Vern has witnessed WILD THINGS FOURSOME (get it, it means part 4)

tn_wildthings4Didn’t get a chance to link this earlier, but The Ain’t It Cool News is running my review of the new straight to video WILD THINGS sequel. It really is called WILD THINGS FOURSOME. It’s easy to assume they only made the movie in order to use that title, but it actually kind of seems like the 4th person in the foursome (not pictured) was added in at the last minute. She’s barely in the movie at all.

By the way, two or three of the talkbackers there remind me how cool you guys are. Good job being cool, everybody.

Hey fellas,

I think we can all agree that WILD THINGS is a unique gem of the ’90s, right? A straight-faced but knowingly hilarious, amped-up take on the sleazy erotic thriller. It has everything you’d expect in a movie like this, except Shannon Tweed. It’s got murder, staged death, false rape accusations, a swimming pool cat fight, a threesome, big boobs, Kevin Bacon’s wang, Bill Murray, and the most convoluted series of double-crosses ever on film (so complex that it flashes back during the end credits to show that you still don’t know who was in on what with who). It found the perfect use for Denise Richards, showed that director John (HENRY: PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER) McNaughton could have a laugh and taught me that Florida is a humid battleground for wars between the swimsuit-wearing super rich and the jealous “swamp trash.” This was helpful to know around then because they elected Jeb Bush governor, then it was Elian Gonzalez, butterfly ballots, Bush v. Gore, Terry Schiavo media frenzy, etc. Maybe WILD THINGS was trying to warn us.

Wild Things: FoursomeWILD THINGS 2 and 3 were direct to video, and the main thing I remember is that I watched them. In that same tradition comes the fourth installment, tastefully titled WILD THINGS FOURSOME, and available on the DVD and the Blu-Ray June 1st.

This one begins promisingly. At a huge mansion pool party hundreds of beautiful twentysomethings in swimsuits watch the male lead win an intense foosball game. There are dynamic shots all aorund him and from inside the table and everything, and when he wins (SPOILER) he raises his arms like a boxing champ. It seems just like that movie NEVER BACK DOWN except instead of the rich bully kid being good at MMA it’s fucking foosball. He starts talking about a $10,000 bet but unfortunately it turns out to be on a speed boat race, and foosball never comes up again. Too bad, because there aren’t enough high stakes foosball movies these days, in my opinion.

Anyway his race car driver dad is killed in a suspicious crash, there are some complications involving the will, there is some scheming, brief nudity, etc. Somebody’s definitely up to something but the mystery is who all is in on it (SPOILER: everybody is).

I don’t really get the philosophy behind these sequels. They’re all just not-as-good rehashes of the first one, no attempt to try anything radically different. You can’t compete with the first one, so they’re content to just trail along far behind. The schemes are different, but there’s always seduction, betrayal, everybody in on it, which was a surprise the first time but this fourth time, not to speak for everybody, but I’m pretty sure most of us have caught on to the formula. The most blatantly rehashed scene is the famous Richards/Campbell/Dillon threesome, which in that one was the funniest blunt way to reveal they were conspiring together, but by now is just expected, like pranks in a POLICE ACADEMY sequel.

Credit where credit is due, I guess: it really does what the title promises. They re-enact the threesome scene and then add a fourth participant. One guy making out with three topless girls in a shower.

Not to piss on anybody’s parade but I gotta say, man, I don’t think one on three is that good an idea. It’s an impressive sight, but it’s alot of pressure for one dude. I’m not naive, I know the girls would probly take care of each other more than the guy would. But still – if it’s worth doing, it’s worth doing well. I’d want to hold up my end of the bargain, and I think that would be challenging. I’m not saying I couldn’t pull it off, I’m just saying it could go either way. I mean, I know you guys all are super-studs, because why would you lie about something like that on the internet? But personally I’d feel more comfortable sticking with the traditional two or less partners.

