11 of 14 people found the following review helpful
The lurid trash of the original reduced to mondo plot twists,
This review is from: Wild Things 3 - Diamonds In The Rough [DVD]  (DVD)
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. I appreciated the explanation, especially 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.