![]() ![]() "Egads!" the film seems to want us to think, "we have a creature that can scare both a tiger, and men who are brave enough not to be scared of a tiger? It must be terrifying!" Me, all I could think was ".but there's no rainforest that includes both anacondas and tigers." And it turns out to be even better than that: the action takes place on Borneo (played by Fiji), an island that has neither anacondas nor tigers. The film's opening scene sets the stage by showing a groups of indigenous hunters evading a tiger with quick wits and bravery, only to witness in terror the very large unseen something that was chasing that tiger. Other than an elliptical reference in dialogue, this is a completely unrelated sequel, taking place in a whole different hemisphere than the first movie. At the same time, we enter a movie called Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid with basically one hope, and once the strategy "try not to show the anacondas" has been read into the record, there's damn little chance of that hope being fulfilled. Which is better than showing them all the time, I suppose, and thereby robbing the animals of any power as a threat. ![]() ![]() The filmmakers have had the good sense to realise this, and compensate by showing us the snakes as little as possible. Unsurprisingly, given the 2004 release date, this movie has no practical snake effects: all of its anacondas are CGI effects, and they're even uglier than the shitty CGI from the first movie. This of course puts the sequel at a disadvantage that it could not possibly overcome, but just to be sure, the movie goes one further, and removes the other actual strength of the original film. The closest that The Hunt for the Blood Orchid comes to having name actors is Morris Chestnut and KaDee Strickland, who aren't even up to the level of Jennifer Lopez, Eric Stoltz, Ice Cube, and pre-fame Owen Wilson, let alone the slumming magnificence of Voight's weathered Paraguayan game hunter. But there is one extremely important difference between the two films: Anaconda had Jon Voight giving one of the most unapologetically ludicrous performances that I have ever seen, and while his not the solitary pleasure that the film has to offer, he's what pushes it into the heights of robust camp. So what? 1997's Anaconda is also pretty fucking dumb, and is nevertheless one of the most entertaining creature features of its decade. 2004's Anacondas: The Hunt for the Blood Orchid is pretty fucking dumb. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |