Mladen and Del review ‘Anaconda’
Image courtesy of Sony Studios.
“Anaconda” Starring Jack Black as Doug McCallister, Paul Rudd as Ronald Griffin Jr., Thandiwe Newton as Claire Simons, Steve Zahn as Kenny Trent, and Daniela Melchior as Ana Almeida, and others. Directed by Tom Gormican. Rated PG-13. 1 hour, 39 minutes. Theatrical release.
Plot summary: In this sci-fi-like horror comedy some folks decide to re-make 1997’s ridiculous and wonderful “Anaconda.” Unfunny foibles ensue.
Spoilers: How does one write a movie review without spoilers?
Mladen’s take
Jack Black must be feeling cowed right about now. From starring in one of the highest grossing movies – “A Minecraft Movie” – of 2025 to playing a central role in what will be one of the year’s crappiest, Black is proof that previous success ain’t a guarantee of future performance.
“Anaconda,” now playing in theaters, is a miss. It barely deserves a C-. Only a couple of funny-ish scenes keep it from entering the Brazil Rain Forest of The Doldrums. Note that “Doldrums” starts with a ‘D.’
Where to start? A plot summary, I suppose.
Lifelong friends McCallister, Griffin, Simons, and Trent decide to “re-imagine” the delightfully campy “Anaconda” film all of us know and love made some 28 years ago. They see their “Anaconda” re-boot as the ticket to lives they always imagined for themselves. That life is Hollywood stardom, show awards, and self‑respect. Toss in a subplot about illegal gold mining in the Amazon and you get an idea of the movie’s narrative.
The above‑mentioned Gang of Four dragged us through a film with meek slapstick, no good jokes, some okay VX, and predictable intrigue.
Black is cliché Black in “Anaconda,” too kinetic. McCallister’s sing-song-y impromptu riffing failed most of the time.
Rudd is too Rudd. Griffin demurred a lot but always followed his good-hearted nature, which generally led to bad things happening to those around him.
Newton as Simons seemed to be cast because the producers felt a woman – the J Lo mimic – had to be present.
Zahn is the funniest meatball in this non‑zany movie but not so funny that I remember anything he said.
Ice Cube’s appearance in the new “Anaconda,” he starred in the original, is uninspiring. His modern equivalent of jive talk during the minute or two he’s on the screen is annoying.
Also, the snake in the new “Anaconda” fails to menace. There’s nothing malevolent about the critter. It blasts through decks like an RPG. It slithers through detonating pyrotechnics. It chases its prey like a cheetah. The 1997 great‑grandaddy anaconda lurked. It ambushed. It was patient. Remember the overhead shot of the predator weaving among the group of ship‑wrecked meals‑to‑be as they waded through a wetland? Top notch stuff. Or, is that scene in the second “Anaconda” film (2004)? No matter. You get the point.
More than anything else, today’s “Anaconda” sucked at two fundamental levels.
The first suck was its Hollywood self‑parody, including taking shots at Sony, the studio that produced the original “Anaconda.” If I have a complaint about Sony, it’s about the television in my living room. Sony, why did you use a Google processor in the “smart” TV? The Google device is as glitchy as Trump’s brain.
The second suck is the piss-on-a-snake-bite-wound scene that went on and on and on. I swear, the movie‑makers added the scene just to make the film feature length. Man, the script writers couldn’t even come up with decent synonyms. All I heard was “piss” and “pee.” What about “urinate?” Or “tinkle?” Or “wee-wee?” Or “drain the main vein?” The latter would’ve been perfect because the scene is juvenile.
I like all the actors in “Anaconda.” I wanted, nay, expected, the movie to be funny considering the cast and the plot. It wasn’t. Damn.
Del’s take
My decline into geezerhood must be accelerating because I largely agree with what Mladen says about the new “Anaconda.” That can’t be good. Make a note to my doctor: Agreeing with Mladen. Look for signs of cognitive collapse.
The new “Anaconda” has one big problem for a comedy – it ain’t funny. That might be all you need to know.
I blame its lack of humor on two crucial factors:
1. The writing.
2. Paul Rudd.
Let’s tackle the writing first. The movie’s approach to comedy is lackadaisical. The humor is often overwrought – it drawls past the inflection point of a well-timed joke and plods into a realm I would describe as tedium. Watching these actors mumble, shrug and shuffle as the joke lies there, flopping like a beached flounder, isn’t funny. There were two scenes I thought rose to the level of hilarity: the afore-mentioned pissing scene, and Jack Black hightailing it across a grassy field with a live pig duct-taped to his back. The rest was, I hate to say it, b-o-r-i-n-g.
And whatever patina of meet-cute charm Paul Rudd might have possessed in the past has vanished from “Anaconda.” He looked haggard – middle-aged haggard – and struck me as a tragic character, worthy of pity more than anything that could be called relatability.
All the characters are either poorly developed or so trite the writers must have felt they didn’t need to give them backstories and personalities. Ronald’s budding romance with Claire just sort of happens. Steve Zahn’s character, Kenny Trent, is a cipher. The snake handler, Selton Mello as Santiago, seems to spring from the ethers, as does Ana, the sultry boat captain who is on the run from mysterious armed men. Who are these people? Where do they come from? Why should I care about them?
Also, the movie never really seems to find its center. It orbits between Black and Rudd, with both offering mediocre to non-existent reasons for anyone to give a damn about them. And the plot? Trust me, you’ve seen it in a thousand movies.
The snake, the real star of “Anaconda,” sucks as an antagonist. It’s a CGI joke that simply appears without provocation and runs through its scenes minus tension or menace. It’s the Alien on a coffee break.
I wanted this movie to succeed but it didn’t. My impression is that it was rushed through its design and construction without much thought given to its comedic elements and plot. It’s a paint-by-number comedy-horror flick that will quickly be forgotten.
Like Mladen (Lord help me, I need another Prevagen) I’m giving it a C-. If the movie had been longer, with better-developed characters and a plot that at least aspired to something original, I could have been more charitable. But in my opinion it’s a lash-up that doesn’t warrant anything higher than a lackluster score.
Mladen Rudman is a former journalist and technical writer. Del Stone Jr. is a former journalist and writer.
Great review!
Thanks Ashley!