Advanced Search >
Help Me Search

Movies

Weekend Box Office
Film Awards & Top 10s By Year
All-Time High Scores
All-Time Low Scores
Best / Worst of the Decade

Wide Releases
Now In Theaters

sort by namesort by score

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.

Limited Releases
Now In Theaters

sort by namesort by score

Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed movies.

Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid

EMAILPRINTScreen Gems Inc.

Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid reviews
40
5.3 User Score:

Mixed or average reviews

Based on 28 critic reviews
How did we calculate this?

Based on 23 votes
Read user comments
Rate this movie >

Movie Info

Genre(s): Adventure  |  Drama  |  Horror  |  Sci-fi  |  Suspense/Thriller

Written by: John Claflin & Daniel Zelman and
Michael Miner & Edward Neumeier
Hans Bauer, Jim Cash and Jack Epps Jr. (story and 1997 screenplay)

Directed by: Dwight H. Little

Release Date:
Theatrical: August 27, 2004
DVD: December 21, 2004

Running Time: 99 minutes, Color

Origin: USA

Summary

RATING: PG-13 for action violence, scary images and some language

Starring Johnny Messner, KaDee Strickland, Matthew Marsden, Morris Chestnut, Karl Yune, Salli Richardson, Eugene Byrd, and Nicholas Gonzalez

This horror-thriller, set in a primitive Borneo jungle, involves a group of scientists on a dangerous journey in search of an extremely rare blood orchid that is rumored to be the source of a youth-preserving serum. (Screen Gems)

What The Critics Said

All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more...

70

The Hollywood Reporter Michael Rechtshaffen

Sufficient cheap thrills and enough of the prevailing camp quality.

Read Full Review >
70

Variety Scott Foundas

Sublimely trashy, this conceptual sequel to 1997's surprise hit, "Anaconda," doesn't expect to be taken any more seriously than its schlock predecessor, and keeps its tongue-in-cheek thrills flowing rapidly.

Read Full Review >
70

Los Angeles Times Kevin Crust

A highly entertaining movie assured of its genre-jumping potential.

Read Full Review >
70

Chicago Reader J.R. Jones

Funny, suspenseful, and well paced, this is definitely the summer's best time waster.

Read Full Review >
70

Washington Post Stephen Hunter

It's one of those "I-can't-believe-I'm-enjoying-this" kind of things.

Read Full Review >
58

Portland Oregonian Karen Karbo

The charming thing about Anacondas is that it neither takes itself too seriously nor is it steeped in postmodern irony.

Read Full Review >
58

Seattle Post-Intelligencer William Arnold

For all its improbable characters, wretched dialogue and stock situations, the movie has an earnest dumbness that sneaks up on you to be surprisingly entertaining.

Read Full Review >
50

USA Today Mike Clark

At least director Dwight Little (Free Willy 2) gives us enough B-movie speed to keep Orchid from becoming a fountain of aging.

Read Full Review >
50

Washington Post Jen Chaney

Still manages to one-up its predecessor, 1997's unintentionally campy "Anaconda."

Read Full Review >
50

Chicago Sun-Times Roger Ebert

Competent formula entertainment, but doesn't make that leap into pure barminess that inspired "Anaconda."

Read Full Review >
50

The New York Times Dave Kehr

A programmer that once upon a time would have played on the bottom half of double bills, Anacondas has no pretensions and gets its little job done effectively, providing some small-scale laughs and chills for the late summer season.

Read Full Review >
50

Philadelphia Inquirer Steven Rea

From its jungle forays to its waterfall tumbles to its deadly spider bites - is entirely, utterly unoriginal.

Read Full Review >
50

TV Guide Ken Fox

Supremely silly but undeniably fun sequel.

Read Full Review >
50

Chicago Tribune Ellen Fox

To be fair, it's little better or worse than the original. But, to be honest, the original--minus its nascent stars--wasn't very good.

Read Full Review >
40

Dallas Observer Luke Y. Thompson

Director Dwight Little, who has made many mediocre films as well as the gleefully gory Robert Englund version of "The Phantom of the Opera," gets at least one thing right -- he really does take time to establish the characters.

Read Full Review >
40

Empire Scott Russon

Exactly as ordinary as you're already expecting it's going to be.

Read Full Review >
40

Film Threat Pete Vonder Haar

More tongue in cheek than its predecessor, and yet less over the top, it won't do any permanent damage. Of course, it won't leave much of a lasting impression, either.

