Sleepaway Camp III (1988) from Tuna

In this sequel, the Sleepaway Camp has been reopened by a lazy couple. They have invited an equal number of rich and underprivileged teenagers to what is billed as an encounter to teach trust and understanding. The evil villainess, Angela,  kills one of the would-be campers by running over her with a sanitation truck, then takes her place. Her next victim is a reporter that asks her for dope. As in the previous films, she hacks and slashes her way through everyone. This time, however, the film doesn't establish nearly as much motivation for the murders.


Stacie Lambert shows breasts in three different scenes, Kessler shows breasts in the opening sequence, Jill Terashita shows breasts putting on a camp shirt, and Kim Wall is seen in a bra and panties in the same scene.
There is some attempt at humor, and one scene got a chuckle out of me. After killing Stacie Lambert, Angela drags her half-naked body back into a tent and observes, "You're lucky you're dead. In a few years, your breasts are going to sag so-o-o bad ..."

DVD info from Amazon.

  • widescreen format

We can be thankful that Sleepaway Camp III: Teenage Wasteland (1988) seems to be the last of the Sleepaway Camp films, even though they left room at the end for another sequel.

For a more positive review, visit the Phantasmagoria site, which seems to think a fourth one is in the making.

Scoop's notes:

Once again, this series proves to be the ultimate source if you are looking for the sisters of famous people. This time, Pamela Springsteen (The Boss's sister) returns as Angela, and Tracy Griffith (Melanie's half-sister) makes an appearance. The previous one featured Renee Estevez, sister of Charlie Sheen.

The Critics Vote

The People Vote ...

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+. To me, the franchise has worn out its welcome, and even had to recycle some footage from number two to fill out the running time on this one.

Return to the Movie House home page