Wild Things 2

Plot synopsis:
Brittney Havers (Susan Ward), a South Florida high school senior, lives with her wealthy stepfather, Niles Dunlap (Anthony John Denison), after her mother ran her car off the road in "Gator Alley" and was presumably eaten by alligators a year earlier. When Dunlap is killed in a private plane crash, his will calls for Brittney to receive a small stipend until she finishes college, after which she will receive only $25,000 a year for life from the estate. The rest of Dunlap's assets, totaling $70 million, are to be left to a corporate trust, unless a blood heir can be found.
Brittney's brash, relatively poor classmate Maya (Leila Arcieri) suddenly claims to be Dunlap's illegitimate daughter as the result of her mother's extramarital affair. She is ordered by a judge to submit to a DNA test, the result of which proves she is Dunlap's child.
At the Dunlap home, Brittney hears a noise on her way to the wine cellar but it turns out to just be rats. Suddenly Maya appears and the girls reveal they are lovers before being joined by Dr. Julian Haynes (Joe Michael Burke), who had arranged the DNA test. The trio are in cahoots, running a scam to secure and share Dunlap's fortune.
Insurance investigator Terence Bridge (Isaiah Washington), investigating the circumstances of the plane crash, finds out from Dunlap's medical records that Dunlap had scarlet fever as a child, one of the side effects of which can be sterility, and asks Dr. Haynes how Dunlap could have fathered a child. Dr. Haynes gets nervous about the plot unraveling and contacts Maya. He agrees to meet her and Brittney that night at the docks, where Maya shoots him. The two girls dispose of his body in Gator Alley.
After Bridge learns the entire affair was planned, he shows up at the Dunlap home and demands half the money in return for not going to the police. Brittney, refusing to give up any of the money, gets a gun and points it at Bridge, but instead kills Maya. She tells Bridge that he has to earn his half. He loads Maya's body into the trunk of his car and he and Brittney drive off to dispose of it.
When they stop at a traffic light, Brittney gets out of the car and walks away as a police car pulls up behind them. Bridge can do nothing but drive away when the traffic light turns green and the police car honks at him to get moving. Brittney phones in an anonymous tip that Bridge's car trunk has a girl's dead body in it. He is soon arrested and jailed. A videotape from the Dunlap home security system shows Bridge demanding half of the inheritance money from Brittney and Maya.
Later, Brittney flies off in a private plane with the very much alive Dunlap, who had faked his own death to escape prosecution for misappropriating millions of dollars of corporate funds to pay his gambling debts, and also to avoid the Cuban gambler to whom he still owed millions. Brittney and Dunlap don parachutes, planning to bail out over swampland and disappear together. As Dunlap is poised to bail out, Brittney reveals that she packed his chute with newspaper and pushes him from the plane to his death. She then bails out, landing safely in the swamp, where her mother (Kathy Neff), also very much alive, is waiting for her in a swamp boat.
It is revealed that Brittney and her mother orchestrated everything, including the deaths of Brittney's co-conspirators, in order to steal Dunlap's fortune, and they relax in the sun on a tropical island. Brittney comes down the stairs of their villa overlooking the ocean with two drinks and hands one to her mother. As Brittney watches intently, her mother takes a sip and remarks that the drink is strong. Brittney replies "They do make them strong here, don't they?" with a wry smile, the implication being that she has poisoned the drink.

Tags: murder, flashback

Review:
The original 'Wild Things' was hardly a classic, although the movie had some apparent attraction (I'll leave it to your imagination what they are exactly).
Names are changed, sure, events are slightly different, right, but it all adds up to the same thing.So, if you've actually seen the original Wild Things there's really no reason to watch this one as well.
The ironic thing about this movie is Susan Ward starred in "The In Crowd," an enormous box office bomb that came out way too soon after the original "Wild Things"--the earlier being like a bargain-basement version of the latter flick.
Sure, one of the trademarks of the original movie is the outpouring of plot twists, and not all of them made perfect sense.
