In the grand tradition of cinematic franchises, there is a cynical adage that the third instalment is usually when things undeniably start to go downhill for the series. This rule applies with brutal efficiency to the series of exploitative erotic thrillers that started with the 1998 surprise hit Wild Things. While the second direct-to-video sequel, Wild Things 2, managed to maintain a decent level of schlocky entertainment, its successor, Wild Things: Diamonds in the Rough (2005), is significantly worse than its predecessor. It squanders the franchise's potential, relying on tired tropes and a lack of imagination that makes the viewer wish they were watching the original again.
The film attempts to ground itself in continuity by returning to the fictional beachside town of Blue Bay in South Florida. Detective Michael Morrison, played by Linden Ashby, reappears from the previous film, serving as a loose thread that tries to tie this entry to the broader universe. The plot begins with Morrison accompanying Karen Richards, a parole officer played by Dina Meyer, as she delivers a lecture to high school students about the dangers of sexual assault. She shares her own traumatic backstory, a classic device meant to add gravitas to a film that is ultimately built on shallow characterisation. However, the audience is quickly distracted from this by Marie Clifton, a smug and wealthy student played by Sarah Laine. Marie is embroiled in a family feud with her stepfather, Jay Clifton (Brad Johnson), a construction entrepreneur facing financial ruin who is contesting her inheritance of two valuable diamonds.
During a swim meet, Morrison notices Elena Sandoval (Sandra McCoy), a schoolmate from the wrong side of the tracks with a criminal history. He invites her to one of his construction sites, and later, she accuses him of rape. This accusation lands him in prison. It turns out, of course, that nothing is as it seems. Marie and Elena were in a secret lesbian relationship, conspiring to obtain the diamonds. Their pact was sealed not just with words, but with a threeway sex scene involving Dr. Chad Johnson (Ron Melendez), a forensic expert who faked the evidence to frame Morrison. In the meantime, Richards, who is Elena's parole officer, begins to suspect the inconsistencies in the story and launches an investigation alongside Morrison.
Written by Andy Hurst and Ross Helford, the authors of the previous film, and directed by Jay Lowi, Diamonds in the Rough sticks rigidly to the well-established formula. It features beautiful people in beautiful settings doing some ugly things to each other in a convoluted web of double crosses. The film is, like the previous entries, made with a relatively low budget, but the producers clearly tried to hide this fact. They compensate with bright colours, visually appealing locations, and, especially in the first scenes, masses of scantily clad nubile women. It is a desperate attempt to distract the viewer from the meagre production values. However, the cast is, in terms of star power, significantly downgraded compared not only to the 1998 hit but its immediate predecessor. The only relatively recognisable name on the poster is Dina Meyer, and even she is hampered by a script that gives her little to do other than deliver exposition.
Sarah Laine and Sarah McCoy were obviously cast on the account of their respective looks. They try their best with their formulaic roles, which include obligatory lesbian and threeway scenes. Sarah McCoy, in particular, relies on body doubles for the more explicit sequences, while Sarah Laine bravely appears nude, offering her body to the camera in a manner that feels more obligatory than erotic. Yet, whenever the film strays from this blatant fan service, the audience has to endure weak, repetitive and uninspired plot points. The dialogue is wooden, the motivations are thin, and the twists, including the ending, are easy to predict even for viewers who haven't bothered to watch the two previous films. The film's reliance on end-credit explanations suggests that the writers knew they had painted themselves into a corner with a convoluted narrative that required too much exposition to make sense. Before the film ends, many viewers would appreciate its short running time as one of its few qualities, as it avoids overstaying its welcome.
The franchise soldiered on with the next sequel, made in 2010 under the title Foursome, but by that point, the damage was done. Diamonds in the Rough is a testament to the decline of the series, a hollow shell of the erotic thriller that once captivated audiences.
RATING: 4/10 (+)
==
Blog in Croatian https://draxblog.com
Blog in English https://draxreview.wordpress.com/
InLeo blog https://inleo.io/@drax.leo
InLeo: https://inleo.io/signup?referral=drax.leo
Leodex: https://leodex.io/?ref=drax
Hiveonboard: https://hiveonboard.com?ref=drax
Rising Star game: https://www.risingstargame.com?referrer=drax
1Inch: https://1inch.exchange/#/r/0x83823d8CCB74F828148258BB4457642124b1328e
BTC donations: 1EWxiMiP6iiG9rger3NuUSd6HByaxQWafG
ETH donations: 0xB305F144323b99e6f8b1d66f5D7DE78B498C32A7
BCH donations: qpvxw0jax79lhmvlgcldkzpqanf03r9cjv8y6gtmk9