Simply A Masterpiece

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

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

Hollywood is incredible sometimes. Not only they made "Wild things 2" with basically the same plot as the original , but now they made this. "Wild things 3" is essentially a remake of first two movies ! My God. What a lazy and greedy people live in Hollywood. I'm even more surprised that they made "Wild things 4" ! I haven't seen that one and I'm not going too. From what I've heard the only change they made is that they have now 3 sexy girls in it instead of two.This ? This is a waste of time. Even the sex scenes were awful , because the girls are UGLY.Don't watch it. I give it 1/10.

The first was good with an A list cast and great soundtrack, the second one okay - quite amusing and clever, this third one is very weak. It only serves to show the earlier 2 in a better light.The cast isn't good. The 2 main leads are inadequate actresses with blank faces. Remember the first one which launched Denise Richards? This cheap installment has the most forgettable actresses who look like they would rather be elsewhere. It's a shame Dina Meyer and Linden Ashby (the cops) were reduced to taking on this weak and predictable story.Don't bother to watch this - it isn't even worth a TIVO.

Man, oh man, oh man. "Wild Things," the 1998 film that turned Neve Campbell and Denise Richards into sex symbols was a very influential film that inspired a generation in the late 90's. 6 years later, we received the very late and unnecessary sequel "Wild Things 2." Now, in 2005 we get the third entry in the Wild Things film series called "Wild Things: Diamonds in the Rough." One question came to mind after I finished watching this crap-fest: "what were they thinking?" This movie is the same as the second one. Basically all they just did was recycle the plot from "Wild Things 2(which was recycled from "Wild Things")" and had cast different people in the same roles. The two lead female vixens were not convincing at all. From the moment the movie started you knew what was going to happen: spoiled little rich girl hates "trailer trash girl," trailer trash girl actually is friends with spoiled little rich girl and they both come up with a way to get millions of dollars. We saw this with the last two "Wild Things" movies except the first, original movie was done with more style.A word to the producers: please stop making these straight to home video sequels. You're f*cking up the rotation.