Like the original "Wild Things," the film contains a 3-way with two girls and a guy, but it's not nearly as steamy with moments where one of the actresses was obviously switched with a body double.
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..
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..
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..
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..
Wild Things 2 (2004) Susan Ward, Leila Arcieri, Isaiah Washington, Joe Michael Burke, D: Jack Perez.
This carbon copy goes through the paces, with plot turns you see coming from a mile away and only get dumber and dumber; you're not likely to care about anything except maybe Ward's tan lines.
Watch this film if you dare, but don't expect to much out of it other then one hot scene followed by complete boredom.
In addition to a cast that was very pleasant to look at, doing some things that were equally pleasing to the eye, it had a credible plot that read like an everyday event in parts of America.
It is almost as if an entire half-hour of footage was deleted from throughout the film, all from between one scene or another.Another feature of Wild Things that Wild Things 2 left out is the plot twists.
After the half-hearted attempt to recreate the threesome scene, and its ability to demonstrate how "wider audience" seems to mean "children/adolescents only" in Hollywood, I'm sure nobody who's seen the film will be surprised that I tend to think of this mess as Wild Things Lite.In all, I gave this mess a two out of ten.
While the original "Wild Things" has it's moments of thrilling scenes and a memorable plot twist, this sequel has only sex and hot women running around in skimpy outfits trying to figure out some stuff.I won't get into detail because believe me, this one does not deserves your time or your money.Susan Ward and a threesome scene (better than the one from the original!!) are the highlights.
So my recommendation is: watch this on late cable and wait for the sex scenes to happen.This movie is a total robbery and a poor excuse for nudity..
Here's what I think you'd expect from a sequel to Wild Things:  plot twists (check), breasts (3 pairs), a few good belly laughs (the vet steals the show), and an entertaining way to spend an evening (check and check).
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) .
All the same: the same American South, the same physically precocious American schoolgirls in bikinis, that do not disdain of same-sex or murder for the millions inheritance, the same cascade of deception and fraud.Actually copying the original story, Jack Perez does not bring to life his own movie.
Similar patterns need actor's charm, possibly negative.And if Neve Campbell and Denise Richards was (at least) just a pleasure to watch, in the second part the actresses from the local drama club were taken.The only notable figure against the cardboard villains is an insurance agent, played by Isaiah Washington.
Wild Things 2 isn't a sequel; it's a cheap emulation, an imperfect carbon-copy that takes nearly all of the elements from the first film and simply replays them with a slightly modified script and a different (ie., less memorable) cast.
As in the original, the noir-style plot revolves around a group of morally bankrupt characters out to get rich any way they can, meaning that double-crosses, murder, and sex are once again the order of the day, all of which leaves the viewer with a very strong feeling of deja-vu.Bisexual rich girl/poor girl combo: it's there!
The first Wild Things was great, but it is not the kind of movie that can be watched over and over.
The plot was also more fun, and more enjoyable.Other reviewers said that this film "copied", or re-did scenes from the first Wild Things, but that really is not true.
Susan Ward is the Troubled Heiress (played by Denise Richards in the first), Lelie Arcierno is the Brainy Girl from the Wrong Side of the Tracks (Neve Campbell in the first one), plus the suspicious investigator (Kevin Bacon in the original) and the sleazy yuppie (Rob Lowe in the original).lots and lots of bad language and some sex, so definitely not for family viewing.
Ms. Ward and Ms. Arcierno are quite hot (look for the taking-off-the-work-shirt scene).best thing about the movie is the Florida setting; a nice change from the usual Hollywood/SoCal scene.all in all--well, like I said, if you liked the first one, you'll probably like this..
It is an interesting movie with many twists and turns.at the beginning story seems to be a simple one but as it progresses,the plot thickens.In between erotic scenes,it has held on to it's plot.girls have done well.watching this movie today may not be as exciting as it would have been 10 yrs back but it's a good revenge story..