Read Full Review >
38

Boston Globe Wesley Morris

There's nothing really wrong with it -- it's bad, but no worse than it needs to be, which is the problem.

Read Full Review >
38

New York Daily News Robert Dominguez

It's never a good sign when the creepiest moment in a movie about monstrous 50-foot snakes is the sight of 2-inch leeches sucking on someone's back.

Read Full Review >
38

New York Post Megan Lehmann

The biggest problem with the corny horror film Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid is that its titular reptiles are about as scary as jellied eels.

Read Full Review >
33

Entertainment Weekly Lisa Schwarzbaum

There's no enjoyably outlandish hiss to this variation on the formula, and no Ice Cube or Owen Wilson, either. This time, a ship of capitalist fools (and no movie stars, unless you count utility player Morris Chestnut as a headliner) steams along the river in Borneo.

Read Full Review >
30

Village Voice Ben Kenigsberg

Clearly a bottom-feeder.

Read Full Review >
30

Austin Chronicle Marrit Ingman

The real problem isn't that Anacondas is bad – it's just so bland, so unremarkable, so by-the-numbers, and so instantly forgettable that bad might be a step up.

Read Full Review >
30

LA Weekly Chuck Wilson

What they don't do often enough is battle anacondas. It's all tease and no payoff.

Read Full Review >
25

Miami Herald Connie Ogle

This movie didn't have to be good, but that it's so boring in its badness is tough to swallow.

Read Full Review >
25

The Globe and Mail (Toronto) Rick Groen

The refined taste insists on risibly bad, on hysterically bad, on poke-your-seatmate-in-the-ribs bad, and this falls well short of that hallowed mark -- it's just routinely bad.

Read Full Review >
25

San Francisco Chronicle Carla Meyer

The sequel might have the formula down, but it lacks everything that made "Anaconda'' fun.

Read Full Review >
20

The Onion (A.V. Club) Keith Phipps

When the CGI snakes finally arrive, they look like they've just returned from a guest spot on "Charmed;" if the film had cut any more corners, it would have had to borrow graphics from an old Intellivision game.

Read Full Review >

What Our Users Said

The average user rating for this movie is 5.3 (out of 10) based on 23 User Votes

Note: User votes are NOT included in the Metascore calculation.

Katlyn S. gave it a10:
The movie was great. I loved it and have watched it over 100 times in a week i loved it so much. I recomend that you should get it it is great.

Landon L. gave it an8:
It was preety good but the first one was better.

Sam gave it a5:
Is it amazing? like the first one, hell no. I mean, dear GOD it's far from amazing, what the hell was amazing about it?!?! Well, that one character was cool, as was the monkey, and Mitchell, but other than that it's FAR from amazing. It's an okay film, but dear god, the first time I saw it, it was a decent movie that shouldn't be taken seriously, the second time I saw it, I decide to test it and took it seriously. Boy did it suck that time. I prefer the first one, but please, don't come out with a third one and if you do, make it a quality movie with excellent effects, and for god sake, SHOW THE PEOPLE GET FULLY EATEN! MORE THAN JON VOIGHT IN THE FIRST ONE!

adam s gave it a10:
It was awesome.

sheldon s gave it a9:
This was an awesome movie. There should have been more anaconda scenes.

D Cleve gave it a7:
You know, monster movies aren't supposed to be that good. No one wins oscars for them, and most don't go down as "classic". So when you have one thats whatchable, you have to give respect where it's due. I will admit that this flic isn't going to be converting a monster movie hater, but those looking for a little cheesy escape will have no problem with this film. I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that some of the acting stunk like rotten cabbage, and that some of the writing is egregious, but this flic is about the snakes, and how they were going to pick these mo'fos off!!!! It's a fun movie..period.

Frank gave it a 3:
"Hey Frank, how was the andaconda movie?" "It was great! There was a cast of crappy actors no one has heard of and a huge man-eating snake... and a monkey!" "Actually Frank, that sounds like it sucked." "Wait a minute... you're right... that movie sucked."

Read more user comments >

Popular on CBS sites: College Signing Day | Olympics | Lost | iPhone | Cell Phones | Video Game Reviews | Free Music

About CBS Interactive | Jobs | Advertise

© 2010 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy (UPDATED) | Terms of Use