User reviews

What does WILD THINGS 2 have going for it from the get-go . . . A) No Denise Richards B)No name actors C)Being a crappy direct-to-video sequel D) No Denise Richards NAKED.

What does WILD THINGS 2 have going against it after the fact . . . A) A script attempting to overcompensate its lameness with enough twists to make your head spin B)ONE sex scene; a threesome -- One of the only links to the original C)Sexy actresses in a sexy movie who refuse to show some skin (This leaves us with a body double and bare back) D) Just plain bad acting (The femme fatale comes across more as a foul-mouthed, petulant 6-year-old) . . .

And I won't even get into the scene where a character is shot above the shoulder blade. However, upon hitting the ground, the fatal wound is now five inches lower!

Did I mention no Denise Richards?

Why this movie was made in first place ? The original was hardly a classic. Most people were watching it for the sex scenes. Including me. OK , so it had decent acting . Nice music . Overall , it wasn't bad . But sequel ? Really ?

Here we have a movie that not just follows the formula of first movie , but actually is a remake. They only changed actors and small details. Talk about lazy movie making… There really isn't any point for watching this. The sex scene is good , I admit. Unfortunately , even that element is weaker compared to the threesome in "Wild things".

Better watch the original. Or "Basic instinct" . Or "Body heat". I give it 1/10.

Stupid. That's one word for this movie. They took the the same story and wrote a really poor script and cast really bad actors. Even porn artists can act better than this.

Watching this movie will make you realize the first part was actually a good movie.

It's almost all been said about this dreck already except one thing. Yes I've found a new complaint for this rubbish! Apparently the people creating this movie have no idea how wealth should look, or they thought their audience would be fooled, or perhaps they thought that everything else in this (Did I mention this movie isn't worth downloading for nothing?) awful flick was so bad nobody would find the time to complain about what I'm going to complain about! Whatever. The limousine the supposedly wealthy girl rides in would have been old in 1990! The, rather small, home she lives in is devoid of decent furniture or art (Oh but it has a plain and cheap looking wine cellar, she must be rich!). The clothes Ms. Ward wears could be obtained easily at Sears.

It has been said already that this drivelfest fails to get even the easy stuff right and this is yet another example.

Pity I can't give it a 0.