User Reviews

The story is about a young girl named Blue (Siemaszko) who takes a job in a brothel after her Jazz playing father (Skerritt) dies as a result of drugs. She later decides to leave and finds it difficult because of the dictator like headmistress (Hughes). The story is really weak and prevents the film from being any good. Then there is a lot of nudity and sexuality but it is not strong enough to keep the voyeurs attention either. Top it all off with poor acting and no imagination and you have "Wild Orchid II: Two Shades of Blue." So the film fails all around. The story has absolutely no similarity or connection to the original "Wild Orchid" starring Mickey Rourke which isn't much better.

Blue (Nina Siemaszko) and her drug-addicted jazz trumpet-playing father Ham McDonald (Tom Skerritt) go on the road. She has to sleep with Jules to get drugs for him. He crashes the car and dies. Alone, she falls under the influence of Elle (Wendy Hughes) working in her brothel. High school hunk Joshua Winslow doesn't know her secret and has fallen for her. Once he's even dragged to the brothel by his father to lose his virginity. Elle's henchman Sully (Robert Davi) rescues Blue from perverted Senator Dixon and they escape trying to live a normal life.

Zalman King's overwrought style is all over this movie. It's luscious and cheesy. It's 90s late night fare. Nina Siemaszko's stone-faced acting limits this and doesn't really help the movie. It's a beautifully shot softcore porn and a slow moving melodrama.

I was a little kind of disappointed when I watched the normal version of this as it feels like it teases so much more. Luckily I was able to track down the unrated cut and it offers some extended dialogue scenes and more "steamy" content.

That being said, its still not great. Nina Siemaszkos character is not very likable but this is probably a part of her situation in the film. Its got a pretty decent cast all in all but Robert Davi and Christopher Macdonalds characters could have used more time.

I like the filmography, soundtrack, overall setting, and costumes for the actors which is where this movie scores points in my opinion. If it was named something else it would probably score better.

I noticed that the overall IMDb rating for this film was a lowly 3.2. This seems a bit unfair. The story is good, not great, and may at times be bit predictable. But the acting is quite good with a very sympathetic performance by Tom Skerritt. Robert Davi shows a warm side in much contrast to the "heavy" he played in a James Bond Film. Wendy Hughes couldn't have been more cold and calculating in much contrast to the warm and loving character she played opposite Peter Falk in "Happy New Year" or the playful character she played opposite Pierce Brosnan in "The Heist." Lastly, Zalman King as a filmmaker has tried to elevate the adult genre to an art form. If not familiar, try to see his most successful series: "Red Shoes Diaries." Sometimes you can catch an episode on late night Showtime.

It might be said that not every film is meant to be "Gone With the Wind" or "Citizen Kane." There's nothing wrong about a shoot-em-up western where the gunfighters never seem to run out of bullets. And although "The Fast and the Furious" may never make IMDb's top 250 list, it was a good enough film for the producers to make two sequels.

It's all about entertainment and since the world's population is so diverse, we all like different types of movies. One could guess that some viewers who are offended by nudity may have been "turned off" by this film, which also may account for the low 3.2 rating. But the film is worth a watch.

Finally, Nina Siemaszko is excellent in this film. She brings across her vulnerability, frustration, disappointment, etc. Her performance must have been good, because other producers noticed and she had a nice supporting role in "The American President" and a recurring role for 3 or 4 years on "The West Wing." On a personal note, I would urge all of us to respect the IMDb and the lengths they go to provide this forum. Let's give fair comments to all films we view. We may actually affect the careers of some of the industry people.

The story is about a beautiful young girl, Blue (Nina Siemaszko), who is approaching sexual maturity. In order to achieve a happy and fulfilling life she must avoid being corrupted and enslaved by sexual desire and lust, and ultimately find true love. But this is no easy matter in the cold, cruel world in which she suddenly finds herself virtually alone and defenseless. She becomes the unwilling victim of power hungry individuals who seek to exploit her as a prostitute. With help from more compassionate and understanding people, Blue struggles to maintain dignity and courage in her desperate commitment to be free.

