23 of 24 people found the following review helpful
on September 13, 2005
Sarah Laine (Marie Clifford), Brad Johnson (Jay Clifford), Sandra McCoy (Elena), Dina Meyer (Kristen Richards), and Linden Ashby (Michael Morrison), star in this third episode of the "Wild Things" movies.
Marie is a spoiled eighteen-year-old who stands to inherit two very expensive diamonds from her late mother's will. However, step father Jay has decided to challenge Marie's inheritance. He owns a construction company which is deep in debt, and he's fighting off the advances of local loan sharks to whom he owes money. He wants the diamonds for himself so he can pay off his debts. Enter Elena, the towel girl for Marie's swim team. Jay starts flirting with Elena at a diving meet and invites her to Marie's birthday party. Upon seeing Elena arrive uninvited, Marie attacks her, and they begin fighting in the pool.
Jay arrives to break up the fight. He then sends all of the party-goers home and invites Elena inside. The following morning, Officers Richards and Morrison show up at Jay's house and place him under arrest for raping Elena. After a trial, Jay is found guilty and sentenced to fifteen years in prison. But did he really do it? Marie arrives and pledges to help Jay, but Jay, having no more money, can't figure a way out of his mess. Marie suggests that they use the diamonds for money. Jay readily agrees and signs off on his interest in the will. Marie is now free to gain access to the diamonds, but will she keep her word and help Jay? Hang on, the twists and turns are just beginning!
This movie keeps in the same tradition of the first two; lots of twists and turns to make your head spin. But you become so engrossed that you want to make sure you follow everything through to the end. Also, this movie has the beautiful girls and obligatory sex scenes that viewers have become accustomed to. Make sure to keep watching when the credits begin to roll, because there are some added scenes that will help you straighten all of the twists out. I've liked each of the previous movies in this series, and I liked this one as well. The plot again is twisting and will keep you guessing until the very end, and, of course, the girls are fun to look at. Watch this movie and experience the twists and turns of yet another "Wild Things" adventure in Blue Bay.
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful
I have seen the original "Wild Things," but managed to miss "Wild Things 2" and have proceeded, at my own pace, to "Wild Things 3: Diamonds in the Rough." Even so, I would tend to doubt that the second film is more like the first film than the third film is, because this 2005 television (?) movie really rehashes what happened in the original. The problem is that the original "Wild Things" was lurid trash glossed up to be all that it could be, mainly on the strength of the chemistry between Neve Campbell and Denise Richardson, who along with Matt Dillon were nominated for the MTV Movie Award for Best Kiss in 1999 (and it was not like Dillon's presence was necessary to earn the nomination). "Wild Things 3: Diamonds in the Rough" is a pale imitation in this regard. Sarah Laine as Marie Clifford and Sandra McCoy as Elena Sandoval are fine enough on their own, but put them together and throw any one of the males in this movie into the mix and the execution is simply not up to the idea.
The subtitle comes because following the death of her mother, Marie's step-father Jay Clifford (Brad Johnson) refuses to give her the four million dollars worth of diamonds that are her inheritance. Marie is not happy and when Elena, the diving team's towel girl dares to show up at Marie's party, the two go after each other in the pool. Elena was invited to the party by Jay, who then proceeds to put his swarmy moves on her. The next day Jay is dragged off by the police for having raped Elena and the games begin in earnest. Of course, given the way Laine and McCoy are posed on the front cover of the DVD we know they are the titular figures and that despite the convincing forensic evidence Jay Clifford is innocent. After all, Marie wants those diamonds. But even having that much of a head start on the plot of this one does not help you keep up with all the twists and turns in "Dimaonds in the Rough," because this script by Andy Hurst and Ross Helford (based on the characters created by Stephen Peters), is determined to keep on twisting and turning until director Jay Lowi's film has shaken every last one of us off of its tail.
