Cruel Intentions 3

[Caroline Forbes]

So I'm watching this one right now, and it's actually not that bad. It's no where near as horrible as the second one was. But it might be because Kerr Smith's in it lol

[Jill Monroe]

is he the only "name" actor in the film? Cruel Intentions 2 was a horrid mess. it was so pathetic from start to finish.

the first film was a very well done modern spin on a classic film called Dangerous Liasons (if i remember correctly) and Sarah Michelle Gellar even wore one of the gowns worn by Katherine Hepburn in the original film that CI was based off of.

I wouldnt have mind a continuation if there had been ANY SORT OF LINK between the characters of CI and CI 2.

But like Wild Things, CI was probably a film that didnt need a sequel.

I didnt even know there was a CI 3

[Caroline Forbes]

I didn't know either until I saw it on tv - it wasn't too bad. Not like the second at all. I think he's the only name in the film.

Dangerous Liaisons the film was based on the novel by Laclos, with Glenn Close, Michelle Pfieffer and John Malkovich. I don't remember a Katherine Hepburn version. There was also a film called Valmont with Annette Bening and Colin Firth.

[Arkaine]

The reason Cruel Intentions 2 was horrible was because it was actually the pilot of a television show based on the movie called Manchester Prep. The scene with the blond girl orgasming on a horse supposedly outraged Rupert Murdoch (FOX was the one buying the show) and it never was aired. Some more explicit scenes were shot (the shower scene with the sisters) and the plot reworked to make it into a movie.

It was dreadful.

Cruel Intentions 3 was also terrible but on a less scale. The ending just spiralled into tackiness.

[Foxfire]

I saw the last five minutes of this film when I was channel surfing. I loved the original film but I had no desire to see the other two movies. What really annoys me with sequels are the lack of stars. If they were to do a sequel they should have focused on Sarah's character or even Reese's.

Its like Grease 2 lol I think the only original cast member from the first film was Frenchy and the head Coach. Even though it had some popular stars in the second film, it just lacked in entertainment. :igitt: So, I think the same problem has been issued with the second and third film for Cruel Intentions.

[Caroline Forbes]

You only saw five minutes of the third one - how can you make a judgement on them?

[Foxfire]

You only saw five minutes of the third one - how can you make a judgement on them?

Everyone has their own form of what they feel is entertainment. If I watch a movie, a show, or read a book it has to grab my attention or at least capture the attention. Which, is not to say that some movies progress slowly but work their way up.

Personally, I just found it a waste of my time even for five minutes. I prefer to see the same cast or something similar. Its like watching Grease 2. There's a reason these movies are directly to home video / DVD. Like I said, that's just my opinion though. :nod:

[MorningStar]

Grease 2 wasn't direct to video. I saw it in the theater.

[Foxfire]

Grease 2 wasn't direct to video. I saw it in the theater.

I was referring to CI films.

[Tammarie]

I hated all of them except the first one. I only watched it in the first place because i LOVE buffy, and, well sarah michelle gellar's in it. So i watched it and become hooked. i must have watched it like 5 times in two days. So decided i would watched the sequals, when i actually discovered they had sequels. To be frank, i couldn't even watch the whole thing. It might have just been because i was obsessed with the first one for a while, and that the others couldn't match up. But, they were both really bad!
The first one was AMAZING.
The second one a disapointment
And the third was okay.
The whole thing could have been improved so much.