While its true that the film has little connection with its predecessor "Wild Orchid", its main flaw seems to be that its just a little too cliché and at times hard to believe. This shortcoming is difficult to avoid, however, in most any book or film. To Zalman King's credit, the final outcome and the essential theme are not completely obvious from the very beginning. The exotic setting in the past also helps give the film a sense of novelty.

While the movie does have numerous sexually explicit scenes, which may offend some people, it exhibits far less voyeurism and wanton sexual intercourse that are typical of so called "soft-porn" movies. Whereas, I found Nina Siemaszko's natural beauty to be a refreshing change from the irritating plastic-boob floozies that are the main attraction of the aforementioned genre. Moreover, Wild Orchid 2 is a far more compelling human drama than stories about men from out of space who want to learn what love is, but seem to only be interested in sex. A rating of 2.8 hardly does this film any justice. I myself was quite found of the movie, and consider it worth viewing by those seek more tragic and melancholy overtones than what you may find in a typical romance.

Nina Siemaszko portrays of young "virgin", who is lonely, innocent and vulnerable, yet strong willed and independent, with higher moral values. She acted well enough to earn my sympathy, and I found myself routing for her throughout the film. Through Blue's trying experiences, we learn that in order to find true love we must be bold and determined, we must exhibit self-sacrifice and compassion, and, above all, we must look beyond outward appearances and fallacies, and seek the inner beauty that lies within ourselves and others we meet.

Zalman King is an actor and scriptwriter who expanded his capabilities in mid career to include both producing & directing (more recently he has also very successfully tried his hand at cinematography, to complete what today has become a rare fivefold). In 1986 the success of the strongly erotic film '9 1/2 weeks', for which he was both a co-writer and the producer, drew a great deal of attention and gave him a chance to build a reputation as the best known North American Producer/Director of erotic films. He accepted this challenge by co-writing and directing another very successful film 'Two Moon Junction', released two years later. Another year on and the first 'Wild Orchid' film with a script attributed totally to ZK was released. Its claim to be a true erotic film became widely accepted - largely on the strength of its last very intense love making scene between Carre Otis and Mickey Rourke. (They were married soon afterwards, and background publicity fostering an unlikely rumour that this scene was not simulated probably helped this) Two years later came 'Wild Orchid 2 - Two Shades of Blue', released in 1989. This featured another original film-script written by Zalman King, and its name was not derived from any previous literary or dramatic work, but was clearly intended to exploit the reputation which WO-1 had earned - no doubt its sub-title was also selected with the same objective. It has only achieved a relatively low approval rating from IMDb users, however as far as I am concerned it is a fine work that, despite some flaws, is the nearest approach to a true erotic film with which Zalman King has so far been associated.

Unfortunately most of his more recent works have been directed more towards television presentation than to the cinema and do not provide a lot of competition. His company has created two different sets of short films for television both comprising independent episodes based on a longer feature film that provides a more detailed background for the complete series. The best known of these is probably the Red Shoes Diaries series. It started with a 1992 feature film of the same name which explained the significance of both the red shoes and the diaries. This has spawned an ongoing series of about fifty short TV episodes that have been continuing ever since. The very similar Chromium Blue series featured fantasies associated with the visit of a billionaire's private cruise ship to various exotic Mediterranean resorts, and probably had a higher unit budget. For me, most episodes from both these series were partly spoiled by the use of cinematographic techniques that are usually regarded as associated more with music videos than with the cinema; in addition their short running times makes it difficult for them to convey any meaningful message.