Hell, even if it’s to celebrate a criminal conspiracy – you could always have two different meeting times at the hotel, split it up. You have a one-on-one to warm up and then a threesome later on. Or vice versa. Of course, if you have to do the pouring-champagne-on-boobs thing, saving half a bottle for later would be tacky, in my opinion. You’d have to splurge for two bottles. But you’re celebrating getting a bunch of money anyway, I think you can afford it, so that might be the better tactic. Oh well. I guess I’ll cross that bridge when I get to it.

Pretty much all of the characters are intentionally hatable. Some of it is funny, but smart enough to keep a straight face and leave it ambiguous how serious it’s supposed to be. I like the scene where two characters are getting married as part of their scheme and as they’re declared husband and wife they look across the property to make eye contact with another character outside the gate giving them the stink eye from inside a yellow sports car, and then she drives away. That’s how it is in Florida, always some bitch in a yellow car waiting around watching and then she drives away.

They do a good job of making Blue Bay, Florida the vapid millionaire beach community portrayed in part 1, but strangely there’s a scene where the police chief claims that it’s a low crime area where a noise complaint is about the hardest thing the cops usually deal with. What, did they not find all those bodies from those three separate crime sprees beginning in 1998? And they consider all those rape charges to be misdemeanors? I don’t get it.

The best thing about the movie is John Schneider as the lead detective on the case. Somehow the guy from DUKES OF HAZZARD provides a little integrity. It took me a minute to recognize him, so I already decided I liked him before I could hold his TV background against him.

To answer your question, yes, they show some boobs, and the girls have nice butts. I think they could’ve had more toplessness though, considering the male lead stays shirtless for most of his part, beginning with the opening scene where he proposes a shirts and skins foosball game with himself as skins. He stays loyal to that team for the rest of the movie. He might as well be in a Tarzan movie considering how rarely he wears a shirt. Anyway, it’ll do in a pinch for teens who can’t get around Net Nanny, but for adults I recommend real porn.

The director is Andrew Hurst, writer of parts 2 and 3 as well as VAMPIRES: THE TURNING and SINGLE WHITE FEMALE 2. This time he entrusted the sacred writing duty to the likes of Howard Zemski and Monty Featherstone. Yes, THE Howard Zemski and Monty Featherstone.

(apparently the authors of HAMMERHEAD: SHARK FRENZY.)

WILD THINGS: FOURSOME is mildly amusing, but mild amusement is not really that big a commodity these days, in my opinion. Doing a part 4 to this is like doing that foursome: tempting, but hard to pull off. I hope if they keep doing these they’ll find somebody who actually has a good idea how to do it as funny and unexpected as the original. Something that continues in the same spirit instead of just rehashing with an extra pair of tits.

thanks fellas


Originally published at Ain’t-It-Cool-News: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/44923

View the archived Ain't-It-Cool-News Talkback
This entry was posted on Tuesday, May 4th, 2010 at 8:17 pm and is filed under AICN, Reviews, Thriller. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

54 Responses to “Vern has witnessed WILD THINGS FOURSOME (get it, it means part 4)”

  1. MattmanBegins

    May 4th, 2010 at 9:19 pm

    God, your smackdowns of assholes are priceless. “Specially arranged for there to be dozens, maybe hundreds of other topics you can find to read about”…ah, I hope you feel cleansed, because I sure do. I really hope you can find a way to somehow collect those for a future book, something of a Vern equivalent of I HATED, HATED, HATED THIS TALKBACKER.

    As it is, I’ll have to be content with my freshly-arrived copy of YIPPEE KI-YAY, which I’m opening up…right about now (a bit of a shame that the publisher couldn’t/wouldn’t do all the different colors and fonts you used in the DOMINO review, by the way. We’ll always have the internet, I guess.)

  2. Great review Vern, I agree that the first Wild Things was great, I haven’t seen the sequels but I’m curious to check them out but definitely not excepting much. I thought it was really funny how some of the talk backers on AICN were so outraged that you were reviewing this particular movie, I guess they had never seen any of your reviews before or they just haven’t been paying attention. Someone must tell them about your greatness.

  3. Thank you vern, for more badassness in the form of moving picture reviews and talkbacker beatdowns. Barnabyjones got owned.

