Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid (2004)

The Worst Film Ever

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

I honestly think it was better than the first one. Johnny Messner is also a great actor and not to bad on the eyes.

The anaconda series is an interesting one for me. While it's definitely not a good series, it has its moments and is mostly harmless fun. However, in terms of comparing the first film and this one, for all its faults I'd actually say this one is the superior film.Yes, despite being set in Borneo where anacondas don't live, this film takes itself a lot more seriously than the first one. Dwight Little I'm a big fan of, and his style is definitely present throughout. The acting too for the most part is pretty good and it's beautifully shot. I don't think I've ever seen such a rich jungle environment. The snake effects too look so much better than the first one and, admittedly quite shockingly, this movie answers some logic questions from the first movie, the main one being how are these snakes growing so big/killing so many people so quicklyAll in all it's not a great movie, but it's still pretty enjoyable

I own the original Anaconda on VHS, my mom and I found it back in I think 2012.( I'll be honest, I'm not a huge fan of it but I do like it). I think we got it from an acquaintance, anyway I just recently seen this one a couple of days ago and I thought it was honestly a pretty good sequel to the first.The boat captain's pet monkey named Kong was so cute, my mom and I really liked him. The characters in this one aren't bad, they we're written fairly well, I liked the boat captain and at least a couple of the scientist, in movies like this you know at least one of them goes bad.The Anacondas in this are kinda cool since the film-makers didn't use puppeteer-ed props the used full CGI effects for the snakes their was one crocodile puppet-ed prop use in one scene which wasn't too bad. Director Dwight Little did a decent job with this film, I've only seen a couple of his films like Murder at 1600 which I own and I think the live action film of Tekken but this film was alright I liked it.Overall a decent film, I liked that it was a light monster movie and that it was in the same tone as the first.I give it a 4/10. A pretty good sequel to the first film. Give it a look.

The original Anaconda was a good horror/creature movie with good performances from real stars and impressive snake-effects.This garbage, with a very misleading title,is so bad that I actually hate it. It's boring with a bunch of unknown actors playing cliché characters that are so annoying and so stupid that waiting 40 minutes for the first snake attack is torture.As for the snakes, they clearly didn't have the budget to make them convincingly. So most snakes are seen slithering under water. And the few times the snakes are seen clearly, it's really bad cgi. Two of the attacks are happening almost completely off camera. They didn't even have the budget for some animatronic snakes, so they show as little as possible. And after an attack a victims boat crashes and explodes. Apparently on a mountain side even though the boat was on the river. They couldn't even afford to show the boat crashing so the explosion is just bad cgi.And don't even get me started on the fact that they can get online on a river in the middle of the jungle. Avoid this!!!!