Unlike these later short productions, Wild Orchid 2 succeeds in involving the viewer in a story that is sufficiently disturbing to provide genuine emotional impact. The film is best described as a movie equivalent of the 'bodice ripper' paperback romances which appeal most strongly to the fair sex but men often also enjoy, and when televised they provide ideal entertainment for a couple. For me Wild Orchid 2 remains far the best of the many works with which Zalman King has been associated. Although the story is rather far fetched the film has an excellent cast and is very well acted, so most of its viewers probably enjoy it. (Some IMDb users have criticised the acting of its star, Nina Siemaszko, but this performance successfully established the foundations for her very productive acting career which has covered numerous TV productions as well as significant feature films - so enough said). The films ending is rather prolonged and is also somewhat weak, this is particularly noticeable because of the strong meat which preceded it, but Zalman King does deserve credit for ensuring that it was not made glaringly obvious long in advance. Watching it, I wished at times that he had had the training as a cinematographer which Russ Meyer received in the U.S. army. The modern cine camera is a technological marvel, capable of providing clear easily viewed images of even the most complex scenes. Unduly short sequences handicapped by excessive or inadequate contrast are used today by too many directors when attempting to create atmosphere or mood; ignoring the fact that this mood can be irretrievably lost once the audience starts wondering what they missed in the lost parts of the screen image. Despite these criticisms, Wild Orchid 2 is a fine film which successfully captured the trauma faced by a young girl being reluctantly but irretrievably drawn into a life of prostitution, whilst lacking the courage to break away and face the world on her own. It provides viewers with much more 'meat' than any of King's other recent films (except perhaps for his own performance in St Francis - another noteworthy film, but a serious study of the drug culture rather than an erotic work.)

I believe WO-2 deserves a far higher rating than it has currently been given by IMDb users, this rating seems to be the victim of what appears to have become a double standard, the upgrading of any excessively violent films (even those showing scenes of torture) because they display the freedom of film to uncover aspects of society which are normally kept under the carpet; but the downgrading of any showing intense sexual situations because they might unduly influence young people.

This film hit theaters in 1991, and played to empty houses. I was actually one of the few that saw "Wild Orchid II" in the theater. I wasn't expecting such a somber, downbeat movie, considering how the first "Wild Orchid" and "Two Moon Junction" were so much more lighthearted, sexy entertainment. Well it seems that director Zalman King wanted to create a serious film that would be respected as more than just erotic fluff. It does succeed in the fact that it is technically, a very well-made film; truly lovely cinematography/photography, stirring musical score, impressive editing, lighting etc. Even the performances were mostly good, most notably Wendy Hughes as the sinister Madam "Elle," and also Nina Sziemasko in the title role who, compared to Carre Otis, was on the level of Meryl Streep! Art direction was also excellent, with impeccable attention paid to cars and clothing of the 1950's, which is when the story takes place. The 4 star rating here is utterly ridiculous and inaccurate. The main problem with "Wild Orchid 2" is that there isn't a very large audience for a strange film like this. Fans of erotic/softcore sex films will most likely be bored with the dramatic, and depressing tale of an innocent girl losing herself in the sordid world of prostitution. And fans of drama will most likely be put off with all the sex and nudity on display, and in this film there is a LOT of that on screen. So much in fact, that the film had to be cut by almost 5 minutes to receive an R rating and play in theaters. When released on VHS it appeared uncut, and there is one sequence in particular that would NEVER have gotten past the censors. On a side note, I'm wondering if director King was at all influenced by David Lynch's "Blue Velvet," when he created this one; the two films have a VERY similar story arc, taking the viewer through a dark, sinister, seedy world of evil, corrupt people, and ending in the daylight, morning sun streaming through the trees as the two main characters find an idealistic "return to innocence." Both films take place in the 50's, and have a very similar aesthetic, and the lead character's name is "Blue." At times depressing, and surprisingly sleazy, but it does have an optimistic conclusion, and it's a film that is hard to forget.

A pretty bad movie, and despite what others seem to think, it was not as good as the first (which wasn't especially "good" either).

The whole attraction for the first Wild Orchid film is the awesome sex scene with Carre Otis and Mickey Rourke. Otherwise, it's a pretty dull and even pretentious movie.

However, the sequel has only one halfway decent sex scene in it, and the female character is not enjoying it at all.

Overall, both Wild Orchid films are of the sort one sees on Cinemax or Showtime at 1 AM. A minute or so of eye candy isn't really worth seeing the rest of the film.

