Making a legacy sequel to the 1997 cult classic Anaconda feels too far gone. Although the film did well at the box office relative to its production budget, it has had a minor cultural impact, with most viewers enjoying it only in a so-bad-it’s-good way. It’s legacy is presented even worse with its numerous direct-to-video sequels that took the series in all kinda of bizarre directions. However, 2025’s Anaconda appears to bring a new spin on the killer snake film, instead making fun of its bizarre concept and turning away for the horror genre almost entirely.

The film follows filmmaker Doug McCalister, played by Jack Black, and struggling actor Ronald “Griff” Griffin Jr, played by Paul Rudd, who reunite after their childhood days to remake a horror favorite of theirs, Anaconda. Joined by their other filmmaking friends, played by Steve Zahn and Thandiwe Newton, they venture to the Amazon rainforest to shoot the project. During production, they encounter a giant murderous anaconda who not only causes issues with their production, but puts their lives at stakes.

After multiple failed Anaconda sequels, the franchise needed to offer something entirely different to win back audiences, and that’s exactly what 2025’s Anaconda is setting out to do. Instead of simply remaking the original film, the movie introduces a meta aspect that adds a layer of satire no other entry in the series has. Whether it is poking fun at the giant snake or raising awareness of the difficulties of filmmaking, the movie’s attempts to bring something new to the franchise are warmly welcomed.

Although the meta nature brings a new perspective to animal horror, the film doesn’t do nearly enough with the concept. There are some sequences, such as a montage of the characters filming their movie, that add a light, fun layer of entertainment, but the film doesn’t devote nearly enough time to them; instead, it focuses on being a bland comedy/adventure. The meta aspects also feel haphazard in execution, appearing as a far inferior version of films like The Disaster Artist and Tropic Thunder, failing to bring any sort of intelligence to the satirical genre.

Because the film is trying so hard to be a quirky comedy, it makes scenes of actual tension feel void of it. Although the concept is silly, a giant anaconda murdering people should elicit some fear in the audience, but 2025’s Anaconda is almost entirely absent of it. What’s made even worse is that every death at the hands of the giant anaconda is shown off-screen, which further lessens the tension the film already had. A film set on a global scale with a large production budget should have some sense of stakes, but this film has the tension of an epsiode of Cocomelon.

Paul Rudd and Jack Black play versions of themselves as Doug and Griff, for better and for worse. While the two’s evident love of filmmaking is beautifully exuded through their characters, their characters lack individuality. One could pluck any character from Black and Rudd’s filmography, and they would be nearly identical to the ones in Anaconda. Being a satire, the two had the opportunity to play against type to a refreshing degree, but their safe approach to the characters makes for a disappointing duo of protagonists.

Easily the weakest aspect of the film is its editing. The film somehow manages to feel slow while also glossing over sequences that needed more time to build. The opening sequence, in particular, sets the stage for the film’s poor editing, introducing the danger so quickly that it is impossible to feel any fear. The beginning is also entirely rushed, failing to build compelling emotional journeys in favor of jumping into the anaconda action. Not only does the movie jump between sequences at a brisk rate, but it also shockingly includes elongated scenes that add nothing to the overall narrative. A scene in which someone has to urinate on a wound is not only an unnecessary sequence but also a failed attempt at comedy. For a film to feel needlessly quick in some scenes while dragging in others is a difficult thing to accomplish, but somehow Anaconda manages to do so.

For a film with as interesting a premise as 2025’s Anaconda, it’s a shame that it turned out as poor as it did. Littered with horrendous editing choices and an underwhelming screenplay, what should’ve been the franchise’s much-needed revitalization is instead a lazy, overall forgettable entry. After nearly 30 years of bad Anaconda films, I think it’s time to bury the franchise for good.

Anaconda is now playing in theaters nationwide.

Rating: 3/10

Oscar Prospects:

None