Wild Things: Diamonds in the Rough

2005 "Bad girls just want to have fun."
4.5| 1h27m| R| en
Details

Two young women will stop at nothing for one to gain a $4 million inheritance of two priceless diamonds, while two detectives try to thwart their plans, but find complications abound.

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial Watch Now

Trailers & Clips

Reviews

Bardlerx Strictly average movie
Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.
BroadcastChic Excellent, a Must See
Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful
John Doe This is a better movie then Wild Things 2 (stay away from that thing trust me). The story is more interesting and has better characters. Also, the women are cuter in this film then Wild Things 2.The acting is very well done with Serah D'Laine (who portrays Marie Clifton), and Sandra McCoy (who portrays Elena Sandoval) taking their roles seriously. I think this should be a little bit higher then 4.5 stars but not by much.This sequel has more depth then Wild Things 2 but is not as good as Wild Things 1.I give it a 6/10
kosmasp The real diamonds lie within the movie "Wild Things" ... that is/was the first part (they actually went and did a fourth one). The others just retell the same story, with some tweaks here and there (though the second felt, like a complete copy of the formula). And while this might steer a bit away from that, it's still as weak/"good", as the second movie. Though it feels weird calling those movies sequels. They are just cash-ins, made for the quick buck.Stay with the original, to get the story with the acting and the story as it should be told. Of course, if you think you have to watch some nice ladies wearing next to nothing (sometimes only the latter), than you can give this a try. But other than that (acting, story, production values), there is nothing much to see here
DJGilby Even though everyone knows this movie doesn't compare to the original movie, it's still a great movie. Personally I think Marie and Elena are good actors even though they could have done better. Let me also say the sex scenes were really hot. This is not deja U all over again like the last person said. It is a completely different movie with a completely different plot. Maybe one or two twists were predictable, but most of them weren't. It was a lot better than Wild Things 2 and I don't know why everyone dislikes this. The girls weren't as hot as the ones in the other movie, but they were still extremely hot. My grade for this movie is a B+ and I really recommend it.
guyfromjerzee This is the perfect movie to watch after a hard day at work, when you just want to give your brain a rest and indulge in some trashy entertainment. I was especially impressed, considering how much I hated the second film. I bought the "Wild Things" box set, which has all three of the films, so it's good to know that two out of three of the films are worth watching. Sure, this ain't exactly Shakespeare, but it's intriguing and fun. I was glued to the screen from start to finish. Unlike the second entry in the series, the acting is pretty good for direct-to-video standards. It's not much better than the acting you'd see on an afternoon soap, but it works, being that the "Wild Things" films are kind of like soap operas. Like in the other two films, there are tons of plot twists and over the end credits, we watch tiny scenes that explain how these twists occurred. And of course, we have to have the good ol' threesome scene. It's great to watch, being that the two lead actresses are very gorgeous and their lesbian scenes are pretty hot--not like in some other films where the girls kiss with their lips barely touching each other. Some of the plot twists are downright ridiculous, but that didn't ruin the film for me. Like I said, it's almost like a soap opera. You're just watching to be intrigued and to keep guessing what will happen next. And what can I say? It's one hell of a ride.