Critic Reviews

40

Metascore

Based on 28 critic reviews provided by Metacritic.com
70
The Hollywood Reporter
Sufficient cheap thrills and enough of the prevailing camp quality.
50
Chicago Sun-Times
Competent formula entertainment, but doesn't make that leap into pure barminess that inspired "Anaconda."
50
At least director Dwight Little (Free Willy 2) gives us enough B-movie speed to keep Orchid from becoming a fountain of aging.
50
Philadelphia Inquirer
From its jungle forays to its waterfall tumbles to its deadly spider bites - is entirely, utterly unoriginal.
50
Chicago Tribune
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.
38
There's nothing really wrong with it -- it's bad, but no worse than it needs to be, which is the problem.
38
New York Daily News
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.
38
New York Post
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.
33
Entertainment Weekly
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.
25
San Francisco Chronicle
The sequel might have the formula down, but it lacks everything that made "Anaconda'' fun.
25
Miami Herald
This movie didn't have to be good, but that it's so boring in its badness is tough to swallow.

More Critic Reviews

See all external reviews for Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid (2004) »

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Reviews | User Ratings | External Reviews | Message Board