Anacondas: Trail of Blood

Well obviously not - with horror there is never the end. Not really ever in any case. Although thankfully some movies have been left alone. But this is the end of the "story" that began with Part 3. And while the other two movies prior had nothing to do with the last two ... there is an obvious connection here. Still you could watch this, without having seen the other. On the other hand, why watch any of the two (part 3 and 4 that is)? Better watch 1 & 2.

Having said, I assume you have seen the third or don't care enough reading this, otherwise jump this paragraph. David Hasselhoff is no more, but we still have the driving force of John Rhys Davies here - or Gimli as some might still call him. Don't think this will bring him down .. bad jokes aside (which you will get a few of in the movie too), the CGI is bad and the acting isn't really helpful either. Considering the time and budget they had (same director as in 3 and was shot back to back with almost no time to prepare), some departments did a lot more than they got paid for ... it is what is, I guess

Seriously, They must have known that this would suck. Yet they still go ahead and produce it. Why?

After the baby snake from the killer Anaconda was salvaged from the fiery explosion in Anaconda 3, it grows at a rapid pace due to the blood orchid serum and is ready to attack.

We first see that the baby snake from the end of the third film is no longer a baby. The snake grew 5 times the normal size within days of the new serum being introduced into its system. The only downside is that it makes the creature far more aggressive than usual. The snake can now regenerate itself after a wound when the serum is given to it. It escapes capture and kills the Murdoch's scientist from the end of the 3rd movie. Murdoch hires a hitman to kill Amanda from the previous film because she knows too much. We also learn he has a week to live without the new serum so he wants results ASAP. Can Amanda survive Murdoch and the killer snake?

Anaconda 4 is another failure in the series, like the 3rd one. Both of which are made for television entires put out by SciFi TV. This one feels just as rushed and cheap as the third movie. We get very little character development which made me not feel for any of them when the snake attacks. Crystal Allen does a good job again, and Linden Ashby is a welcomed addition to the cast as well. Everyone else is in this movie just to be snake food.

I liked it slightly more than Anaconda 3, but that's not saying much.

3/10

This fourth installment in the ANACONDA series is in fact better than the third but miles away from the first two, it features returning actors Crystal Allen who is not a very good actress no offense intended, and John Rhys-Davies who plays his role excellently I might add, the supporting cast which is different than third one is in fact a lot better group of actors then those used in the third one, which is one of the things that made this film better.

Crystal Allen is actually a very attractive woman, but her acting as seen in this one and the previous film is very poor, most of the time she's rubber face and at serious situations she doesn't really play her part very convincingly, she just seems like she doesn't want to put much effort into her acting, like she's just trying to make a quick buck and go home.

Overall, an average snake movie but Ms. Allen would go up for a raspberry award for her acting, the film itself is just a time passer nothing more.

This movie was not as bad as expected. The acting wasn't Oscar worthy but for a Sci-Fi produced film, most of the cast gave it all they had. Speaking of the cast, there were plenty of characters in this film, that's for sure. Maybe a bit too many. So much so that the two other people I saw this with kept asking, "Well, who are these people?" or "Where was this guy in the movie before now? I never seen him before now!" And it's true. There were so many characters and competing story lines that it was hard to keep track of exactly what the heck was going on sometimes.

Another problem with cheesy horror films like this is that the writers have characters do the dumbest things just for the sake of moving the plot along or for an individual character to serve as an easy kill for the monster. There are a lot of instances in the movie where this plot device is used. It shows a serious lack of creativity on the writers' part. It makes the characters seem so cliché. And when they continue to do stupid stuff in situations where they should be more cautious or just use plain ol' commonsense, it's hard for the viewer to care when they end up in the mouth of an 100-foot anaconda.

Other things to note: Gore is not too bad although special effects overall are the worse. The film moves along at a consistent pace from start to finish and the ending hints at a sequel, but I'm not so sure that's a good idea. From the first Anaconda on up to this latest effort, there hasn't been anything new added to the franchise. And unless writers start actually being creative, there probably won't be anything added to the franchise that justifies another movie, which might explain why the major film production companies stopped after the second Anaconda film.