Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid Reviews

Page 1 of 184
½ August 26, 2016
Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid sounds haunting, but in the end, the film will only haunt us of how there will never be a good film about anacondas.
April 23, 2016
Mostly a rehash of the first film with a new mcguffin. The characters are pretty stale, and there isn't a ton of memorable snake action. The CGI isn't too great, and a step down of practical effects compared to the last film. Forgettable.
April 7, 2016
A ridiculous movie with ridiculous plot and ridiculous characters. Turn your brain off, get some friends, and have the time of your life.
April 3, 2016
It was better than the first one and it was great
January 24, 2016
Significantly better than the first movie, however it was still just another average thriller movie.
½ November 4, 2015
Entertaining... great background movie for long work nights, lol
October 19, 2015
Good movie, love how the plot is based off of The Epic of Gilgamesh. Acting could have been better
September 1, 2015
Johnny Messner's character needs his own film. Everything I want in a cheesy animal horror flick.
August 10, 2015
This is actually a better movie than the original. It has a slight sense of humor, which is important. The only time the suspense falters is when the anaconda shows up for the kill. Otherwise it's a pretty good stretch of the Star Wars trash compactor scene: "Something just moved by my leg, man!"
½ August 6, 2015
Your typical Anaconda movie & sequel. Not as good as the first as the acting isn't all the greatest. But a decent flick. If you enjoyed this one and can get over a bit of bad acting, then this is for sure worth a watch on Netflix.
July 25, 2015
A creature feature that fails to embrace the B-movie silliness that made the original a treat, opting instead for playing it painfully straight. Aside from a couple cool set pieces, there's nothing to see here.
June 12, 2015
Although it's enjoyable campy, Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid is just too forgettable. It should have just gone straight to SyFy.

Also, why does KaDee Strickland lose her southern accent halfway through the movie?
May 22, 2015
The best and scariest part of the movie is the poster.
December 26, 2014
It's a pretty good movie it is alot better than the first one
½ November 11, 2014
A creepy sequel with some lacking F/X. 52/100
½ September 21, 2014
Should have known better to make this sequel .... then again they make sequels of anything .... just bad
½ June 30, 2014
While this delayed sequel has the benefit of better special effects and probably a bigger budget; it suffers from being the same old formula. A bunch of people running through the jungle being picked off one by one by some man-eating snakes - while a maniacal bad guy threatens them at the point of a gun. It's still effective as a film, an enjoyable if completely forgettable few hours while lavishly requires you to ignore most common sense.
½ May 21, 2014
Anacondas is very much on par with its predecessor maybe even a tad better. Of course its not a great film but this stand-alone sequel does another good job at providing light horror entertainment. Theres nothing like watching people way out of there depth being picked off one by one by a oversized monster creature. These types of films can be good fun, once again we're dished up plenty of action without being too similar to the 1997 hit. It does have a thin plot-line and the quality of acting is not as good here but Anacondas felt more complete.
Super Reviewer
May 9, 2014
Strangely enough I actually liked this sequel over the first film which was a big surprise as I really expected a complete pile of nonsense and that would look pathetic. So much to my amazement I found myself enjoying the film from start to finish, yes the plot is basic with your typical group of adventurers taken down one by one, but its actually made pretty well on location and it does look real-ish.

The effects are about on par with the first film but just that tiny bit better due to advancement with CGI effects obviously. A lot of the snake effects are in the dark or under heavy shadow so its hard to pinpoint if they are actually any good or not but I guess that's how you properly deal with a creature effect and make it effective. As said location work really adds a lot to the film and raises it above your average B-movie schlock. The scenery does look like real deep dark thick jungle and what sets there are look quite authentic, nice boat/river direction too.

Casting is reasonable with no big names but all characters are fun to watch. Messner is your gruff unshaven 'Indy' type hero whilst Marsden is great as the cliched British scientist/villain. The rest are your usual mix of stereotypes that we've seen before but always fun to see new creative teams of oddballs. This lesser known cast actually works better than the big name cast from the first film in my opinion as your not overly sure who will survive to the end, it just feels that bit more exciting and fresh.

Everything about this sequel is just a slight cut above the first film. Yep believe it or not but its true, pure hokey B-movie fodder that's highly enjoyable and is actually just as good if not better than the original.
½ January 25, 2014
Even worse than its predecessor, and it attempts at a lame story.
Page 1 of 184