Three beautiful transsexual women visit small-town America and take jobs in macho workplaces to raise money for a sick family member. Their adventures on the road are shocking, funny and ... See full summary »
Two guys at a college prep school make wagers on seducing naive young girls, and then meet their match when they agree to see which one can seduce the most popular and devious girl who has her own agenda to everything.
This takes place several years before Cruel Intentions (1999), back to when Kathryn first meets Sebastian, their sexual attraction to each other and their enjoyment in destroying the lives of their peers.
Keri Lynn Pratt
Lily is a sheltered art student from Michigan going to school in California. She finds an apartment and her roommates aren't quite normal. One day she finds a box of items belonging to a ... See full summary »
After a mysterious death of a young college student occurs late one night at a prestigious New England college, Danielle "Daisy" Brooks nevertheless decides to escape her small town life ... See full summary »
Wolves, coyotes and other native carnivores balance ecosystems and keep wilderness healthy. But they are also seen as a threat to livestock, and for over a hundred years ranchers and ... See full summary »
Rich 17 year old wild thing Brittney is devastated she loses her inheritence to a classmate, Maya. An insurance investigator uncovers the two girls plan, and soon the three are involved in a steamy relationship of sex, money and people being fed to aligators. Written by
Why did i rent this movie? to see 2 girls kiss, its as simple as that. I didn't expect a masterpiece, or even anything as good as the surprisingly entertaining film the original was.. but i did not expect something as insipid as this.
This film goes out of its way to insult your intelligence, and to prove the fact a script can be written within 2 hrs and actually end up as a real life movie.
Gigli to me wasn't a bad film, its more misunderstood, and a bit different from usual fare, without Lopez and Affleck in it, i doubt many would make as much fuss.. its still made well, yet people quote it as the worst film ever.. but those people clearly don't watch these straight to video sequels. I just don't get why they have to be so bad, it really isn't hard to write an average script and at the very least make some sense, but to write something as completely moronic as this, and have it take up 2 ft on a Blockbuster shelf defies all logic and reasonable belief.
I am someone who can watch an average movie, a film that doesn't quite hit the spot, or truly achieve its potential.. and come out the other side with few complaints, i like to watch movies, i'm generally pretty positive to a lot of them that i watch.. but every once in a while a film like this comes up, and you honestly believe you have become more stupid as a result of watching it. The people who wrote this, are not intelligent, i hope there was a lot of red tape going on, and no one actually had any creative control, because that is the only way to forgive the people behind a film like this. If i was given the job to make a straight to video sequel, of a guilty pleasure film like Wild Things, i knew i wouldn't make a classic, but i knew i could take the basic ingredients of that film, twist it a bit, and still make a fun movie.. a bit like the Tremors sequels. I wouldn't do like this, and simply try copy everything, and do that poorly. All i ever ask of a film, past technical competence, is for it to at the very least make sense, something this film dies flat on its face.
Is there hot lesbian action? yes, and of course taking away the star factor of the original, its probably hotter, though it is a carbon copy of that scene. Everyone went to see Wild Things, for the threesome scene, and expected little else, but instead got a good pulp storyline that was genuinely entertaining.. everyone will watch Wild Things 2 for a threesome, they'll get it, but they'll also get brain damage in return. Stick the subtitles on, and fast forward.. that's a health warning people.
24 of 31 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?