According to someone, this not bad sequel (Nina looks hot), otherwise, not a bad movie, no sequel (or most) do not equal the original (kinda like some remakes). Anyway, DVD cuts some minutes (according to some reviewer on Amazon.com); I've got the unrated VHS. I think I'll follow the suggestion that if the unrated version (with the additional material) comes out on DVD (one day, hopefully) to get it then. If the additional footage doesn't matter, I guess some people might buy it now. Viewer's choice. That's a problem with some movies. Unless someone puts both versions of a movie on the same disc, it might be better to wait. Also, the viewer has to beware of some manufacturer's discs. I bought a version (from Canada) of a movie called Terminal Island and it cut everything, language and the ladies' scenes (you know what I mean). I had to buy it again and can't even give the other one away. Ugh! A bit of advice for buyers/viewers of movies (if they want the full unadulterated versions of movies). You've been warned.

Why did anyone keep giving Zalman King money to make these? And how did Tom Skerritt keep getting sucked into these things? You'd think "Poison Ivy" would have been enough to teach my fellow Seattle-ite to stop riding the 90's Alyssa Milano erotic thriller burn-out-coaster (he's really the only thing even passing for okay in this). To Tom's credit, he grits through with as straight a face as humanly possible. A great actor reduced to, well, "this." The other actors plow through it in what I suspect is some kind of drug and alcohol-rehabiitation parole requirement.

On the plus side, the garage sale I bought this at did come with a free box of tissues. I think that's positive.

When you love music and how some of the best musicians had difficult lives, a reminder of Chet Baker came to mind immediately just because of details from the opening scenes.

The catchall phrase, for me at least, was "I'd be honored."

This is about you and what makes you feel what you feel when saying that to someone because you know it is the right thing to do.

All the cast & crew extended the theme of the film to go beyond yourself by seeing the worst and the best the audience has to look forward to. There are several examples of choosing the easy way and dealing with a conscience that a parent and child relationship does for doing the next right thing, perhaps when you know what love is all about.

A confusing time set out well in this depiction of questions in morality. There is an openness created by the writers and producers of this movie that seems to tell about lessons we all touch upon whether it be sex and money or sports or authority figures. But usually the heart and tongue join somewhere and provides a direction for where a movie takes you and how you feel.

Honor is a gift a person gives to themselves usually because of patterns in their life that reflected on good or poor choices. Sully rang true with a genuine thread of support. He championed a young person and her life knowing the experiences witnessed and the decay it can bring to one soul.

They say it is not a sin if you do not take pleasure in it. But, not what I say while using a line from another movie where one person had to save honor for their family, friends, or loved one(s). It is not selfish to take care of yourself.

The scenes told a story that easily captured a cultivating mind who wants an easy life of pleasure, not necessarily one of passion. You can have both. Usually what is harder is better for many who choose the acting movie career and all those people necessary in order to create a good product using people more than a machine.

Emily filled the bill in all regards for a good ending with Sons & Daughters and their parents or caretakers noted so well in a healthy film attempting to find justice in all that we do.

Thank you kindly.