  4. I think the twist for Wild Things Fivesome should be that one of the guys is a serial rapist, but nobody believes any of the victims cos of the four movies’ worth of scheming bitches’ false allegations.

  5. I received not one, but 2 copies of YIPPEE KI-YAY this week. Safe.

  6. Anaru – wow. Issues!

    I totally agree on the idea of a “foursome” and will continue to stick to threesomes only in future. (Yeah.) The foursome, it seems to me, would be just awkward, like when you’re on a bus that’s full of people and the guy sitting directly opposite you has his fly undone. You don’t know where to look.

  7. I find it hilarious that they’ve made a 4th dtv sequel to a movie from 1998 that people only saw for the nudity

  8. whatever happened though to movies that’s main selling point was some famous actress’ nudity?

  9. Uh, was there any real nudity in the first WILD THINGS? I remember titilation rather than flesh…

  10. The entitlement of some talkbackers is monstrous. “This thing that took four minutes to read and was totally free and optional did not quite meet my standards! No one has ever suffered more!”

  11. Jareth Cutestory

    May 5th, 2010 at 9:10 am

    Not only that, Majestyk, but the talkbacker who was complaining the most was oblivious to the skill with which the review was written. Even if you don’t care about the film, you have to appreciate the review on a technical level. That’s some beautiful writing.

    And of course the explication of the technical aspects of a foursome is pure genius.

  12. Look at it this way: at least Vern’s review took those nutballs away from whatever other mischief they might be up to in their real lives. As long as someone is posting anything anywhere on the internet that displeases them, they’re powerless to resist the urge to complain and hence incapacitated, unable to leave to do any of the real harm they might wish to.

  13. Jareth:My favorite part of the exchange was the talkbacker’s clueless comeback, which was something to the effect of “Are calling me gay?” You can’t make that shit up. Well, actually you can, but everyone would say it was overly broad and obvious. That’s reality for you.

    Mr. S: You make a good point, unless the mood slime from Ghostbusters II is real, in which case all the negativity these douches generate on a daily basis is bound to have some serious Twinkie-level repercussions.

  14. Jareth Cutestory

    May 5th, 2010 at 9:22 am

    I like to think that at least one of those talkbackers is being kept busy trying to crack the “code” that Vern encrypted into his review.

  15. “By the way, two or three of the talkbackers there remind me how cool you guys are. Good job being cool, everybody.”
    No problem, Mister V. *double thumbs up*Eyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

  16. Wow. Those talkbackers were lame. And I thought I was a dick! Funny review. Would I partake in a foursome? I would give it my best that’s for darn sure! Picturing Jareths comment. Great stuff! So what is next? Wild Things 5: Cluster fuck? Without the actual fucking?

  17. I just wrote about the foursome that I once participated in (during my “let’s experiment” years), but then I decided to delete it, because it sounded too much like a lame attempt at being funny, although I was 100% serious.

  18. I should have written: “with just the cluster?”. Better ring to it. And CJ, please rewrite. I’m intrigued.

  19. Oh, and I have technically been in a foursome. Two guys and two girls. Really just a case of swapping. So not much fun. Well, it was a laugh. I’ll leave it to that.

  20. Jareth Cutestory

    May 5th, 2010 at 12:25 pm

    CJ Holden: After that review Vern posted on the Horse Fucking movie, and the comments that followed (second only to the Demon Dave talkback and the Walter B. talkback), I think the bar has been set pretty high for sex-rated hijinks on this site.

    What the hell was the name of that Horse Fucking movie, anyway?

  21. ZOO.

    I have not seen it, by the way.

  22. Jareth Cutestory

    May 5th, 2010 at 12:43 pm

    Thanks, Mr. M. You know the old saying: Some films you can see without seeing.

  23. GoodBadGroovy

    May 5th, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    I have seen Zoo, caught it late night on TV. Actually found it to be incredibly boring, managed to go the opposite end of sensationalising, instead trying to make it seem artistic. Bizarre.

    Everyone seen the new trailer for Machete? I’m suprised how decent and “straight” they seem to be playing it. Also Seagal looks fairly badass.


