the film, I actually appreciated the characters because, although they are two-dimensional, idiotic buffoons who have NO idea how to dance...or act, they still stood out enough so that I knew who was who when it came to 'driller-killer' time. It's also pretty violent in a few scenes.
Anyway, I would definitely recommend renting this title one night if you happen to find it at your local video store...and if you are a slasher fan then I would recommend buying it if you can find it for a decent price. And by decent I mean under four dollars.
5/10 is my vote. Better than I expected it to be.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaHope Marie Carlton did her own stunt in which she crashes through a glass door.
- ErroresAs the pizza girl walks along the street, she walks past the same pick-up truck three times.
- Versiones alternativasThe original R-rated VHS of the film released by New Horizons Home Video runs 75 minutes. There was also an unrated version released to video by the same company, which runs 80 minutes. This release contains more dialogue and a few extra scenes, as well as several gory images cut from the initial release. In 2000, New Concorde released the film on DVD and VHS as the R-rated version, however, it contains all of the extra footage released on the unrated VHS, plus an additional 7 minutes of scenes, clocking the film at 87 minutes. This is the most complete version of the film available.
- ConexionesFeatured in Some Nudity Required (1998)
- Bandas sonorasLove 69
Written by Mark Levi & "Psycho" Freddy Trash
Performed by High Class Trash
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Slumber Party Massacre III?Con tecnología de Alexa
- What are the differences between the Unrated VHS Version and the R-Rated Version?
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 350,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 1,242,995
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 270,135
- 9 sep 1990
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 1,242,995
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 27 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was Slumber Party Massacre III (1990) officially released in India in English?
Responda