More Action in Blue Bay
Jeffrey T. Munson | Dixon, IL | 09/13/2005
(4 out of 5 stars)
"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."
Nice looking girls what else you could ask?
Ronnie Clay | Winnsboro, Louisiana | 09/11/2005
(4 out of 5 stars)
"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."
The great lurid trash of the original reduced to mondo plot
Lawrance M. Bernabo | The Zenith City, Duluth, Minnesota | 08/05/2005
(3 out of 5 stars)
"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."
Not So Wild: Yet Another Story That We Have Been Told 7 Year
Tsuyoshi | Kyoto, Japan | 12/04/2005
(2 out of 5 stars)
"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."