This is vastly different from the first Orchid, which has yourself questioning is this past of the first franchise, for this is a more refined tale about a girl becoming a woman, and discovering her sexual self, and the affect her beauty it has on other men. This is after making a bad choice in the wake of her very sick father (Skeritt, a sax player here, wasted). Left with much financial hardship, she's propositioned by a headmistress, excellently played by the late great Hughes, a real wicked so and so who runs an elite bordello, than caters for some weird tastes, as you'll see. The film runs high on nudity and it's quiet delicious, some really tasty girls on show, (Dominique the hottest) and this movie does have class, and is quite dramatic, specially as how Siesmasko wants to leave the business, where Hughes is intent on snatching her back. Too the black wig donning beauty has fallen in love with a young client, who if you can believe is a virgin. We are talking about Brendon Fraser here. The period and the way the film is shot is none short of excellent and beauty, and some of Blue's (Siesmasko's) clients are nasty, but in the end, the film has you asking what's the purpose of it. Really one answer there: to get you off. All performances are good, but it's Hughes's as that brutal Madam, that stays with you. The film really has some weird out scenes, like Dominique doing a sit and slow strip show for Blue's benefit, where in the back playing mutely on a t.v. in the b.g. is a pornographic cartoon. The little scene with Dominique getting done by a hunk in a steam room, where she catches Blue discreetly spying was hot. Though really there were quite boring stretches in this, that scene with Blue being dominated by her first client in that blue room was ridiculous. Another scene later on in the flick, has three of the girls totally nude standing, where a hession bag is put on a girl's head standing middle. To me and in many other scenes, they're just pointless, the norm with King's films. A few people will find this film a bore, some scenes testing their patience. Milk it for what it's work, an erotic adult pic, hiding under the facade of an adult drama, where I'm not bought but titillated.

I don't need to outline the story, as the other reviews have done this effectively enough. I've seen a fair few other Zalman King produced or directed films (Wild Orchid, Two Moon Junction, Lake Consequence etc). I am a fan of his erotic dramas, and I think that if you liked any of his films, you'd probably get something out of this one. It's a lot slower paced than some of his other efforts. But it is very well produced. The scenes of nudity and sexuality are mostly sensuous and not overly explicit, with the exception of two scenes. Wendy Hughes also puts in a good performance as the madam. I do recommend watching the uncut version. Either way, make up your own mind, but it's really not that bad.

My review was written in April 1992 after watching the movie at a Midtown Manhattan screening room.

A sequel in name only to the Mickey Rourke-starrer "Wild Orchid", Zalman King's pretentious exercise in softcore erotica is hot stuff only for pay-cable and home video markets.

Filmed as "Blue Movie Blue" and on the shelf since last fall, pic has already been followed by a third "Wild Orchid" feature "Red Shoe Diaries", which debuts on Showtime almost simultaneously with "Blue" getting a theatrical release.

All three films have in common the focus on a beautiful young woman's rites of passage. Here petite Nina Siemaszko portrays Blue, a California teen who's orphaned in 1958 when her heroin-addicted jazz trumpeter dad (Tom Skerritt) dies in a freak car accident.

She's taken under the wing of brothel madam Wendy Hughes and introduced to a life of prostitution. Her sexual flowering has already occurred at the hands of sleazy jazz club owner Joe Dallelsandro.

There's a certain amount of interest generated in Blue's fate as King's slowly paced melodrama unfolds, but Siemaszko's zombie-like performance denies the put-upon character much sympathy. Artsy photography is very distracting, as are several music video-styled interludes.

The picture's original title stems from a ey plot point: Siemaszko is coerced into appearing in an unfinished stag film, or blue movie. Extremely disappointing finale has not one but two white knights appearing to save her: a platonic lover Robert Davi and all-American boy Brent Fraser. King evidently intends this as a story book fantasy but destroys all credibility with such lame devices.

Siemasko's extremely alluring figure (which she bares) counts more than her acting ability this time out. She's briefly upstaged by Canadian thesp Lydie Denier as the lovelost brohel irl. Aussie actress Hughes adopts a neutral accent and severe manner in the villainess assignment. One can infer she's a lesbian doting on Blue, but King plays down numerous opportunities to make this subplot explicit.

Rest of the cast is stuck with stereotyped roles, resulting in overplaying by Davi as the brooding Hughes henchman who turns over a new leaf. Dallesandro as he lech and Christopher McDnald as an evil senator. Fraser is forced to gush unconvincingly as the handsome rich kid who has his first sexua experience with Blue at the cathouse, but does not recognize her before or after without her Louise Brooks-styled wig.

Pic is technically well-made. As with King's Sherilyn Fenn-starrer "Two Moon Junction", there is plenty of camp potential here (e.g., prostitute Blue going back to school as just another bobby-soxer) but it remains still-born under King's ponderous, self-important direction.