So even though all of the clues are there, you are going to be hard pressed to figure out who is going to be left standing at the end of this one. The best part of "Diamonds in the Rough" might actually be the end credits, not because the movie is over, but because there are scenes cut into it that go back and show us what really happened just to be clear on how the script connects all the dots, just like in the original. I appreciated the explanation even more so this time around since I was never really involved in the story or characters enough to be inclined to try and figure it all out as we went along. I just waited for the other shoe to drop. My main critical comment while watching the film was to note that you can film girl on girl action and strip away almost all of the eroticism. Consequently, after watching this version do not be surprised if you feel compelled to go back and watch the original to help restore your faith in the power of lurid trash.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
on December 3, 2005
So they still keep doing this, I mean, `two-sequel policy.' Get one surprise hit, and make two sequels, whether or not you need them. They did it to `Cube'; they did it to `Mimic': to `Species' 'Cruel Intentions' or so many countless examples. Of course, not all of them are bad (Wes Craven and his `Scream' trilogy for instance), but as far as `Wild Things' goes, we don't need any more. But here it is, another sequel `Wild Things: Diamonds in the Rough' which is slightly better than the previous sequel, but still unnecessary.
You know, the formula is now very familiar. Imagine one rich, spoiled high school girl Marie living in Blue Bay. And now, Marie has a step-father, who just got two diamonds worth $4 millions. Next, another girl Elena, bad girl who, as you know, cannot get on well with Marie at school or party. And one day Elena has the police arrest Marie's step-father for raping. But you know better, much better, if you have seen the original `Wild Things.'
In spite of the slightly changed situations about the probation officer (Dina Meyer) and the local cop, the basic pattern remains the same. They investigate the case, and they find something crucial within 5 minutes, which leads us to another finding. To be fair, the ending is a surprise, if not a big one, and everything ends neatly. Too neatly I'm afraid, however, and you might say looking at it `So what?'
I know nothing about Sarah Laine (as Marie) and Sandra McCoy (Elena), but I think their acting is just OK. I read on imdb that one of them refused to do nudity, and I think it's a wise choice. She knew (and we know) that the only way to revamp the series is to include more nudity, which this new sequel has (but not much). But you know, it also is the last resort for someone to cash in on the hit movie made 7 years ago, and as this fact shows, the series of 'Wild Things' should be over by now.
Thanks to the good job done by the shooting crew, the film captures the hot air of Florida, and though the story has lost the punch of the first one, it is reasonably entertaining. At least the film doesn't stop because once it does, it will fall into pieces.
Strange thing is, only those who have seen the original would be likely to be interested in this second sequel called, of which story, especially the first half of it, is virtually the retread of 1998 John Mc Naughton thriller. One of the (guilty) pleasure of the first one is, to me, watching Neve Campbell and Denise Richards, both of whom surely surprised us more than one way with their impossible characters and the over-the-top acting. But in this sequel, you don't see them, not even Dillion, Bacon, and Murrey. Good as she is, Dina Meyer cannot beat the cast nor provide the delightfully tongue-in-cheek mood of the original alone.
12 of 15 people found the following review helpful
on April 3, 2010
Ok.. everyone knows if they are going to buy the movies or not.. based on the MOVIES. The issue I want to bring up here is the CRAPPY packaging. Also I will note, which I did NOT know.. Wild Things 1 is actually the UNRATED edition, not the R-rated one.. so do NOT buy both editions, you are just doubling up.
But to the CRAPPY part. On the outside it looked like a standard keep case.. which the picture shows.. but open up the INSIDE there is no middle catch or hubs on either side with a spine middle holder. There is a SINGLE hub that holds all three discs.. meaning basically all three discs set DIRECTLY atop one another. It's not a BIG deal.. but considering I've seen FOUR disc sets within the space of a keepcase it just seems rather cheap and chintzy for an actual, at least the first, STUDIO film. (the other 2 were DTV, with another on the way soon I hear).
I just want to give everyone a heads up on the packaging.. its not as bad as the Good Times or Sanford and Son COMPLETE SERIES packaging.. with a plastic inside holding ALL of the discs (around 20) on a single spoke.. but still this just seems lazy when there are very clear ALTERNATIVES.. look at The Shield season 7 oeason 7 (BOTH fit in a single keep case and hold FOUR and SIX discs).. This just seems inexcusably lazy on the studio's part.
