I am not a fan really of the first Anaconda, and was expecting this movie to be worse. Actually I think it is better than the first Anaconda for quite a few reasons. While the story is very predictable, the script occasionally weak but also with enough humour and snappy lines to savour, the direction too low-key in places and the pace uneven, what made Anacondas:The Hunt for the Blood Orchid better was more suspense and less cheese which I appreciated. Also any scenes that needed suspense did have it and in a satisfying amount too. The scenery is splendid, the effects are quite decent even if the anacondas are underused somewhat and the music further adds to the atmosphere. The acting is better for me here too, the leads were likable and efficient enough and at least there wasn't Jon Voight and his dreadful accent to drag things down this time. Overall, entertaining if flawed. 6/10 Bethany Cox

I kind of got a kick out of the first ANACONDA when I saw it in the cinemas, so it was inevitable that I'd catch up with this sequel sooner or later. Sadly, it's a film that totally obeys the diminishing returns of sequel law. Whereas the first film had plenty of up-and-coming talent (Owen Wilson, Jennifer Lopez) and at least one Hollywood star, Jon Voight, this sequel has a fresh-faced cast, most of whom are totally unfamiliar. There's the token Latino chick, a blonde woman, a muscular 'The Rock'-type guy, an annoying comic relief black guy and a token Asian. There's also at least one British actor (Matthew Marsden, who went on to tread similar jungle territory in RAMBO) whose plot twist is utterly unsurprising, and a brief role for Morris Chestnut – the wimpy porter in UNDER SIEGE 2 who's become tough and an action man in his own right.

The plot, what there is of it, consists of the hunt for the titular flower, the discovery of which will lead to a huge scientific breakthrough or some such thing. Anyway, the party inevitably starts getting picked off one by one by those pesky snakes and it all ends with action, explosions and death. There are some obvious, tired plot twists and plenty of clichés along the way, including an irritating monkey. The biggest sell for me was that the title's ANACONDAS, meaning that there are multiple enemies expanding on the singular monster of the first flick – just like ALIENS did to ALIEN. The problem is that this film's budget means that only one snake is on screen at the same time, apart from in a pit scene at the end. So what was the point of all that? The sinking budget also means that the CGI animation of the snakes is WORSE than the animation in ANACONDA, which was made a good seven years previously, we must remember.

So, with poor monsters, rather uninventive death scenes (characters are swung through the ceiling or pulled into water to die),there isn't much to recommend here. The script is mundane and the lower certificate means that it's all very kiddie-friendly. I usually get a kick out of these jungle adventure films but this one's a chore to sit through, a definitely forgettable exercise in unoriginality.

There were movies released before and after this installment but this one stood the best.

The story, associated facts with drugs and the mammoth reptile were all executed nicely. Direction withstood quality.

Final Verdict: The movie is underrated in its segment and is worth watching.