  24. Should have said in my previous post that I enjoyed the review a lot too, and when Vern said John Schneider plays the lead cop, I first pictured ROB Schneider in the role for some reason. And I don’t hold Dukes of Hazzard against John anyway, cos I’m more familiar with him as Pa Kent in Smallville.

  25. I dunno about that MACHETE trailer. Seagal looks cool, but Jessica Alba especially looks pretty out-of-place. It’s fine that she can’t act, but she just looks to obviously Hollywood for something like this. The original trailer felt 100% badass authentic… this one kind of wavers between slick Hollywood and grimy z-grade exploitation. But I was always opposed to casting all those big-name stars, so I guess its not much of a surprise that I’m lukewarm to it. At least DeNiro looks like he’s playing it pretty straight – I wish it was some unknown, but I appreciate that he doesn’t look like he’s treating like some hilariously ironic joke. Seagal too, obviously.

    What can I say, man, haters gotta hate. On the other hand, its fucking awesome that they got it linked in with this bullshit Arizona law. That’s legit badass.

  26. Michael Richards = wrong way to handle hecklers.

    Vern = right way.

  27. AICN talkbackers REALLY get on my nerves sometimes, so much so that I often contemplate whether to stop visiting AICN altogether

    I’m hopelessly addicted though

    and GoodBadGroovy, I found ZOO to be extremely boring too, I stopped watching it after 30 minutes

  28. Admittedly A Pervert

    May 5th, 2010 at 9:16 pm

    Vern, can you confirm that Marnette Patterson (the blonde) shows her boobs during the foursome and that it is not a body double. Some of us have really been into her ever since she was on “Movie Stars” and Who’s Your Daddy? .

  29. Yeah, Vern, I hope you were taking notes during the sex scenes. It’s your JOB as a critic to keep track of these things.

  30. The thing about my foursome report is not that I’m scared of writing something dirty here, but that it comes pretty close to the “I’m a stud on the internet”-thing that Vern talked about in his review. (I would never call myself a stud or show off with my sexual abilities, but unfortunately this is part of the story and even while I’m writing this apologoy for not talking about it, I feel bad for talking about it by not talking about it.)

  31. CrustaceanHate

    May 6th, 2010 at 12:23 am

    Love that MACHETE trailer and the opening sequence about Arizona is 110% awesome, wobbly zoom and all.

  32. Admittedly A Pervert: Sorry, I cannot confirm or deny which actresses show boobs. I think she did but I wasn’t paying attention if it was a stunt double or not.

  33. Just clicked on to the Machete trailer and I’m impressed. About time Trejo got a lead role. De Niro looks great and in a good role at long last. His recent back catalogue has been dissapointing. Rodrigez (Michelle) looks typically bad ass, Lohan I didn’t even recognize! I think people are being harsh on Alba. I read her interview recently and she just wants to escape the usual Hollywood role and veer off course into shit like this. Good on her. And of course Seagal. Always a joy to see Seagal!

    Machete looks like a decent return to form for Rodrigez (Robert) and would appear to bring back the fun of Dusk ’till Dawn, El’mariachi and Desparado. How can one not be entertained?

  34. Alba seems to be working in the trailer for Michael Winterbottom’s Jim Thompson adaptation, THE KILLER INSIDE ME. Well, she’s getting slapped around, but it looks good.


  35. I might have to masturbate three times for michelle, lindz and alba.
    ok, maybe two times for michelle and once for lindz.

  36. Did you guys read that Danny Trejo interview on the AV Club? Best interview ever. My favorite part is when he got up in some dude’s face for being a prick on the set of a Charles Bronson movie and Chuck was like, “I like the way you work, Danny.” That’s an historic meeting of two of film’s most grizzled faces right there.

  37. That was great piece. I liked the fact he worked on Heat as “Armed Robbery Consultant”.

  38. Majestyk – just read that bit, haha, that’s raw bad-assness. Really interesting reading how he likes acting because it’s a rush similar to his bank robbing days. The dude needs an autobiography.

  39. google champion, his autobiography documentary, there is a trailer on youtube.