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful
on September 10, 2005
I think WT3 is a pretty decent movie, much better than the second, but don't expect a clever movie cause you'll be disappointed. The plot doesn't differ too much from the first movie, a man accused of raping a young girl plus the difficult relationship with his step daughter (Sarah Laine) with the diamonds in the middle. The low class girl in interpreted by Sarah McCoy as Neve Campbell did that role in the first. Both girls are very good looking especially, Laine. There's treason, blackmail and a well-thought scheme (at least in the minds of the characters). The revealing ending shows with flashbacks during the credits the key points of the plot, a surprising finale that is hard to anticipate. If you like the first movie, you'll like the third one.
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
on February 6, 2012
Third installment - the hottest of the bunch. Skip number 2, yikes that was bad. Number 3, pretty much the same story as number 1. There's no reason to watch this for the story. Get real, watch this for the action. OK, volleyball is gone, traded in for diving. Better choice, wet girls, no sand, same bathing suits.
Yeah this is the same old story. Who cares. The two stars get it on a lot. There is a lot of nakedness. A lot of really sweet naked women. Sweet sweet naked women. The first best scene, two kids making out in the garden - oh man she was super sweet and you get a good long look. There is a ton of girl girl action between the two stars. They have the nicest, perkiest, sweetest bodies. That's all you really need to know, get it for the four or five hot scenes. It works. But remember, there's no kitty cats shown and no roosters, remember this is r rated main stream stuff.
Remember to stick around after the show - during the credits there is a locker room shower scene that is sweet.
Horrible story - who stole what, who belongs to what, who double crossed who - bahhhhh - forget it. For this one, there's no shrinkage Kevin Bacon running around. Grab number 3 for the t and the a, and just enjoy the ride.
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful
The original Wild Things; you know, the one that was a bona-fide guilty pleasure/lurid trashy thriller, has now spawned not one, but two direct to video sequels. Wild Things 2 was a waste, and Wild Things 3 is no different. The story, if you want to call it that, is practically a carbon copy of the previous films where two sexy girls are in the center of twists and turns with loads of cash and murder in the mix. There's twists aplenty here, all of which are pretty much non-sensical, and they're actually pretty predictable. Mortal Kombat's Linden Ashby, who was in Wild Things 2, returns as a clueless detective, and Starship Troopers' Dina Meyer is here as well, for no apparent reason. The girls are hot, and the steamy scenes between them are better and hotter than in Wild Things 2, but nothing can save this from being another needless and pointless direct to video sequel. Stick with the original Wild Things; it wasn't a masterpiece, but it was a fun trash-noir thriller that was actually memorable.
11 of 15 people found the following review helpful
on May 6, 2005
This movie is a complete waste of time --bad acting, very predictable plot-The original Wild Things was pretty good and it went downhill from there. If you just like to look at hot babes then you might be able to sit thru it-but the babes in here are really stupid-they act stupid and the script is pretty lame. Does this really happen? A real waste of 90 minutes--avoid it except if you turn the sound off and look at the chicks.
19 of 27 people found the following review helpful
on February 25, 2005
Like the origninal Wild Things, this 3rd installments has the same premise, and the twists and turns. It does have its cheesy moments, but when you look back at everything after watching it. Everything comes together and it makes sense. The ladies in the installment are knockouts, and some great scences with them too, if you know what I mean. Not as good as the first one, but much better than the 2nd one. Check it out
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
on August 4, 2008
I own the first WTs. And I love to periodically watch it. It seemed like a great send up of a classic film noir, but with a really good modern smutty feel to it. The score on both these is really effective IMO. Someone has labeled it "Trash of the Gods."
I own this one too and it's fun to watch on occassion. Part of the fun is just vicariously living the life styles of the nasty rich, but also being glad you're not like that.
If you haven't noticed this is not the same quality as the first, very straight to video, soft core, mostly unheard of actors. The two lead "sluts" look like leftovers from porn. Very rough faces, which no one notices because they're half naked most of the time.
Great fun if this sounds like your cup of tea or you want a guilty pleasure.