40
Metascore
28 reviews · Provided by Metacritic.com
- 70The Hollywood ReporterMichael RechtshaffenThe Hollywood ReporterMichael RechtshaffenSufficient cheap thrills and enough of the prevailing camp quality.
- 70VarietyScott FoundasVarietyScott FoundasSublimely 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.
- 50Chicago TribuneChicago TribuneTo 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.
- 50Philadelphia InquirerSteven ReaPhiladelphia InquirerSteven ReaFrom its jungle forays to its waterfall tumbles to its deadly spider bites - is entirely, utterly unoriginal.
- 40Dallas ObserverLuke Y. ThompsonDallas ObserverLuke Y. ThompsonDirector 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.
- 33Entertainment WeeklyLisa SchwarzbaumEntertainment WeeklyLisa SchwarzbaumThere'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.
- 30L.A. WeeklyChuck WilsonL.A. WeeklyChuck WilsonWhat they don't do often enough is battle anacondas. It's all tease and no payoff.
- 25Miami HeraldConnie OgleMiami HeraldConnie OgleThis movie didn't have to be good, but that it's so boring in its badness is tough to swallow.