  40. Valuable data and excellent design you’ve got here! I would like to thanks a ton for taking turns your thinkings and time into the stuff anyone post!! Thumbs upwards

  41. Jewish dating site? oy, I would love to take a nice Jewish girl down to the local bagel shop for a nosh

  42. Vern, your review has gone 404 on AICN

    the world must know your thoughts on Wild Things Foursome again!

  43. Is the Wild Things Quadrilogy the first series where each entry works successfully as a standalone, and the quality of each individual film ranges from “pretty good” (Part 2) to “modern day classic” (Part 1, of course), but it absolutely doesn’t work as a franchise? I mean, I just powered through the series and I’m still scratching my head as to who thought it was a good idea to make 3 sequels with the exact same twist as the first one. It’s literally like calling “The Others” with Nicole Kidman “The Sixth Sense 2” and then being shocked, positively SHOCKED that people figured out the twist. At least Part 4 has the decency to drop the ruse early on and has the two women only call each other bitch and fake-fight in public for 20ish minutes instead of dragging it out for an hour.

    One could argue the plot is besides the point with DTV softcore thrillers, but the three sequels weirdly don’t seem interested in titillation much either – there’s relatively little nudity and it’s not like you can show much of a threesome in an R-rated movie, and I don’t know what kid is going to be interested in whacking it to 20 seconds of shirtless making-out before a fade to black. Plus not to be racist or anything, but I had a really hard time telling the blondes apart in Part 3 – I’m actually not sure who was supposed to be who or how many blondes there even were (I assumed three but I think there were only two).

    One bright spot that Vern pointed out – the supporting cast is uniformly excellent in these movies. Isaiah Washington, Linden Ashby, Dina Meyer, and especially John Schneider all have way more gravitas and screen presence than any of the leads, and I’ll be damned but Brad Johnson has more charisma and swagger in Part 3 than back when Hollywood was trying to make him a leading man in real movies. It’s honestly delightful seeing these guys back on the screen showing the new kids how it’s done. I don’t want a Wild Things Fivesome anytime soon but if they can get a grizzled Taylor Lautner, Freddie Prinze Jr, or Cam Gigandet to show up as a dirty cop/guidance counselor/insurance agent/lawyer who’s in on it, sign me up please.

  44. Speaking of John Schneider, saw him as the sleazy poser weatherman in Snow Day recently, pitted against Chevy Chase as the relatable, competent weatherman who is not at all a smug prick. That aged well.

  45. Apart from that, SNOW DAY rules though. I’m always shocked when I hear how disliked that movie is, considering that it might be the only movie produced by Nickelodeon that actually feels like a Nickelodon production! (Not counting movie spin-offs of actual Nickelodeon shows.)

  46. Yeah, it’s certainly not a bad movie. A little eclectic in that it’s going… Muppet Babies Robert Altman with plots about mischievous kids, silly adults, and lovelorn teens all running at the same time, but I can appreciate that scope and weirdness in a movie that was probably meant to do nothing more than sell kids Burger King. And man, for a kid’s movie, they left NO doubt that Emmanuelle Chriqui could enrapture the entire male population of a high school. *Yowza*

  47. I reckon some of the Game Boy Color Generation must rate SNOW DAY. I watched the ORANGE YEARS documentary about Nickelodeon a couple of weeks ago and there were plenty of rhapsodising about the “genius” of many things that were frankly ephemeral crap! Or maybe I’m just bitter it mentioned neither ANGRY BEAVERS nor COUNT DUCKULA. Or maybe both. Anyway, there must be some nostalgia out there for SNOW DAY, which at least has some mega-acting from Chris Elliott and well used Foreigner needle drops. I personally haven’t seen it all the way through though.

  48. Well, COUNT DUCKULA isn’t actually a Nickelodeon cartoon, but a British production that was shown on there, but no ANGRY BEAVERS mention sounds like a crime!