Unfortunately , even that element is weaker compared to the threesome in "Wild things".Better watch the original.
I thought this movie was going to be different than the original one but it seems to be a cheesy B-List copy in almost every way.It contains the same plot as the first Wild Things.The actors and the characters they play look like,act and talk almost identical to the characters in the original.They chose Susan Ward for the Denise Richards spoiled-rich girl role because she looks like Richards.They chose Joe Michael Burke for the Matt Dillion town-respected city worker role because he looks like Dillion and they chose Linden Ashby for the Kevin Bacon obsessed cop role because he looks like Bacon.The only difference between this one and the original is that in this one the rich girl gets the money and the poor girl dies,where a in the first movie the poor girl gets the cash and the rich girl dies.This movie is very predictable after the first fifteen minutes.
This movie is exactly like the first Wild Things, a scam + a threesome (FFM) + murder + corruption.
If you've seen the 1st Wild Things, there's no reason to watch this movie- they have the same chain of events (more or less).
If you haven't seen the 1st Wild Things, there's still no reason to watch this movie, unless you only want to see hot girls frolic in a pointless movie, then by all means watch it.
this followup to the original Wildthings falls short in a lot of ares.it is nearly a carbon copy of the original plot structure.basically people betraying each other and being betrayed by others.however,there is no originality in this movie.the basic story has been done and much effectively in the original.there are a lot of twists and turns in this one,but they are very predictable,although ridiculous at time.the acting,while decent in the original,is less than decent in this movie.this is unfortunate,because the story itself is not good enough to carry the movie.you may find your eyelids drooping while watching this thing,as it is painfully slow at times.and you're eyes will glaze over and roll back in your head at the absurdity of the plot twists.i believe many of these plot twists were simply added to keep the movie at a certain running time.this movie is a much less than average effort 3* out of 10.
The movie is the same exact plot of Wild Things except this time the case is different and the actors are different.
Wild Things was a pretty good movie and this remake/sequel is absolute garbage by comparison.
Overall, if you have any desire to see this movie, just watch Wild Things.
If you have already seen Wild Things, watch it again and then you can say you saw this movie.
The original Wild Things is a decent movie...kind of a guilty pleasure of mine.
I watched it with my best friend and at one point she turned to me and jokingly suggested a ludicrous ending.Imagine our surprise and disbelief when that WAS the real ending.Wild Things 2 lacks the sensuality, the intelligence, and the imagination of the original.
This movie is a piece of crap, all it was is a reworking of the Wild Things without the original skilled Generation Y actresses.
The movie would of been better if they redone it with an original thought out script and a plot that had so many holes in it to drive a Sherman Tank through.
The plots twist along with the unbelievable situations make this so called film a complete  waste of time do not watch it..
Everything is built like the first one, a miserable story with a tribunal to get 70millions dollars, a girl (the neve campbell's double) who wants the money and lives in a mobile home, the good girl who is really rich and actually really aged to be in college...
The success of the original WILD THINGS (a great little film, by the way, and well worth tracking down) led producers to demanding a second helping of the pie, so along comes this sequel (and a further two down the line, so somebody somewhere must like them).
Sadly, WILD THINGS 2 turns out to be a lukewarm retread of the original, down to using almost exactly the same plot except with the character names changed.Unfortunately, the thing that helped WILD THINGS to achieve its success was the novelty: it stands alone as a uniquely thrilling compendium of twists upon twists, manipulating the story constantly to keep the viewer guessing.
We've already seen and dealt with all that by the time of WILD THINGS 2, and it all feels very passé as a result.It doesn't help that this straight-to-video outing lacks any decent cast members (and low rent action star Linden Ashby playing a cop doesn't count) and as a result the acting is pretty poor.
Almost like a kind of parody of its predecessor.Someone asked 'which are the movies in which the stories will almost be similar but the actors will be different?' The other answered 'porn movies!!' This is the similar kind to the wild things 1 in the sense the plots and sub-plots are the most unexpected.
