Badmovies.org Forum

Has anyone else seen the two terrible Anaconda films? They are Anaconda (1997) and Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid (2004). The first one centers on a convoluted plot by Jon Voight to poach anacondas, complete with terrible special effects, false "documentary" information, and a crew of stars getting sprayed with monkey blood.
I can understand sequels to good movies, or at least popular ones, but B-movies rarely see them. Blood Orchid was ridiculously implausible and poorly acted, with crazy asides like a spider that turns people to stone. Not to mention that it was set in Borneo, where (whoops!) there aren't any anacondas in the first place.
Both movies exist simply to show off cheap thrills and are so monumentally dumb they deserve a place on this site.

If it wasn't for the special effects I would have loved this film with J-Lo and Jon Voight winking at the camera when he goes under.

I took my kids to see the first ANACONDA in our local theatre...the STRAND. It was great to view an old fashioned explotive horror movie in the same theatre that I watched cheezy horror flicks as a kid....not a classic,but a fun goofy,good time!

i dig the first one.

I saw the first one when i was 9, i think. I had my eyes closed for most of it, cuz this was the time i couldnt stand horror movies. I do remember one part where this one guy got something bad cought in his throught and these other guys had to fish it out.

I think that's the key.  When a B-film knows exactly what it's trying to attain, it can have good time with it, and thus come out a more enjoyable film.  This is one of the reasons I enjoy LAKE PLACID so much.  The seriousness is barley kept to a thin veneer and it's fabulous to see actors with great deadpan skills like Brendan Gleeson and Bill Pullman in a film where there was no obnoxious pressure to pretend they were making a serious art house film or summer tent-pole spectacle.