IMDb रेटिंग
2.9/10
6.1 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंA genetically created Anaconda, cut in half, regenerates itself into two aggressive giant snakes, due to the Blood Orchid.A genetically created Anaconda, cut in half, regenerates itself into two aggressive giant snakes, due to the Blood Orchid.A genetically created Anaconda, cut in half, regenerates itself into two aggressive giant snakes, due to the Blood Orchid.
Alexandru Potocean
- Roland
- (as Alexandru Potoceanu)
- …
Marcel Cobzariu
- Mercenary #1
- (as Marcelo Cobzariu)
Vasile Albinet
- Mercenary #4
- (as Vali Albinet)
सारांश
Reviewers say 'Anacondas: Trail of Blood' delves into the perilous world of genetically enhanced snakes, highlighting themes of greed and the risks of unchecked scientific progress. The film balances action, horror, and scientific intrigue, focusing on the regenerative capabilities of the snakes. It contrasts those exploiting the Blood Orchid with those aiming to prevent disaster. The visual style and tone align with its predecessor, garnering mixed reviews as a typical made-for-TV creature feature.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Let's start it of with the acting. When I watch a movie, I expect it to feel real. I expect it to feel natural. When I was watching this movie I felt horrified by how the directors can actually think that people start dialogs like they do in this movie.
The effects does not feel real and the plot has definitely been used before. And the way the movie flow and the way things happen, feel so fake. And not like some kind of Quentin Tarantino movie either.
To top it all of I feel like they made the wrong actors play the wrong characters. None of the voices feel like a fit.
Still, if you are really bored, You could watch it. But you should not watch this film to be amused.
The effects does not feel real and the plot has definitely been used before. And the way the movie flow and the way things happen, feel so fake. And not like some kind of Quentin Tarantino movie either.
To top it all of I feel like they made the wrong actors play the wrong characters. None of the voices feel like a fit.
Still, if you are really bored, You could watch it. But you should not watch this film to be amused.
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.
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.
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
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
Shot back-to-back with Anaconda 3, this carries on the riveting saga of snakes, flowers and secret formulas. It's come a long, ridiculous way since it's humble origins. This continues the cheap, made for television feel. The CGI is just an effortless mess which just can't interact with it's surroundings. This snake must be as light as a feather to not disturb the dirt as it slithers. The original had the charm of campy "throat-o-vision" which was actually practical effects. The fourth installment doesn't even have David Hasselhoff. There were a few genuine laughs, which suggest this should have been a comedy. The grenade scene was just unexpectedly goofy, but pleasant.
...you really having nothing better to do. For me, even the most outrageous & unbelievable must draw me in at that moment so I'm actually scared and believing this is really happening; but, this movie just had me yelling at impossible & ridiculous situations. I don't know why Anaconda inspired me to finally write my first review other than after rating over 100 movies, realizing ratings alone won't necessarily help me or anyone else next time it comes around again. I've never seen an Anaconda film; and, if this is anything like the rest, I haven't missed a thing. I suppose there's some entertainment value as I didn't turn it off & was curious enough to see what would happen; but, there was really nothing to see but more cliches, a plot that's all over the place & a big snake that can't catch runners but can outslither a Jeep & never gets full. I didn't particularly like much less emotionally connect with any characters either & was constantly annoyed at dumb choices like why waste a man with a stream of bullets in the middle of a jungle where you're being hunted by giant snakes! No thank you, there's too many other choices...whether film or frolic to waste my time on a film like this again. Don't do it!
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe film contains many references to Anaconda 2: the plot is developed around the bloody orchid, one of the main characters is fatally bitten by a spider, the plot indirectly involves the company Wexel hall, the protagonists survive by blowing up the Anaconda and the design of the Anaconda is openly inspired by the green Anaconda.
- गूफ़Just before the title sequence, when the camera enters the lab, the cameraman can be seen reflected on the edge of the stainless steel worktable. He's wearing jeans.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in Phelous & the Movies: Phanacondas 4 (2010)
- साउंडट्रैकConcerto 1052 for Harpsichord
Written by Johann Sebastian Bach (as Bach)
Arranged and Performed by Garry Johnston
Courtesy of Noma Music
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइटें
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Anacondas: Trail of Blood
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 29 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें
टॉप गैप
By what name was Anacondas 4: Trail of Blood (2009) officially released in India in English?
जवाब