Watch the original Wild Things before you even think about watching this.
And while you didn't care about the cheats that much in the first one (because it was good), you will not be able to watch this completely and enjoy it as a movie (depending on your likings, you might enjoy the "bodys" on display here ...
But cruel, obnoxious school girl Maya King (Leila Arcieri) claims Britney's stepfather was HER father and she deserves all the money...Pointless "sequel" to "Wild Things".
I was surprised to see Susan Ward in this considering she had already played the same type of character in The In Crowd (which, is a lot better than this in terms of being a trashy, guilty pleasure), Isaiah Washington (what's he doing in this??) and a newcomer Leila Arceri who seems to try too hard.Anyway, don't waste your time on this.
It's not so much a sequel as it is an example of what the first movie might have been like if it had been made by a group of complete hacks.In the original, it was important to the plot that the two girls dislike each other.
The plot is very similar and the characters are imitations of the original ones - but I recommend this film for a great night out.
There isn't too many surprises, but who cares.The two leading ladies were great to watch and most of the performances were quite good for a direct-to-video film.
(Loud fart noise!)Yes, you can see the plot twists coming a mile off AND the film does rip off several scenes (with minor tweaking) from the original (swamp scenes, double crossing, the courtroom, end credits, menage a trois, the assembly hall, etc...), but give it a go!
(If you don't think that she looks like Jack Lord, have yourself a side-by-side look at the close-up pictures of both in the image galleries.)In Wild Things 2, the rich girl's stepfather dies in a plane crash (or so it seems), and the will stipulates that only a blood descendant will get any significant amount of inheritance.
The rich girl, played by Susan Ward, then gives us a re-enactment of the outrage displayed by the Denise Richards' character in Wild Things when the poor girl breaks down under cross and admits to their conspiracy to get their teacher put away.
At this point some guy walks in to re-enact the sordid 3-way scene from Wild Things, and other than the fact that some sort of successful plot is implied by all this celebrating, you're not at all certain that you even know who this guy even is, or how you should attempt to reinterpret anything that you have witnessed thus far.They kill this poor guy right away, and it is clumsily revealed that he is the coroner who falsely certified that the body in plane crash was that of the rich man who isn't really dead, and it is clumsily revealed that the real conspirators were the rich man and his stepdaughter.
Wild Things had one of the most clever plots of any movie in recent memory, and it deserves to be recognized and remembered for that.
SPOILERS-MANY OF THEM-THROUGHOUT: Actually with Wild Things Two it is quite easy to come up with your own spoilers while your watching the movie.
And actually, this is a great movie to watch if you want to really miss the first one.
Just remember: what you absolutely can't believe is really what this movie will give you....that's Wild Things two!.
Wild Things 2 is not a great film.
Towards the end, in the attempt to make the film either as bad as possible, or to destroy all sense of character depth, he becomes money- crazed, bitter and imprudent, gives up his morals out of sheer and sudden enlightenment that his job was rather unfair and made those teenagers wonder if there was going to be another dreadful threesome sex-scene.
This man was the worst idea of the film and his only use was a convenience to the plot and his abs for the threesome sex-scene.
There are a lot of things in common with this movie to the first one:sex, greed and murder in Blue Bay. Considered a sequel, it really isn't, because none of the characters from the first film appear in any shape or form in this home video version (Although one actor from the first film is playing a totally different character in this one).Brittney Havers (Susan Ward)is the step-daughter of Niles Dunlap (Anthony John Denison, famous for his villainous role in the 80's TV show "Crime Story"), an incredibly wealthy guy.
Lots of plot devices are recycled from the first film (Including some sex scenes).
If you have seen the first Wild Things film and enjoyed it, don't see this one.
In the first film I was pleasantly surprised by the great storyline, thinking it was just some lame story with two girls making out (based on the trailer I saw in the theatre).Well, in part two they did exactly what I first expected of part one.