    Not saying that SNOW DAY is an actual masterpiece, but it’s extremely entertaining, has humor that goes from “light chuckles” to Nickelodeon’s trademark absurdity, a good ensemble cast ( Chase, Schneider, Elliot, Pam Grier, Jean Smart, Iggy Pop and some others) and sticks out by giving each age group (Adults, teens and kids) equal screen time for their plots. which I can’t remember having seen before. Other movies would probably cut down the snow plow man plot to appeal more to the teen crowd or cut the one about the adults, because the studio would probably think that kids won’t care if Chevy Chase keeps his job.

    It has a 5.2 on IMDb! That’s way too harsh!

  49. (Sorry I don’t have anything to add on the WILD THINGS sequels!)

    DUCKULA (my favourite cartoon BTW) was actually green lit and co-funded (with Thames TV in the UK) by Nickelodeon and first shown on there some six months before it was shown here on ITV, granted it was made in the UK (and Spain) and felt like it, and they no longer have any rights to it, but there is an argument to be mace that it was their first original cartoon. Now I assumed it almost certainly would be passed by quickly if it wasn’t flat out ignored (they do briefly show a clip of DANGER MOUSE), but they do wax lyrical about the “brilliance” of YOU CAN’T DO THAT ON TELEVISION, which was a rehased\imported show. I know it and DOUBLE DARE helped build the network’s name, but to spend so long on that but ignore BEAVERS, AHH REAL MONSTERS, HEY ARNOLD, WILD THORNBERRYS, even that monstrosity CATDOG, and only briefly cover ROCKO’S MODERN LIFE, seems a mistake, whether or not I or the makers personally like all those shows. If I were to guess the directors etc just covered what they were personally interested in and\or grew up on, which would explain why even though it’s supposed to cover the 80s and 90s the interest level seems to drop precipitously after 93 or so, which is understandable but not terribly professional. It’s still an OK watch it you’re interested and don’t have to pay extra to watch it.

  50. Did not know that about Duckula. In Germany it premiered on a public broadcasting channel (German Nick happened a few years later) and I can’t remember seeing any Nickelodeon references in the credits. That said, the documentary sounds weird, considering they seem to ignore everything that people still love and remember about that channel.

  51. I don’t think Nickelodeon does appear in the credits, which is odd, must have been part of the agreement. The YouTube channel PopArena has a good history of the production, if you’re interested (they’re working their way through every Nick show).

    I think Nickelodeon didn’t start in the UK until around 1993, and Satellite and Cable subscriptions were pretty rare here (I was lucky/privileged enough to be an exception), and I think most people only had 4-5 channels until 2004ish, so most of the big Nickelodeon shows also turned up on one of those channels. I don’t think we ever got YOU CAN’T DO THAT ON TELEVISION, DOUBLE DARE or ALL THAT, but I’m pretty sure even in the US the HEY ARNOLD generation are more likely to be watching a Nickelodeon documentary in this day and age than the YOU CAN’T DO THAT ON TELEVISION age group.

  52. Does anyone have any appreciation for HARRIET THE SPY? I saw it as a grown person but I remember thinking it was really artfully directed and interesting, had lots of eccentric/hip touches along the lines of what I think of as a seminal Nickelodeon show, The Adventures of Pete & Pete, but also took the emotions of the kids really seriously. Pretty much the opposite of GOOD BURGER, which I also saw and thought was funny but shitty in all filmmaking respects.

    The director of HARRIET, Bronwen Hughes, followed the path of most women directors of mostly finding work in TV. She did a not great Sandra Bullock/Ben Affleck romcom called FORCES OF NATURE but then she did the outstanding and totally badass Tom Jane bank robber movie STANDER, which I saw at SIFF and reviewed and wish would’ve caught on.

  53. I saw it on TV when I was about 16\17 but I remember it being advertised when I was 9/10 and wanted to see it, although I wanted to see pretty much everything that came out. I remember liking it, but I don’t remember much of it.

    PETE AND PETE gets a fair amount of discussion in THE ORANGE YEARS, I never watched it much but can see how it was special.

  54. SNOW DAY was originally conceived as a PETE & PETE movie, by the way. Never saw HARRIET but a while ago I stumbled across a discussion about enjoyable kids movies and this popped up a few times, so I might have to check it out.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>