I am not really familiar with Anaconda 2 and 3, but I enjoyed the first one. It had a solid cast and simple story that worked in specific environment. And that is exactly the difference between first and fourth movie , cast and environment. The acting is horrible and unconvincing, which is no surprise considering it was made by Syfy.
Plot is set in Romanian mountains which doesn't have the same feeling of isolation and danger that Amazonian rainforest had. Giant snake would probably look less bad in a swampy environment then in a cold forest. Effects are bad and there isn't a single shot in which Anaconda looks like a realistic being. Movie lacks any interesting characters to make movie engaging. Action is clunky. Ending is predictable and the way they kill anaconda is lame. What movies like these usually have is entertaining moments which are completely lacking in Trail of Blood. This isn't a fun bad movie like Lake Placid or Shark night. Its just bad.
Plot is set in Romanian mountains which doesn't have the same feeling of isolation and danger that Amazonian rainforest had. Giant snake would probably look less bad in a swampy environment then in a cold forest. Effects are bad and there isn't a single shot in which Anaconda looks like a realistic being. Movie lacks any interesting characters to make movie engaging. Action is clunky. Ending is predictable and the way they kill anaconda is lame. What movies like these usually have is entertaining moments which are completely lacking in Trail of Blood. This isn't a fun bad movie like Lake Placid or Shark night. Its just bad.
Tell Your Friends